A change to Trip ...

[The Speaker in Dreams]

The Speaker in Dreams wrote:

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Whether or not triplock is too powerful is mostly irrelevant. I personally believe it is too good if the "in combat" cost is an AoO, but probably ok if it burns and action to pull off. Fortunately for my opinion, the rules support this as well, and have done so since the 3.5 ruling on this same issue.

Moving along folks.. keep it civil. I'll check back in later.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

I'm with you on the ruling, but you do have a really interesting focal point too - emphasized above by me.

Hmmm ... *maybe* a solution would revolve around changing HOW the benefit of the trip attack is made by the tripper then?

So, instead of getting an AoO to attack the target of YOUR trip attempt, instead you get to use a *swift* action to deliver an attack as well? This would limit it to 1 use, PERIOD, and charge a cost of the tripper to use it then. I'd say that even the baseline Trip feat *should* include this, and then maybe have the AoO-provoking work sort of like the Bull Rush works now - you (bull-rusher) don't get the AoO, BUT any allies who's threatened spaces you move the target through provoke AoO's.

It can read something like, "Make a swift action in order to make a single attack at your highest BAB on the tripped target." Or something to this effect (ie: similar TO an AoO, but NOT via AoO mechanics).

I think that could work out nicely, honestly - and will make the trip a kindred spirit to bull rush in 'team friendly' application and mechanics.

I think this may become a new house rule for my games - I'll have to bounce it off my players, though.

Hi all!

Taken from a different thread and placed here for appropriateness.

This is *kind* of revolving around Trip-locking, though - clearly - it doesn't allow for trip locking. If anything, it kind of restricts tripping a bit more. So ... thoughts on this change above?

Comments?

Missed mechanics overlap somewhere?

[Mirror, Mirror]

It could use a specific call out that the attack granted is a trip attempt, but that is probably just because we have snipets right now. I think such a change would be fine.

It also would need to be expanded to Disarm as well. Otherwise, someone picking up a weapon could never be disarmed.

Although, personally, I see no big issue with allowing trip-locking or chain-disarming. Mostly because it's not more powerful than what the casters can do, there is always a chance of failure, it is a dedicated build, and good tactics can easily negate the benefit.

As such, I disagree with our lead designer up there. Certainly in my games it is allowed, and nobody has ever been able to break an encounter by doing so (despite having a tripper fighter and a whip bard in two seperate campaigns).

But OT, I think the change would be just fine.