|
So there's Combat Casting to give you a +4 bonus to concentration, and you can cast spells without envoking attacks of opportunity in melee without too much of a problem, but dare to fire an arrow or gun in melee, and you're @$$ is grass. That's SO unfair. Why is waving your arms around, speaking magic words, and juggling spell components like you're a circus clown less provoking than pulling back on your bow, or firing a gun at an opponent?
Is there any way around that? In Spell Compendium, there's a spell called Arrow Mind which lets you cast in melee, and even lets you do AoO on your opponents if they run. There's even a feat that allows you to take AoO with a ranged weapon if they move within 15 feet of you. But where's the feat that mimics Arrow Mind? Especially for pistol and rifle users (arrow mind wouldn't work in a literal stand point). Not to mention Arrow Mind isn't OGL material.
I know there's going to be a smartass going "Well just don't fire arrows in melee, duh! You're RANGED!" Yeah, like the guy who's charging you (possibly with pounce), or polymorphs into something that makes him go from medium to gargantuan is really going to let you stay out of melee for long when he realizes you're doing a decent amount of damage. Yeah that's what your secondary weapon is, but chances are it sucks by comparison to the weapon you normally use because it doesn't have bonuses past +1 (if it even has that), nor your weapon focus.
There's gotta be something that lets you fire in melee without opening up your character for a monumental raping. In the Warcraft books, I'd heard of Close Shot, which allowed such a thing, but again that's not OGL.
If there's isn't such an ability out there for ranged fighters fighting in melee when they're forced into it, I'd highly urge Paizo to develop one, and put it in one of their upcoming updates, or the new hardcover books that are coming out. This is something that needs dealing with.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
There's a PFRPG feat from the PFRPG Campaign Setting, iirc, called Gunslinger that makes you not provoke AOOs with firearms.
But ideally, your archer PC just "machine guns" down charging foes with arrows before they ever reach him or her. And if they get to you, stand fast and keep making full attacks. There's a reason you have a d10 hit die now, ranger!
|
This has always been the case in 3E, so it is not something new to Pathfinder. It isn't as bad as you think, though. As a ranged fighter, you can always 5ft step away and still full attack, plus (unlike casters) if they do attack you, you don't lose your attacks at all.
The real problem is for both ranged fighters and casters is Step Up ( PF new feat), which any single class 2nd level character can now take which can ruin both easily. I'd consider banning that and you shouldn't usually have a problem, if you remember the point of playing a ranged fighter is to stay away from melee.
This has always been the case in 3E, so it is not something new to Pathfinder. It isn't as bad as you think, though. As a ranged fighter, you can always 5ft step away and still full attack, plus (unlike casters) if they do attack you, you don't lose your attacks at all.
The real problem is for both ranged fighters and casters is Step Up ( PF new feat), which any single class 2nd level character can now take which can ruin both easily. I'd consider banning that and you shouldn't usually have a problem, if you remember the point of playing a ranged fighter is to stay away from melee.
Ack!! It's a great feat, the whole 5' step shuffle is annoying as hell.
A guy with a sword SHOULD be able to slaughter a guy who is 5' away with bow.
Realistically speaking yes. But this is fantasy we're talking about. I agree the 'standard' should be swordsman in sword range dominates archer in sword range. However, like I said, fantasy. I want to see archers dodging and weaving as they fire, fighting competently vs melee.
I can see to some extent, but consider this. Ranged focused combatants have a huge advantage over melee focused combatants at range. Melee combatants should have an equal advantage in the reverse situation.
I don't think they should necessarily be helpless mewling children, but as things are a melee fighter has to take a feat (step up) to retain his edge at close range where he should dominate by default.
|
|
@ Charlie Bell - A Campaign Setting for PFRPG? I don't think I've seen that book. Actually, I know I haven't or I probably wouldn't have made this thread. However, "Gunslinger" doesn't sound like it'd help the archer too much.
@ Beckett - How do you 5 ft step away from something that's got a 10-20 ft reach, and you're literally toe-to-toe with it. Yes they can charge you, or just move 5 ft and be within that square to hit you, but why settle for that when you can breathe down their neck and not allow them to get away from you short of just moving, and not being able to attack? Then you can charge them again.
Step Up works both ways. You want to be able to use that feat on your opponents just as much as they want to use it on you. I look at it as a double-edged sword. I know I'd want to have it if I'm suddenly facing off against a wizard with a half dozen lvl 9 spells in his arsenal.
@ kyrt-ryder -- Realistically speaking no one should be higher than lvl 5, ever. Because real people die pretty easily. There are few beasts out there can be beaten with a sword or bow and arrow combo.
As for your idea on doing Acrobatics, I'd like to suggest that it be changed to something very different. Mostly because practically no one has that skill. It's a cross class for just about everyone, and most people won't spend two points into it just for a rank.
It's a cross class for just about everyone, and most people won't spend two points into it just for a rank.
The days of cross-class skills, and paying two ranks for one skill point ended with Pathfinder. All skill ranks now cost 1 for 1, whether its a class skill or not.
As for your idea on doing Acrobatics, I'd like to suggest that it be changed to something very different. Mostly because practically no one has that skill. It's a cross class for just about everyone, and most people won't spend two points into it just for a rank.
The skill system is significantly different from 3.5 and cross classed skills are much more usable under pathfinder. You can get the benefits of a class skill by simply dipping into a class for one level. For an archer, maybe dipping a level of barbarian or rogue.
|
|
The days of cross-class skills, and paying two ranks for one skill point ended with Pathfinder. All skill ranks now cost 1 for 1, whether its a class skill or not.
So why have class skills at all?
As for class dipping, it's an option, but you'd be losing out on your final level's awesome finisher ability. Even more so if you'd planned on taking another class, or even a PrC.
|
|
My problem with Step up is that when combined with Readied actions, completely nulifies both casters and ranged attacks. From both player's and Dm's point of view.It can easily make an archer and a caster not be able to a single thing the entire combat except die.
As for things with reach, well there isn't much you can do, really. If you step behind a little cover, say a corner, they can't take an AoO. Another option is if they consistantly charge you, you can ready an action to move away when they charge. You will not get hit, and they will still suffer the -2 Ac, but you also can't attack that round.
So why have class skills at all?
You get a +3 bonus on a cless skill as long as you have ranks in it. Did you even read the rules?
and you can cast spells without envoking attacks of opportunity in melee without too much of a problem, but dare to fire an arrow or gun in melee, and you're @$$ is grass. That's SO unfair. Why is waving your arms around, speaking magic words, and juggling spell components like you're a circus clown less provoking than pulling back on your bow, or firing a gun at an opponent?
You've missed a huge rule change here. 1st as you know casting spell while threatened provokes an AoO. This can generally be avoided by making a concentration check. Concentration checks are now 1d20 + your caster level + your relevant ability modifier. DC: 15 + (2xSpell level) So it may not be quite as easy to pull off anymore.
2nd: "Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively."
So the devs saw the same essentially problem youre seeing now and have already fixed it.
In fact there have been many changes in PF over 3.5 and it sounds like you'd be quite pleased with some of them. Check it out! The PF SRD has all the rules online as it's OGL content though it's much easier to read and follow the book either in hard copy or pdf form!
References:
PFSRD: Cast-a-Spell
|
|
You get a +3 bonus on a cless skill as long as you have ranks in it. Did you even read the rules?
So why have class skills at all?
No, because the DM hasn't decided what rules he's going to keep, and what he's not. He's combinging 3.5 and PF, and keeping what he likes from both. And chances are he won't be keeping the new concentration spell rules and making it more difficult for his NPCs to instantly teleport away. I know he's not keeping the new race or item creation rules so far.
As for the -2 AC from charge, our DM doesn't do that. You get full AC when you charge (he does a lot of that with his NPCs, but sometimes we do too).
Anyone got a link for that PFRPG Campaign Setting that Charlie mentioned?
Well, to be fair, it's hard to justify complaining about a rule when A) you haven't read much of the rules and B) your DM is houseruling a lot of the most basic balancing rules out. If he's houseruling that much, anyway, then you might be barking up the wrong tree; instead of asking paizo to publish a feat that he might just ignore anyway, talk to your DM about the problem and ask if you or he can homebrew the feat yourselves.
Thats what I was thinking too. This is really just asking for suggestions to a hybrid game your dm is making so all we can do is point you to existing feats and rulings for you to try and persuade your dm with. Has he tried running a Vanilla PF game yet?
Sidenote there already exists a 3.5 feat that completely avoids AoO for ranged attacks when threatened which seems to be what you're hoping for? Named Combat Archery only it's epic with a fairly dedicated prereq list. If you're going for trying to get balanced house rules, Khalarak's suggestion of a AoO AC bonus based off Mobility would be the best.
My Archer fighter took 2 levels of Order of the Bow Initiate. It's not OGL, but it is in 3.5 (complete warrior). The prereqs are fairly light and can be entered at around 6th level I think. So at 8th level or about you can fire arrows from all threatened areas without risk of an AoO.
I have very little problem with getting AoO's most of the time due to smart maneuvering and the 5ft step (granted I haven't encountered Step Up yet). The damage the character can do is very high for someone primarily ranged based. At 8th level he has something like 3 shots (4 if you count manyshot as two hits) and would do between 44-92 if all hit (which rarely happens). When switching over to PF, I dropped the Order of the Bow levels and took them in fighter instead for the greater feat and skill progression. The only problem I've had since then is when getting overwhelmed by lots of lower level creatures and in that case I can certainly see why using a bow would be difficult.
|
|
There actually is a feat that gives you a +4 to AC against AoO, but it's not OGL. It's called Defensive Archery, and it's from Races of the Wild. It requires Point Blank Shot. I wonder if that'd stack with Combat Casting. I'd think it would.
Regardless of whether or not my DM is doing a Vanilla PF campaign or not, he allows feats that exist. If it exists in a book, and not a homebrew site, he'll allow it. So if Close Combat or Defensive Archery existed in PF, I'd be allowed to take it. But still, the fact that such a feat doesn't exist in PF is a bit alarming. Especially with the Campaign Setting (just picked it up) talking about AoO with guns (which btw are super ridiculously expensive when compared to Tome of Secrets' guns).
I'm an archery ranger now, and the only thing saving me is Arrow Mind (we're still doing 3.5). I don't know about what Khalarak's player did, but I'm 14th level and I'm sure as heck not doing no 200-300 damage a round. I'm lucky if I do 84 a round at max, and that's only if I'm faced up against a favored enemy. Granted I pass all DR with my force bow, but the others have transmutation weapons with demolition and true death crystals. I'm also in the middle for AC. The sorcerer's the lowest.
But yeah, we very rarely fight five on one. It's usually five on five, or five on nine. The more you're fighting, the more you're all going to get surrounded.
|
|
We were usually 5 PCs v. 4-6 monsters, most groups consisting of giants. Basically, the archer in my group focused more on strength than you'd expect for an archer (with a 20 Str and 18 Dex at level 11 with items). He had bows as his primary weapon training and a +1 enhancement bonus. So at 11th level, he was doing 1d8 + 5 for strength (with a composite bow) + 1 for enhancement bonus + 2 for weapon specialization + 2 for weapon training + 1 for greater archery bracers + 1 most of the time for point blank shot. 1d8+12 on each shot, with double damage from Manyshot on the first shot, combined with rapid shot, and haste (either from his boots of speed or the mystic theurge casting it, and even if the last shot missed (which it did about half the time) you end up with about 80 damage a round at 11th level, before various cleric buffs to damage rolls. And for emergencies, he had a handful of various types of bane arrows. Later on his numbers exploded up into the multiple hundreds mostly because of better buffs and finding a treasure of truly epic proportions.
Granted, this player is notorious in my groups for focusing more on math than on anything else, and he can be a pain to play with at times because of it, but I was just trying to illustrate what an archer can be capable of if you really want them to break faces ;).
Oh my definitely doesn't break faces. Mine currently has 14 Str and 22 Dex, but has the feat that allows you to use Dex damage over Str, the bow is a +1, and just the lesser bracers on my guy. I've also got the substitution that switches out Animal Companion for Favored Enemy to attack bonus. So 1d8+8 on each shot (1d8+4+1d6 against undead or constructs with crystals), +6 against favored enemies (which we fight 90% of the time now), no Manyshot yet, rapid shot + haste swift (speed on buckler and swift haste spell as back up), and I almost never miss. I just don't do the damage. I do have Point Blank so another +1 when I'm in range. Weapon Training and specialization would be nice though. Not to mention the greater bracers. We don't get buffed by our party, despite having a favored soul or paladin. They're kind of out for themselves, and want to charge in immediately. Maybe later I'll be able to do the kind of damage your archer did. I'd like to get splitting put on my bow, but a +3 bonus is expensive on a already +3 equivalent bow.
Stuff
Ok your main complaint here is not being able to do archery in melee range. The combat casting is a separate issue and if they fail they lose their spell, way worse than getting hit and getting to give a hit in return.
You have a few good options if you want to do archery but are scared about melee. Option number one, take shot on the run. Mobility is a pre-req and will give you +4 AC against their AoO.
Option two, tumble past your enemy. As an archer you probably have high dex and low armor check penalties, unless you are a cleric archer, in which case they should probably be running away from rather than towards you.
Option three.. you're going to love this. As an archer, keep a spiked gauntlet equipped so you always threaten melee. Put the nastiest poison you can find on it, smile with glee as your opponent wishes he'd tangled with the barbarian.
Option four, you have a dex stat, act like it(not an insult, inside joke), tanglefoot bags are your friend. Stick them down then make them look like a pin cushion. Strategize with your party wizard, ask them to grease/web/otherwise immobilize targets for you.
|
|
You have a few good options if you want to do archery but are scared about melee. Option number one, take shot on the run. Mobility is a pre-req and will give you +4 AC against their AoO.
Option two, tumble past your enemy. As an archer you probably have high dex and low armor check penalties, unless you are a cleric archer, in which case they should probably be running away from rather than towards you.
Option three.. you're going to love this. As an archer, keep a spiked gauntlet equipped so you always threaten melee. Put the nastiest poison you can find on it, smile with glee as your opponent wishes he'd tangled with the barbarian.
Option four, you have a dex stat, act like it(not an insult, inside joke), tanglefoot bags are your friend. Stick them down then make them look like a pin cushion. Strategize with your party wizard, ask them to grease/web/otherwise immobilize targets for you.
The nice thing about PF is the extra feats. Normally Mobility wouldn't be the best to take if you're a ranger, but in this case it looks like it'll be a necessary evil.
If you're a fighter, you're in just as much trouble with armor as you would be as a cleric, maybe more because clerics can't wear heavy armour anymore. Also, while enemies tend to run away from clerics, they have no problem running towards the fighter.
I like option three. I used to have one on my ranger, but my new bow is elvenkind so it works like a staff. No poison though. That's definitely a thought. Too bad they only do 1d4 damage though.
Hmm, hadn't thought of tanglefoot bags at all. Definitely something to consider, but you won't always have those in stock. IF your party has a wizard, then a strategy is a good idea. I'm sure most normal parties have them, but ours never does. Maybe we'll get one of those next campaign.
But more so then than now, guns are a bigger part of the PFRPG. To the point that in Tome of Secrets, "musketeers" have their own combat style. Yet there's nothing in there to save them from melee attacks. Guns sadly only have 20 ft. That's pretty dicey compared to an archer who can stand 60 ft back with a shortbow. I guess you could always take the "Catch-off guard" feat, and use the guns as an improvised club.
You have a few good options if you want to do archery but are scared about melee. Option number one, take shot on the run. Mobility is a pre-req and will give you +4 AC against their AoO.
Option two, tumble past your enemy. As an archer you probably have high dex and low armor check penalties, unless you are a cleric archer, in which case they should probably be running away from rather than towards you.
Option three.. you're going to love this. As an archer, keep a spiked gauntlet equipped so you always threaten melee. Put the nastiest poison you can find on it, smile with glee as your opponent wishes he'd tangled with the barbarian.
Option four, you have a dex stat, act like it(not an insult, inside joke), tanglefoot bags are your friend. Stick them down then make them look like a pin cushion. Strategize with your party wizard, ask them to grease/web/otherwise immobilize targets for you.
The nice thing about PF is the extra feats. Normally Mobility wouldn't be the best to take if you're a ranger, but in this case it looks like it'll be a necessary evil.
If you're a fighter, you're in just as much trouble with armor as you would be as a cleric, maybe more because clerics can't wear heavy armour anymore. Also, while enemies tend to run away from clerics, they have no problem running towards the fighter.
I like option three. I used to have one on my ranger, but my new bow is elvenkind so it works like a staff. No poison though. That's definitely a thought. Too bad they only do 1d4 damage though.
Hmm, hadn't thought of tanglefoot bags at all. Definitely something to consider, but you won't always have those in stock. IF your party has a wizard, then a strategy is a good idea. I'm sure most normal parties have them, but ours never does. Maybe we'll get one of those next campaign.
But more so then than now, guns are a bigger part of the PFRPG. To the point that in Tome of Secrets, "musketeers" have their own combat style. Yet there's nothing in there to save them...
Actually with armor training by level 7 fighters can run full speed with adamantine full plate on. Add some boots of speed, shot on the run, and you can move, fire, move behind cover. No line of sight means no charge. Add some points in stealth and your opponent is really baffled.
Also, your archer can take ranks in craft alchemy and make his own tanglefoot bags.
I've never used guns with pathfinder, but I could see a two-weapon fighter using revolvers being pretty fun. Take catch-off guard and use them as improvised melee weapons. Would work to let you use arrows in melee too. Possibly a powergaming tactic considering how cheap it is to enchant a single arrow... I better stop here before we get to a +5 wounding arrow of speed for 4,000 GP being used as an improvised dagger.. too late. And the archer was really angry when somebody shot his arrow.
And chances are he won't be keeping the new concentration spell rules and making it more difficult for his NPCs to instantly teleport away.
Pff. The amateur.
I know he's not keeping the new race or item creation rules so far.
Why not? The item creation rules finally make sense and are usable.
Anyone got a link for that PFRPG Campaign Setting that Charlie mentioned?
The Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting was written during 3.5e times, but the rulesets are compatible, anyway, and most of it is setting information.
I can see to some extent, but consider this. Ranged focused combatants have a huge advantage over melee focused combatants at range. Melee combatants should have an equal advantage in the reverse situation.
Listen to the ugly, misshapen creature before you slay it for XP and it's hook!
The advantages are quite big, as an archer can make full attacks a lot more often than melee attackers.
I don't think they should necessarily be helpless mewling children, but as things are a melee fighter has to take a feat (step up) to retain his edge at close range where he should dominate by default.
And another to get more out of this than one AoO.
Realistically speaking yes. But this is fantasy we're talking about. I agree the 'standard' should be swordsman in sword range dominates archer in sword range. However, like I said, fantasy. I want to see archers dodging and weaving as they fire, fighting competently vs melee.
Then get a good AC, do dodge and weave.
Other than that, my Idea of Fantasy is not that archers dominate everything.
Basically, the feat would let you "Fire Defensively" like casters get to "Cast Defensively" though you'd have to set up an appropriate DC. Perhaps DC = 10+ the threatening foe's total attack bonus?
I could see it work against CMD.
|
|
@ Khalarak - Got Improved FE already. That's why it's +5 (+6 from knowledges).
@ grasshopper_ea - I've only ever used guns when I was a Rogue/Marksman in a Warcraft d20 campaign, and that was pretty fun save the DM being a jerk. At any rate, they have their own Combat Style, but only for three levels. Rangers obviously have more than that, but I don't know what you'd default to afterwards. I'm guessing the archery style (point blank, precise, shot on the run, etc). I don't think I'd take Two Weapon unless you had a DM that'd let you use all three for the gunslinger as Two Weapon Rend and Improved Shield Bash is pretty useless for someone with two guns, or no shield. As for using a +5 wounding arrow, I can see DM's nerfing that pretty quickly. XD
@ KaeYoss - He says they actually don't make sense because if you fail a roll, it'll become cursed, but there's no prices for the curses if you try to buy or sell the weapon/armor/item. Unless something's chanced since he last looked.
Yeah, it looks pretty compatible. Short of prestige classes and races being changed, I think just about everything's compatible.
And melee fighters can get just as many full attacks as a ranged fighter. You just need the feats (ie pounce for charging), stay ungrappled (which a lot of ranged fighters would suck against), and items to avoid worrying about terrain.
@ Korzak - Rangers get Hide in Plain Sight as well, but much, much later. As for Shadowdancers, I think they're gone. I haven't seen them at all since the conversion guide came out. Them and Archmages. Oh, and Blackguards too.
I wonder if I dipped into rogue if I could do that little ability too. The problem with rogue/shadowdancer is you're losing +2 BAB.
@ Khalarak - Got Improved FE already. That's why it's +5 (+6 from knowledges).
@ grasshopper_ea - I've only ever used guns when I was a Rogue/Marksman in a Warcraft d20 campaign, and that was pretty fun save the DM being a jerk. At any rate, they have their own Combat Style, but only for three levels. Rangers obviously have more than that, but I don't know what you'd default to afterwards. I'm guessing the archery style (point blank, precise, shot on the run, etc). I don't think I'd take Two Weapon unless you had a DM that'd let you use all three for the gunslinger as Two Weapon Rend and Improved Shield Bash is pretty useless for someone with two guns, or no shield. As for using a +5 wounding arrow, I can see DM's nerfing that pretty quickly. XD
@ KaeYoss - He says they actually don't make sense because if you fail a roll, it'll become cursed, but there's no prices for the curses if you try to buy or sell the weapon/armor/item. Unless something's chanced since he last looked.
Yeah, it looks pretty compatible. Short of prestige classes and races being changed, I think just about everything's compatible.
And melee fighters can get just as many full attacks as a ranged fighter. You just need the feats (ie pounce for charging), stay ungrappled (which a lot of ranged fighters would suck against), and items to avoid worrying about terrain.@ Korzak - Rangers get Hide in Plain Sight as well, but much, much later. As for Shadowdancers, I think they're gone. I haven't seen them at all since the conversion guide came out. Them and Archmages. Oh, and Blackguards too.
I wonder if I dipped into rogue if I could do that little ability too. The problem with rogue/shadowdancer is you're losing +2 BAB.
I think if you wanted to play a gunslinger ranger just talk to the DM explain how rapid shot/manyshot don't make as much sense as TWF, ITWF, and GTWF, but that point blank shot-precise shot make sense and make your own "gunslinger combat style" blending the two. DM's can't really legally stop you from getting a +10 arrow for 4000 gp because that's the cost of it, but if you take catch off-guard and start using it as an improvised dagger to keep it from being destroyed when you shoot with it, they can sunder/disarm it
|
|
I think if you wanted to play a gunslinger ranger just talk to the DM explain how rapid shot/manyshot don't make as much sense as TWF, ITWF, and GTWF, but that point blank shot-precise shot make sense and make your own "gunslinger combat style" blending the two. DM's can't really...
I was thinking that myself. Truthfully, for a gunslinger, it should be written as the PF version and you being given a multitude of choices. If you look at the Tome of Secrets, it makes me wonder if it's not all that compatible with the current version of the RPG because the combat style says "Quick Load at 2nd, Far Shot at 6th, and Precise Shot at 11". First of all, Precise Shot should be at 6th. No one ranged fighter is going to wait until 10th to fire in melee. Not only that, there's not choices. It just tells you what you're taking. I think a variation like that should come into play. I'd like to think my DM would allow a combination at each given level so long as it makes sense. Chance are anyways that you'll be taking Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot as soon as humanly possible given that you'll want to be effective ASAP. I'd also ask him to allow a retraining as Quick Load is awesome, but the +2 ability Everload makes it so your weapon never runs out of ammo. Kind of pointless once you've got that.
But going on that, would the feats we've been discussing go in there? Would that be asking too much? Putting in a feat that allows you to fire in melee as a combat style?
Do not forget Deadly Shot. Great feat for archers, the ranger in my game did great damage while using it.
@ KaeYoss - He says they actually don't make sense because if you fail a roll, it'll become cursed, but there's no prices for the curses if you try to buy or sell the weapon/armor/item.
Well, it costs the same to make. If you manage to con someone, you can sell it for the usual price.
And if you fail your bluff, the guy will go Niska on you. Or if he buys it from you and later finds out you sold him a cursed item.
|
|
Do not forget Deadly Shot. Great feat for archers, the ranger in my game did great damage while using it.
I'm looking, but I don't see it. o_O
Well, it costs the same to make. If you manage to con someone, you can sell it for the usual price.
And if you fail your bluff, the guy will go Niska on you. Or if he buys it from you and later finds out you sold him a cursed item.
And that'd be the reason he's not going to allow it.
And that'd be the reason he's not going to allow it.Well, it costs the same to make. If you manage to con someone, you can sell it for the usual price.
And if you fail your bluff, the guy will go Niska on you. Or if he buys it from you and later finds out you sold him a cursed item.
What? Any chance of people going Niska on other people is great.
I'd allow players really stupid stuff if it would increase the chances of any player characters being brutally tortured in a hilarious fashion (and, let's face it, brutal torture performed on player characters is always hilarious)!
And if it's sensible rules? I've elevated Jason to Saint status in my Church of Pain!
There's gotta be something that lets you fire in melee without opening up your character for a monumental raping. In the Warcraft books, I'd heard of Close Shot, which allowed such a thing, but again that's not OGL.
In straight 3.5 the concentration skill could let you use distracting skills and abilities in combat without taking an AOO. It didn't extend to ranged attacks by RAW, but it wouldn't have been unreasonable to do so.
But hey.. no Concentration skill in Pathfinder... *grumbles*
|
|
I personally like the Step Up feat. It was something I felt needed to be there. And it is only going to be as common as the players or GM make it. Which outside of really aggressive fighting style characters or dedicated archer/mage killers I dont see it being a common feat most would bother with. Better things to spend feats on.
I also like the Stand Still feat. Finally a fighter can actually protect someone. In previous games it was too easy for attackers to just run past the fighter and hope they withstand his attacks of opportunity. Often this gambit paid off and the party wizard becomes so much arcane hamburger.
With Stand Still and Combat Reflexes a character could hold a 10 foot wide gate against several opponents...which, lets admit, is pretty heroic and pretty much a staple of the fantasry genre.
Combine either with a dex of 13 and Nible Moves and even in rough terrain, the character can do either.
-Weylin
I wouldn't mind it if there were more prereqs for it. It is too good for a feat that any single class 2nd level character can take. It really needs to be the end of a two or three feat chain (maybe Endurence, Dodge, and Mobility). I know for a fact it absolutely owns casters if used to it's fullest,and they simply can not do anything to defend. I haven't had trouble wit ranged combats, but I can see that, too.
|
|
And that'd be the reason he's not going to allow it.Well, it costs the same to make. If you manage to con someone, you can sell it for the usual price.
And if you fail your bluff, the guy will go Niska on you. Or if he buys it from you and later finds out you sold him a cursed item.
What? Any chance of people going Niska on other people is great.
I'd allow players really stupid stuff if it would increase the chances of any player characters being brutally tortured in a hilarious fashion (and, let's face it, brutal torture performed on player characters is always hilarious)!
And if it's sensible rules? I've elevated Jason to Saint status in my Church of Pain!
Oh no, that's not the point. It's the fact that he can't make us spend money on stuff, or gain extra gold for other items. Sometimes we're evil, and sometimes we're good. But even more so than that, he wants us to pay for curses to get removed. This helps him price out how much it'll cost for us to make it so it doesn't nerf us.
I wouldn't mind it if there were more prereqs for it. It is too good for a feat that any single class 2nd level character can take. It really needs to be the end of a two or three feat chain (maybe Endurence, Dodge, and Mobility). I know for a fact it absolutely owns casters if used to it's fullest,and they simply can not do anything to defend. I haven't had trouble wit ranged combats, but I can see that, too.I personally like the Step Up feat. It was something I felt needed to be there. And it is only going to be as common as the players or GM make it. Which outside of really aggressive fighting style characters or dedicated archer/mage killers I dont see it being a common feat most would bother with. Better things to spend feats on.
I also like the Stand Still feat. Finally a fighter can actually protect someone. In previous games it was too easy for attackers to just run past the fighter and hope they withstand his attacks of opportunity. Often this gambit paid off and the party wizard becomes so much arcane hamburger.
With Stand Still and Combat Reflexes a character could hold a 10 foot wide gate against several opponents...which, lets admit, is pretty heroic and pretty much a staple of the fantasry genre.
Combine either with a dex of 13 and Nible Moves and even in rough terrain, the character can do either.
-Weylin
Step up is only one feat, so is combat casting. Cast defensively, ghoul's touch, coup de gras, silly fighters. All necromancers carry a scythe...
|
Option three.. you're going to love this. As an archer, keep a spiked gauntlet equipped so you always threaten melee. Put the nastiest poison you can find on it, smile with glee as your opponent wishes he'd tangled with the barbarian.
I wouldn't allow this in my game when the archer full attacks.
The bow is a two handed weapon and therefore both hands are busy if the archer decides to full attack during a round. If they only use a standard action, then I have no problems with gauntlets working the way you suggest and granting an AOO and/or treating the archer as "armed". (Of course, taking IUS also works and is only one feat.)
Remember that all combat is happening simultaneously -- the concept of initiative is to add just enough order to the chaos so that the combat can be adjudicated (somewhat) objectively. Since the archer was using both hands on his bow during the round that he makes a full attack, he doesn't threaten the area around him until his next action, when he can decide to use a standard action and NOT use his two handed weapon for the entire round.
|
|
I wouldn't allow this in my game when the archer full attacks.
The bow is a two handed weapon and therefore both hands are busy if the archer decides to full attack during a round. If they only use a standard action, then I have no problems with gauntlets working the way you suggest and granting an AOO and/or treating the archer as "armed". (Of course, taking IUS also works and is only one feat.)
Remember that all combat is happening simultaneously -- the concept of initiative is to add just enough order to the chaos so that the combat can be adjudicated (somewhat) objectively. Since the archer was using both hands on his bow during the round that he makes a full attack, he doesn't threaten the area around him until his next action, when he can decide to use a standard action and NOT use his two handed weapon for the entire round.
Then to make up for this, I'd have the bow Elvenkind. This makes the bow into a quarterstaff melee weapon, and despite having a full attack, you're stil allowed to take a AoO. You could easily fire a few rounds, and use the bow to smack someone. You'd amazed at what you can do in six seconds.
Option three.. you're going to love this. As an archer, keep a spiked gauntlet equipped so you always threaten melee. Put the nastiest poison you can find on it, smile with glee as your opponent wishes he'd tangled with the barbarian.I wouldn't allow this in my game when the archer full attacks.
The bow is a two handed weapon and therefore both hands are busy if the archer decides to full attack during a round. If they only use a standard action, then I have no problems with gauntlets working the way you suggest and granting an AOO and/or treating the archer as "armed". (Of course, taking IUS also works and is only one feat.)
Remember that all combat is happening simultaneously -- the concept of initiative is to add just enough order to the chaos so that the combat can be adjudicated (somewhat) objectively. Since the archer was using both hands on his bow during the round that he makes a full attack, he doesn't threaten the area around him until his next action, when he can decide to use a standard action and NOT use his two handed weapon for the entire round.
Nah, no archer keeps his hands on his bow all the time. You see, in order for the bow to work properly, an archer absolutely *MUST* let go of the bowstring. If he keeps his hand on the bowstring all the time, the bow will never fire.
Besides, he does spend a significant portion of his time reaching back to his quiver for more arrows, right? Surely at least one of his hands is not on his bow while he does that, right?
Simply saying that his hands are busy so he doesn't have time to make an AoO when he full attacks should apply to everyone. The guy with the greatsword has both hands on his weapon, and both of his hands are busy attacking, so he has no time to make an AoO. Neither does the guy with the sword and shield. Neither does the guy dual-wielding a pair of shortswords.
By the "too busy" logic, the only way to make an attack of opportunity when you spend your round full attacking is if you are wielding a one-handed weapon and not using your other hand for anything during your full attack.
|
By the "too busy" logic, the only way to make an attack of opportunity when you spend...Which would therefore mean if you don't have IUS then you'd be provoking an AoO yourself, and you're both in trouble.
spiked gauntlets allow your unarmed strike to not provoke, also in pathfinder you are proficient with unarmed strike and any natural weapon you possess.