|
I've been forming up a concept of a fighter not concentrating on dealing damage, but doing all kinds of tricks and combat maneuvers. Then I come across the feat Combat Expertise. I blink for a moment. Turning a few pages I come across Dodge. I begin to wonder the feats' balance.
Dodge is obviously superior to Combat Expertise, and by a lot.
- Dodge doesn't require any actions to be taken. This is crucial to characters whose main point is not to attack every round. For example wizards and other spellcasters can't even consider taking Combat Expertise.
- Second, dodge doesn't give any kind of penalty for using it. While a -1 to attacks is merely a nuisance, it's still a nuisance and has a great impact on lower levels.
- Combat Expertise's only advantage is its slowly progressing AC bonus (and attack penalty). One could argue if it's worth it anyways. Dodge just is there, and it gives the bonus regardless of anything. A character with BAB +16 would still inherit a penalty of -4 to all attacks and a small bonus of +4 AC.
Both are dodge bonuses, so they go away if the character is denied his/her Dexterity bonus.
Both feats are requirements for other feats in the same chain. They are equal in that matter.
All in all, I simply hate Combat Expertise. It's a prerequisite for a CMB fighter, and a fighter just doesn't want to use Combat Expertise since it hinders all the combat maneuvers as well. Truly a waste.
Actually they stack, so you can take both and should if you plan to be a different kind of a fighter. Also both give to CMD which is really useful for different situations.
Dodge also requires a swift action if I can remember correctly which means it cannot be used together with feats like Arcane Strike or the one that reduces Spellcasting failure.
And, Combat Reflexes has much more powerful feats in its chain then Dodge.
Dodge also requires a swift action if I can remember correctly which means it cannot be used together with feats like Arcane Strike or the one that reduces Spellcasting failure.
It did in beta, but not in release. It's permanent, now.
Dodge also requires a swift action if I can remember correctly which means it cannot be used together with feats like Arcane Strike or the one that reduces Spellcasting failure.It did in beta, but not in release. It's permanent, now.
True. But I still stand by my point. If it was one or another then it could be claimed Combat Expertise is weaker but since both can be used at the same time I do not see the problem.
Oh, I agree. Was just pointing out that they fixed Dodge (it was almost useless when it required a swift action, IMO) since you seemed unaware :)
|
|
Actually they stack, so you can take both and should if you plan to be a different kind of a fighter. Also both give to CMD which is really useful for different situations.
True. But I still stand by my point. If it was one or another then it could be claimed Combat Expertise is weaker but since both can be used at the same time I do not see the problem.
But separately Dodge is inferior to Combat Expertise. If you use both at the same time, dodge will still prevail with the free +1 AC bonus.
Furthermore, feats aren't something you get all the time (every other levels isn't all the time). Getting both Combat Expertise and Dodge expend two feat "slots", thus a non-human character would have to be at least 3rd level character.
This whole thing hit me when I was designing my trick fighter, which requires tons of feats to be competent (nearly improved combat maneuver feats). There is no room for feats like Dodge, or even Combat Expertise. The latter just happens to be a prerequisite, but otherwise it remains utterly useless. If Combat Expertise would function the same way as Dodge, I would gain at least some benefit from it.
non-human character would have to be at least 3rd level character.
Or a first level fighter.
Combat Expertise isn't for using all the time (like dodge), it's for turtling.
-5 atk/+5 AC (stacking with everything, including the usual option for fighting defensively) is freaking awesome when you really need to hunker down against an onslaught. This still leaves it pretty crappy at low levels, but I just boosted the modifier by a point (+2/-2 at 1st, +3/-3 at 4th, etc).
If this were a permanent adjustment, then you would be right, the AC boost wouldn't balance out the attack penalty for most characters. What makes it worth taking is that you can turn it on and off, picking up the AC boost when you need it and then reclaiming your attack bonus when you need that instead.
I put out a house rule on this one.
When using combat expertise you gain a bonus to your dodge equal to your ranks in acrobatics divided by 5.
This gives the maneuver fighters/rogues an option to get big ACs even in light armor.
There's a numerical reason why PA gives 50% more for two-handed users: doing so exactly mirrors the damage bonus which a dual-wielder gets for the same penalty.
More to the point, power attack is both improving and penalizing the same thing: your melee attacks. And attack bonuses are much more important than damage bonuses at mid and high levels: if PA were one-for-one, it would stop being viable as soon as your started reliably dealing 10 points or so per hit.
CE is a different ballgame. A shield user is actually giving up less than a dual-wielder or a greatsword guy, because his attacks aren't that great anyway, and he's gaining a bonus to something which he's already good at (which in D&D is usually better than a bonus to something you're bad at). Also, a point of AC really is worth a bonus to attack rolls, at least in general. It's definitely worth less when you're on the offensive but definitely worth more when you're clinging to your last hitpoints and hoping for the wizard to pull something awesome out of his hat. On average, PCs are winning more often than they're losing, so for the average fighting-character offense is worth more, but the beautiful thing about CE is that you can turn it on or off depending on what situation you're in.
You cannot make CE work same as PA, that is not balances. All numbers different feats give have a purpose and are mathematically sound.
Power attack gives you additional damage with your first attack and reduce the already low chance of subsequent attacks hitting similar to Vital Strike (vital strike takes away all extra attacks for even more bonus damage).
CE gives you the chance to avoid all damage. If you wanted to give it more effect them a more logical change would be that it gives DR for penalty to attacks. So it is something similar to power attack.Reduces incoming damage for a penalty to your attacks while power attack would increase damage you do for a penalty to your attacks.
|
|
It must be remembered that Combat Expertise was made worse from 3.5, where as Dodge was made better. Even back then they were practically balanced due to Dodge's "small bonus, no drawback" to Combat Expertise's "variably bonus, variable penalty". Now CE just sucks compared to Dodge.
When did CE need nerfing?
While house rules are good, they cannot be incorporated in Organized Play (like Pathfinder Society). And if you ask my opinion, I greatly dislike to have dozens of house rules to make the game better and balanced. Isn't that quite like saying "this and this is wrong", thus decreasing the quality of the product altogether? I think it is.
And if you ask my opinion, I greatly dislike to have dozens of house rules to make the game better and balanced. Isn't that quite like saying "this and this is wrong", thus decreasing the quality of the product altogether? I think it is.
See what your saying but to me its more like "this and this is wrong" in my game is all and then you house rule it.
I see combat expertise in the light that if you take just this feat, okay its a relatively good feat, especially if stacked with dodge, possibly even others like mobility etc vs AOO, however its a stepping stone to creating the more tactically rounded and to me, more entertaining fighter who has far more options.
Everything is always just an opinion though, and the main rule is that the rulebook isnt the be all and end all...its your game at the end of day, change what you want.
I put out a house rule on this one.
When using combat expertise you gain a bonus to your dodge equal to your ranks in acrobatics divided by 5.
This gives the maneuver fighters/rogues an option to get big ACs even in light armor.
I bet monks love you and other players hate monks even more ^_^
There is certainly room for improvement.
Power attack is a two for one feat. You gain two points of damage (three with a two-hander) for every point of attack you give up. Why not make Combat Expertise the same way? Make it give you two points of AC for every lost attack point? You could even mirror Power Attack more and make it a three for one if a shield is used. Then you add huge utility to being a sword and board player.
If you think that is too powerful then back it down a little. Make it a one for one feat normal and a two for one feat with a shield.
You cannot compare damage to AC in terms of what a feat gives as a bonus. +1 AC is vastly superior to +2 damage. Look at what you are comparing them to. HP scales up very fast, AC on the other hand (and more importantly to hit bonuses) do not scale up anywhere near as fast as HP. If you did 2 for 1 on combat expertise it would make the fighter nearly unhitable very fast.
I bet monks love you and other players hate monks even more ^_^
Yes the Rogue and monk do love this rule. The only player that hates me is the druid after I explained how wildshape was nerfed in pathfinder. Now that gnome druid is looking at her strength after taking the form of a black bear and getting very sad.
Well, to be fair, "druids can't completely dump strength and dex in pathfinder" is something that I would want to know before alocating stats.
Off-topic at this point, but I would adjust a small creature's strength score up by 2 points before applying adjustments from Polymorph spells. All creatures smaller than small and larger than medium adjust their scores, but for some reason small creatures don't (even though tiny ones, one level below small, actually adjust str by 4 points before polymorphing).
I told her that since we did not know about the new wild-shape rules I would allow her to switch a couple stats around. It is a pretty major nerf for the druids. (not that they didn't deserve it)
I also told her that she could apply an extra +2 str -2 dex to the shift since she is growing up from small sized.