The reason for that is the existence of splatbook feats that provide a better bonus.
Under core 3.5, Weapon Spec is still worth a fighter feat slot.
You're saying that if it was worth spending a feat on to use, it was clearly unbalanced.
If one exotic weapon is clearly worth spending the feat on to use, and no other exotic weapon is, then the first one is quite clearly overpowered relative to the others.
Of course, that doesn't mean said exotic weapon needs to be powered down - powering up the other exotics is an alternative solution, for example - but it was still overpowered compared to other exotic weapons.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Here's the other spiked chain thread with Jason's comments.
And here's my two C-bills on the matter.
OK, can you explain your logic to me.
You're saying that if it was worth spending a feat on to use, it was clearly unbalanced.
Well often times 3.5 meleers took power attack. Obviously that feat was unbalanced, why else would people be taking it. Thus it had to be nerfed. Same idea with the spiked chain. If people pick to use it, it must be unbalanced. Simple logic my friend, simple logic.
I thought Jason said during the playtest period he was going to leave spiked chain as it was. Does anyone else remember that?
Now he has said it was changed because he thinks having reach + adjacent attack made it too good (even with the exotic weapon feat requirement etc). So that is the answer to the OP's question.
You may disagree with his view but at least you know why it was done.
I think the answer to the question has been answered. Game balance.
Please just accept it :)
If you don't like it use Rule0 and allow it in your game.
And no one in my campaign has used it in my campaign because it has a typical european middle-ages feel and people just would look silly swinging a chain around, especially in a 10' wide corridor with their companions by their side.
And the only reason so far players have taken Power Attack is so they can get Cleave.
Actually you're kind of misrepresenting the issue. IF a certain feat is so good relative to others that it becomes effectively mandatory that everyone must take it, the question must be asked is why. if all other feats are crap compared to it than it needs to be looked at.Well often times 3.5 meleers took power attack. Obviously that feat was unbalanced, why else would people be taking it. Thus it had to be nerfed. Same idea with the spiked chain. If people pick to use it, it must be unbalanced. Simple logic my friend, simple logic.OK, can you explain your logic to me.
You're saying that if it was worth spending a feat on to use, it was clearly unbalanced.
sure but it was funny : )
Presumably, conversely, if the feat is so lame no-one takes it then the same question must be asked.
- really did everyone take spiked chain in your games? In the last 8-9 years since 3.0/3.5 came out I have been playing weekly and my experience is of maybe 2 spiked chain wielders out of about 25 melee characters-- but every arcane spellcaster takes haste.
(actually this is how I look at spells too. I houseruled haste to only effecting 1 person per three caster levels and everyone kept taking it- so I knew that even with this reduction in power it was not too weak)
|
|
I've never thought the build as broken, I've had a fighter chain tripper before, but I had been throwing centaurs and giant bats at the party left and right, so it hadn't been an issue.
But here was the thing that made me dislike the whole way trip was handled in 3.5
I had for story reasons, introduced the party to the 15th level villian when the group was level 2. A fight ensued with the reckless players.
My 15th level fighter went to close with the 2nd level fighter. The 15th level fighter could litterally kill the 2nd level fighter with one hit if he wanted. The 2nd level fighter triped 15th level baddy at reach, I tried to have him stand and with the AoO the player tripped the baddy again. I finally after about 5 rounds of this I had this really powerful BBEG crawl the 5 feet and strike the 2nd level from prone.
I mean a 15 level baddy with a 20str (built with the elite array so str had started as 15 and for story reasons couldn't have invested in str building items) vs a 2nd level fighter with an 18 str and improved trip and the 15 level fighter couldn't defend himself from the tactic.
Granted that whole issue was fixed by the change to CMB/CMD mechanics I was just sharing a tale of the annoyance of the mechanic in 3.5
|
Actually you're kind of misrepresenting the issue. IF a certain feat is so good relative to others that it becomes effectively mandatory that everyone must take it, the question must be asked is why. if all other feats are crap compared to it than it needs to be looked at.Well often times 3.5 meleers took power attack. Obviously that feat was unbalanced, why else would people be taking it. Thus it had to be nerfed. Same idea with the spiked chain. If people pick to use it, it must be unbalanced. Simple logic my friend, simple logic.OK, can you explain your logic to me.
You're saying that if it was worth spending a feat on to use, it was clearly unbalanced.
The spiked chain was never a "must have" feat in any of my games. I've seen 2 or 3 in the last 7 years. They were cool but never overpowered even with all the associated feats. A feat monkey can be very effective with one but he won't out-damage a power attacking barbarian using a greatsword and sure he can trip at 10' and still hit someone up close but he spent a feat to do so. Spending a feat to do something a bit more than a polearm wielder is acceptable. He trades high damage output and the standard polearm setup in for being able to control the battlefield a bit. At the cost of a feat (or several if he takes all the combat reflexes, imp trip, etc. that goes with it).
It made an effective character, not an overpowered one. Nerfing effective things really wasn't what I thought was the purpose of PRPG. Nerfing the overpowered was.What was done to the spiked chain was wrong. It may as well have been just removed from the game in accordance to all the "it's not a real weapon" arguments and left at that instead of creating yet another worthless exotic weapon that no one would ever take unless a class feature allowed access to it without a feat cost.
|
|
I've never thought the build as broken, I've had a fighter chain tripper before, but I had been throwing centaurs and giant bats at the party left and right, so it hadn't been an issue.
But here was the thing that made me dislike the whole way trip was handled in 3.5
I had for story reasons, introduced the party to the 15th level villian when the group was level 2. A fight ensued with the reckless players.
My 15th level fighter went to close with the 2nd level fighter. The 15th level fighter could litterally kill the 2nd level fighter with one hit if he wanted. The 2nd level fighter triped 15th level baddy at reach, I tried to have him stand and with the AoO the player tripped the baddy again. I finally after about 5 rounds of this I had this really powerful BBEG crawl the 5 feet and strike the 2nd level from prone.
I mean a 15 level baddy with a 20str (built with the elite array so str had started as 15 and for story reasons couldn't have invested in str building items) vs a 2nd level fighter with an 18 str and improved trip and the 15 level fighter couldn't defend himself from the tactic.
Granted that whole issue was fixed by the change to CMB/CMD mechanics I was just sharing a tale of the annoyance of the mechanic in 3.5
This is an example of a DM not using/knowing the rules correctly, not an issue with spiked chain. The AoO from the player is done before the NPC stands so can't be used to retrip. I will post the text for you to peruse.
***edit***
Can't find it in a quick look and I gotta move on but really, you can't trip an already prone character and you provoke the AOO before you are standing (just like you provoke before you finish a spell or before step into the next space, or before you drink the potion...the act of beginning to do something provokes, not the completion of the act), presumably by pushing off of the ground or rolling over to get to your feet or whatever. This was a common problem though until people asked WOTC for clarification way back when.
|
|
Well since you got the rules wrong I can see the problem.In 3.5 you can't trip someone who's standing up from prone. You get an AOO, but because they're already prone when the AOO occurs you can't trip them. So you baddy could've simply got up, sucking a AOO and 5' stepped, no AOO, and smashed him.
This is like the bonus to tripping that Spiked Chains got. No such thing. Never was. Yet people complaing about spiked chains kept talking about it and still do. They're complaining about rules and abilities that never existed.
Indeed in the example offered the ability for the lev 2 fighter to repeatedly hit and trip the baddy 5 times in a row suggests great dice rolling, or other rules that were got wrong.
Don't blame the weapon if you...
Also a level 15 fighter has (+5ish)Str +15BAB to defend against the trip. A +20. A 2nd level fighter, even optimized can only see a +4 ability, +2 BAB, and +4 imp trip. A +10. I low-balled the level 15 also by not giving him any magical strength gear and feats (both of which he should have which would boost his bonus by between +2 and +8 or more). Even if 15 rolled a 2 the 2nd level dude needs a 12 to trip him. 5 times in a row? That's horrible luck rolls and bad rules use, not a spiked chain issue.
****Clarified the post above in the bold area to make intent more clear.***
Not only were there chain wielders lurking on every corner, we even had a sorcerer who took a level in fighter to take spike chain as an exotic weapon. Yes in network play they were THAT common. Because not only can you trip the poor sod, once he's down everytime he tries to get up, he's provoking an AOO and you don't have the usual problem with reach weapons that become unusable in close quarters. Attack, trip, down, everyone else gang piles with that +4 to hit.
- really did everyone take spiked chain in your games? In the last 8-9 years since 3.0/3.5 came out I have been playing weekly and my experience is of maybe 2 spiked chain wielders out of about 25 melee characters-- but every arcane spellcaster takes haste.
On what you say then I would have to agree with you that there was a problem with the system. Perhaps with the reach of spiked chain. Is it not a problem with trip being too easy?
wont those type of players just take glaives+ armor spikes (or whatever the reach weapon is that allows trips)?
<Lots of silly stuff>
You've obviously never played with the sort of power gamers I have if you think spike chain was ok. So how about a quick example of exactly why it's not ok, and why trip builds were so bad starting right from level 1 (though admittedly, these builds aren't as bad until level 3 or 4).
Bob, Human Fighter, Level 1
25 point buy
Str 16
Dex 14
Con 12
Int 13
Wis 8
Cha 8
Feats: Exotic Weapon Prof. (Spiked Chain), Combat Reflexes, Improved Trip.
Now each turn, Bob can trip one person on his action (at a very healthy bonus on the roll) and get a free attack for doing so (so he's not even losing any damage, in fact, since attacking someone that is prone in melee lowers their ac by 4, he's probably doing more damage this way). Not so terrible so far, until you notice that one of the actions that inspires an attack of opportunity is standing up. So every time Bob's opponent tries to stand up, Bob gets another trip and another free attack at a +4 to hit.
Tack on an enlarge person from a helpful friend/potion, and Bob now threatens a 40 ft. x 40 ft. area, a total of 60 squares (64 - 4 for the 4 bob stands on as a large creature) and has a total modifier on his trip attempts of +8, the equivalent of a 26 strength, all at level 1.
Now lets advance this a bit, here's bob around level 8...
Bob, Human Fighter, Level 8
25 point buy, +2 points from leveling
Str 22 (16, +2 leveling, +2 enhancement, +2 Enlarge Person)
Dex 14 (14, +2 enhancement, -2 Enlarge Person)
Con 12
Int 13
Wis 8
Cha 8
Feats: Exotic Weapon Prof. (Spiked Chain), Combat Reflexes, Improved Trip, Weapon Focus (Spiked Chain), Greater Weapon Focus (Spiked Chain) Weapon Specialization (Spiked Chain), Power Attack, Cleave, Great Cleave
Bob's not quite at his gold limit, I saved some back since you'd want magic armor, bags of holding etc. I'm only paying for two stat boosting items, a permanent Enlarge Person, and, eh, lets say a +2 spiked chain.
Bob can almost always afford to power attack, since trip attacks are touch attacks, and bob gets some hefty bonuses vs. prone opponents, so Bob would be dealing between 2d4+15 and 2d4+29 (+2 from weapon spec, +2 from enhancement, +9 from str, +2-16 from power attack) with a total to hit bonus of +9 to +16 (and don't forget the -4 AC on prone opponents, so effectively +13 to +20). Bobs trip modifier will be +14, the equivalent of a 38 strength, giving Bob decent odds at tripping any creature, of any level, other than Dragons and some of the larger giants. (That's another nice thing about trip, since it's a flat strength check, it doesn't really ever scale. There are plenty of high CR mobs with trip modifiers just a point or two above orcs and hobgoblins.)
Normally Cleave and Great Cleave are kinda sucky, but since Bob can simultaneously threaten two opponents that are 40 ft. apart, they become somewhat useful.
Now show me another feat or pair of feats that lets a fighter, starting from level 1, not only incapacitate multiple opponents, but incapacitate them and deal full normal damage with a bonus to the attack roll. This is why Spiked Chain and Improved Trip were too good. (Though honestly, I do agree they nerfed it too far, all the talk about spiked chain not being too good in 3.5 is nuts though.)
Oh, and Bob is actually a very sub-optimal tripper, Barbarians and Clerics can do it even better, just not at level 1.
Well since you got the rules wrong I can see the problem.
In 3.5 you can't trip someone who's standing up. You get an AOO, but because they're already prone when the AOO occurs you can't trip them. So you baddy could've simply got up, sucking a AOO and 5' stepped, no AOO, and smashed him.
Mind backing this up with a reference to where it says you can't use your AOO to trip someone?
This was a common house rule, specifically because of trippers, but there's nothing in the RAW that I'm seeing that says this.
EDIT: Actually, my bad, I did find where this was officially ruled on, and you're right, since the AOO comes before the triggering action, the opponent would still be prone, so no retripping. I'll give you that one.
On the other hand, standing from prone does suck up a move action, give the spike chainer a free attack, and all you can do after is move 5 ft. in and make a single attack. The spike chainer can then take a 5. ft step back and make a full attack, including a trip, forcing you to do it all over again next round. Oh, and if the spike chainer has reach and a spiked chain, like say, Bob above, from enlarge person, then you don't even get that far. Stand -> Free attack from bob -> start moving closer -> AOO Trip -> down you go again before you can close. Bob steps back 5 ft. and the whole system is reset.
As far as I can tell you can retrip someone standing. As the act of standing brings about the AoO. It's not like look your thinking about standing I get an attack ! It's look he stood up..down ya go again
Edit: I have looked though the SRD and the rules compendium and nothing in there says ya can not do this. Standing triggers the AoO so tripping is by RAW is legal as far as I can see and nothing in the rules compendium I can find says you can not
Here is a discussion of the 3.5 rules for tripping.
It's possible to attempt a trip attack as an attack of opportunity. Fortunately, you can't be tripped while getting up from prone, at least not through the attack of opportunity you provoke. That because attacks of opportunity are resolved before the actions that provoke them (there are a few exceptions, see Rules of the Game: All About Attacks of Opportunity for details). When you try to stand up from a prone position, the attack of opportunity comes before you get back on your feet. Since you're still prone when the attack comes, the attack of opportunity can't trip you.
So the logic is, sure you can trip him and get your bonus attack (of course you could lose and possibly get tripped back/disarmed in the process, not too smart). But since he was already prone to begin with, he is still prone prior to his stand (when the AoO occurs). His move action to stand up hasn't occured yet, and so still exists. And so he stands up, takes a 5 ft step and owns the 2nd level guy. Problem solved.
It is basic misunderstandings like this (see also "but the spiked chain is a double weapon" folks) that gave the spiked chain such a horrible reputation.
More reference material:
An attack of opportunity "interrupts" the normal flow of actions in the round. If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character’s turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character’s turn).
That is very gray and iffy ground there. Funny they never made it clear in the rules compendium. The act of standing provokes the AoO. So your half up half down. Logically ya can be knocked back down.
Thats like saying I am drawing my sword but ya cant knock my hand away as it is not out yet. Pretty much making AoO's imposable to do if the action that provokes them has not happened yet
You can't attack me my weapons not out yet...but you drew it...no I was trying so ya can't attack till I drawl it...well I AoO ..you can't I haven't drawn it yet!
and other silly things
That is very gray and iffy ground there. Funny they never made it clear in the rules compendium. The act of standing provokes the AoO. So your half up half down. Logically ya can be knocked back down.
If that was true, but it isn't. You are not "half up half down". You are completely down PRIOR to standing up and that is when the AoO occurs. It is not "made clear" because it is common sense if you know the workings of AoOs. If you are shaky on those rules, and many people were/are, then it seems gray.
so Laying still gets the AoO but standing up does not...got ya
Edit. It is grey as rightly so someone will argue that to stand you must be well trying to stand, arms pushing off the ground and so on. And as trying to stand up is what allow the AoO you are half up. Laying still not trying to stand does not provoke the AoO
so Laying still gets the AoO but standing up does not...got ya
Edit. It is grey as rightly so someone will argue that to stand you must be well trying to stand, arms pushing off the ground and so on. And as trying to stand up is what allow the AoO you are half up. Laying still not trying to stand does not provoke the AoO
Hey, all I am saying is if you think that the rules make silly situations (a 2nd level fighter continously tripping a 15th fighter), don't complain when it is point out that you are applying the rules wrong. I'm not saying the rules make "sense", I am saying that if you apply them correctly you don't get the fighter 2-fighter 15 problem described above. You can scream "but that is stupid!" all day, but that is how the rules work.
Thats like saying I am drawing my sword but ya cant knock my hand away as it is not out yet. Pretty much making AoO's imposable to do if the action that provokes them has not happened yet
You can't attack me my weapons not out yet...but you drew it...no I was trying so ya can't attack till I drawl it...well I AoO ..you can't I haven't drawn it yet!
So your counter argument here is that you should be able to disarm someone while their weapon is still in its sheath? I'm not sure if that is a good argument to make.
Hey, all I am saying is if you think that the rules make silly situations (a 2nd level fighter continously tripping a 15th fighter), don't complain when it is point out that you are applying the rules wrong. I'm not saying the rules make "sense", I am saying that if you apply them correctly you don't get the fighter 2-fighter 15 problem described above.so Laying still gets the AoO but standing up does not...got ya
Edit. It is grey as rightly so someone will argue that to stand you must be well trying to stand, arms pushing off the ground and so on. And as trying to stand up is what allow the AoO you are half up. Laying still not trying to stand does not provoke the AoO
heh that was not me. Am the rules never state for sure. The sage said it somewhere most folks will never see it but the last clear cleaned up rules does not say it. The give a vague hint that can been seen one of 2 ways. The action that provokes it has started or it would have not be provoked.
And gamers who have fought, or watch TV or moves will see someone trying to stand and getting there legs knocked out from under them as valid
So your counter argument here is that you should be able to disarm someone while their weapon is still in its sheath? I'm not sure if that is a good argument to make.
No my counter is I did not waste my AoO as you have not tired to stand up yet. Once you try I get an AoO which means you are half up. Now if the trip fails you finish, if it does not you hit the ground.
You provoke the AoO which means you have started the action which provoked it. If you had not tied to stand up I get no AoO and you are fully on the ground
Hey, all I am saying is if you think that the rules make silly situations (a 2nd level fighter continously tripping a 15th fighter), don't complain when it is point out that you are applying the rules wrong. I'm not saying the rules make "sense", I am saying that if you apply them correctly you don't get the fighter 2-fighter 15 problem described above.so Laying still gets the AoO but standing up does not...got ya
Edit. It is grey as rightly so someone will argue that to stand you must be well trying to stand, arms pushing off the ground and so on. And as trying to stand up is what allow the AoO you are half up. Laying still not trying to stand does not provoke the AoO
heh that was not me. Am the rules never state for sure. The sage said it somewhere most folks will never see it but the last clear cleaned up rules does not say it. The give a vague hint that can been seen one of 2 ways. The action that provokes it has started or it would have not be provoked.
And gamers who have fought, or watch TV or moves will see someone trying to stand and getting there legs knocked out from under them as valid
It is not the actual getting up that draws the AoO.
Provoking an Attack of Opportunity
Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing an action within a threatened square.Moving
Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes an attack of opportunity from the threatening opponent. There are two common methods of avoiding such an attack—the 5-foot step and the withdraw action.Performing a Distracting Act
Some actions, when performed in a threatened square, provoke attacks of opportunity as you divert your attention from the battle. Actions in Combat notes many of the actions that provoke attacks of opportunity.Remember that even actions that normally provoke attacks of opportunity may have exceptions to this rule.
Clearly it is not the first one (moving out of the square), thus it must be the second one (performing a distracting act). It is the diverting your attention from the battle that draws the AoO, not the act itself. It is not the standing up, but the fact that your focus left your opponent that does.
No it is a move action and listed as such.
Prone character tries to stand up. AoO is provoked. Character is still prone. You cannot trip a prone character. After AoO, character stands up. Character is no longer prone.
I believe that this was covered in a Sage Advice column before.
Yet but not in the rules anywhere. The is the issue yall are missing. The rules never say that. So while one one may have ruled it as such it never made the rules.
And the fact is it is not a clear rule
No it is a move action and listed as such.
And again.
Moving
Moving out of a threatened square usually provokes an attack of opportunity from the threatening opponent. There are two common methods of avoiding such an attack—the 5-foot step and the withdraw action.
So again, it is clearly not the first type of thing that draws an AoO, thus it must therefore vis-a-vis concordantly ergo be the second type of action, an action that distract your attention from the combat. It is the distract that draws the AoO not the action itself.
Again it is a move action and falls into move action. there are type type's of actions move and distraction . This one is stated as a move action.
Blame the writers if that is confusing
Edit: just to be clear playing devils advocate here. I know what ya mean but to many people they lump it as a move action as it is very clearly marked as such
Another weapon that allows simultaneous reach and adjcent attacks:
The Duom (a spear with two reversed blades for adjacent attacks)
It showed up in several books including the old Arms and Equipment Guide.
No it is a move action and listed as such.Move actions don't automatically cause AOOs.
Moving out of a threatend sq causes an AOO.
Standing up from prone is a move action but it osn't moving out of a threatened square. It is a distracting action (getting up breaks your concentration) and thus attracts an AOO for that reason.Stephen
And because it is a distracting activity you can actually be distracted before ... you actual start getting up. Who'd have thought huh?
|
Who Can Be Tripped: Any creature that is subject to gravity and somehow holds itself off the ground is subject to trip attacks. Incorporeal creatures can't be tripped -- even by other incorporeal creatures -- because they can't fall down. A prone creature has already fallen down and can't be tripped. (This can prove significant when you've tripped a foe and wish to keep him down; see the section on being tripped [below].)
Standing up from being prone is a move action that provokes an attack of opportunity. You can crawl 5 feet as a move action without getting up, but doing so provokes attacks of opportunity. SeeRules of the Game: All About Movement for details.
It's possible to attempt a trip attack as an attack of opportunity. Fortunately, you can't be tripped while getting up from prone, at least not through the attack of opportunity you provoke. That because attacks of opportunity are resolved before the actions that provoke them (there are a few exceptions, see Rules of the Game: All About Attacks of Opportunity for details). When you try to stand up from a prone position, the attack of opportunity comes before you get back on your feet. Since you're still prone when the attack comes, the attack of opportunity can't trip you.
Your foes still can use trip attacks to keep you down when you're prone, however. A foe can use the ready action to prepare a trip attack against you when you stand up.
I think we've managed to do a good job of uncovering a lot of the where the impression that Spiked Chains AND tripping are broken.
People getting the rules wrong.
It's also worth noting that many of the tripping scenarios could of been done with a Hv Flail.
Yes, yes they could have, but they could not have been done from 10 ft. away, or 15 ft in the case of a character that has 10 ft. reach normally. The ability to do this sort of thing while also being far enough away from your target that reprisal becomes a problem is what's wrong with the old spike chain.
Bob must make a touch attack with an attack bonus of +4.
Against the touch AC of most 1st level opponents, that's going to be a pretty easy check, certainly easier than hitting their normal AC with the same +4.
If he hits he must subsequently make a trip attempt - opposed roll +7 vs +3 on a standard Orc, or +5 on a standard Dwarf.
If Bob fails to beat their roll they may make a trip attempt back, +3 for the Orc, or +1 for the Swarf vs your +3. If they beat you you must drop your weapon or be tripped yourself.
True, which is why this isn't completely, stupidly broken, just a little powerful, there are some opponents that it's a bad idea to try and trip. Of course, since the only feat you're taking that isn't useful otherwise is Improved Trip, you still have the option of just attacking in the same way as any non-trip fighter. It's not like building for the option of tripping costs dearly.
Compare this with Bob just smacking the Orc AC13 or Dwarf AC16. Then if you try again to tell me how powerful Spiked Chain or Trip is in this example watch as I fall over laughing at you.
Ok, lets compare. Orc, AC 13, Bob hits on a 9 or better, giving him 60% odds of dealing 2d4+4 damage. Since Bob isn't tripping the Orc, the Orc then attacks bob for 2d4+4. Now if Bob attempts to trip, Bob hits the orc on a 5 or better (80% odds) and beats the orc's roll on the trip attempt (70% odds) then he gets to attack, prevent the orc from attacking him this turn, AND get a second free attack on the orcs turn. So he's up an extra attack, the orc is down one, and anyone else in his party has an easier time hitting the orc while it's down. (Plus he can always choose to step back five feet after his turn, and force the Orc to close again, potentially tripping it again.
There, compared. And I'd like to point out that this is against high strength opponent that is specifically going to be HARD to trip. Against other 1st level opponents like gobbos, it's almost a sure thing.
Aside from explaining what a 1st lev character is doing with a potion of enlarge (250gp) that lasts one round.
3.5 enlarge lasted 1 minute per caster level, not 1 round. Perhaps I should have left off the word potion, at the time I was thinking about that option being valid at later levels. That still doesn't stop him from having a sorc/wiz friend to help buff things a bit.
Then try looking at the back of your DMG since you failed to correctly calculate the area threat zone. It's 76 squares (for what it's worth, which isn't a lot).
It's 60, and yes it is.
Large Creature
@@
@@
Large Creature w/ 5 ft. reach
####
#@@#
#@@#
####
Large Creature w/ 10 ft. reach
######
######
##@@##
##@@##
######
######
Large Creature w/ 15 ft. reach
########
########
########
###@@###
###@@###
########
########
########
Count them yourself if you want, or just try 8 times 8 - 4 (the four are where Bob is standing). Now take an 8x8 rectangle and compare it to the setup for most fights in published adventures, I'll bet you 9 times out of 10, Bob could reach most if not all of the foes on the board.
He still has to make a touch attack at +3
+4, you screwed up the math again, -1 for size, +1 for the Strength increase.
He then gets to make his trip attack opposed roll with +13 which is pretty good, and +9 to avoid been tripped back if it does fail.
Of course you just burned 250gp for that.
Which is why I said friend, and just added potion as an optional afterthought.
I suggest you look at how much more effective he would've been in that situation with Cleave. He could've finished off both the Orc and the Dwarf.
If he happened to survive the damage they dealt charging him, or he got lucky, beat them on init, and they were standing no more than 15 ft. apart, and if he did enough damage to kill them, and if he even hit the dwarf (who, if he's wearing armor and a shield, Bob probably needs a 14 or better to hit).
He's now got a +16 to make the touch attack and +14 on the opposed attack roll, and a +10 to avoid been tripped back.
The CR7 Ogre Barbarin has Str 30 raging, Touch AC 10, normal AC 19, +14 opposed trip attempt..., hey that means the trip only has approx 45% chance of success, and the chance of getting disarmed or tripped back is approx 55% x 70% = approx 38%.
Wow, the Ogre has almost as good a chance of trip/disarming Bob as Bob has of Tripping him, ON BOB'S ATTACK.
Yes, against an Ogre Barbarian while raging, a trip attempt would be foolish. Duh. That's like claiming a 1st level spell that does 20d6 damage is balanced because it doesn't work on Iron Golems.
Against an Ogre Barbarian, Bob would be better off just attacking, yeah, but like I said earlier, the only thing Bob is losing out on compared to a regular fighter is one feat, Improved Trip, all the rest of his feats are still just as useful as ever. (Ok, ok, two feats, but the exotic prof. in spike chain is still letting Bob hit the ogre without taking an AOO, so it's useful.) It's not like he can't just stop and say "Wait a sec, this bad mother is twice my size and has four times my strength, for once, I'll just attack." And do very nearly as much damage as any other fighter, while still having the option to completely screw over non Behemoth-roidusing-barbarian opponents.
Oh, and again, Bob wasn't even a really optimized tripper, Barbarians (Much higher strength) and Clerics (Righteous Might, Divine Power, Greater Magic Weapon, etc. etc.) can both do it much, much better in the long run, I just used Bob because it showed you can do it right off the bat at 1st level.