|
If the monster must move to engage either of the characters, it has no incentive not to walk around, since it is not getting a full attack anyway.
I only responded to explain the reason behind 'walking around'. I'm not going to waste time defending the position, because no one here is going to change their mind.
Well, I don't say it doesn't happens or that tactics I pointed out before work 100% time - it's far more less.
I just ask this: if the risk is take an AOO, fall prone and being full attacked after my move, I prefer stay there and try to dispatch at least the fighter.
If I'm super duper (in my mind), I will nuke the fighter and the others. Otherwise, I will hope my buddies will manage it while I'm fighting the fighter.
I don't say that it should always happen. Several times the monster will actually try to bypass meleers, other maybe will stun the fighter on the first attack and then move right near casters to slaughter them thereafter.
The fact that a plethora of things can happen makes things interesting. Not an excuse to not fix things if happens don't work, of course.
|
|
I just ask this: if the risk is take an AOO, fall prone and being full attacked after my move, I prefer stay there and try to dispatch at least the fighter.
It all depends on what you think the chance of that happening is. If it takes a natural 20 for the fighter to do that to you, you'll probably take the AoO.
If the monster must move to engage either of the characters, it has no incentive not to walk around, since it is not getting a full attack anyway.
I only responded to explain the reason behind 'walking around'. I'm not going to waste time defending the position, because no one here is going to change their mind.
How do you 'walk around' a combat patrol that includes the target within it's area? More over, how does the monster/NPC know what area is covered by the combat patrol?
How do you 'walk around' a choke point?
Short of using movement based magics, which not all creatures have i am not sure how exactly it is that your meant to be able to do it.
While I doubt I will come to agree with you that it is never possible to tank(though you might), you might change my oppinion about how useful it it.
I just ask this: if the risk is take an AOO, fall prone and being full attacked after my move, I prefer stay there and try to dispatch at least the fighter.It all depends on what you think the chance of that happening is. If it takes a natural 20 for the fighter to do that to you, you'll probably take the AoO.
IME, the chance are too low and ignore only with certain "big bosses", which is actually reasonable, and not even then (see my previous posts).
We just disagree then.
I just ask this: if the risk is take an AOO, fall prone and being full attacked after my move, I prefer stay there and try to dispatch at least the fighter.It all depends on what you think the chance of that happening is. If it takes a natural 20 for the fighter to do that to you, you'll probably take the AoO.
But the list of possible monsters for who that is the case is tiny, possibly not even statistically significant when compared to the full range of monsters a character might face at any given level.
|
|
While I doubt I will come to agree with you that it is never possible to tank(though you might), you might change my oppinion about how useful it it.
I never made the argument that it was impossible. I merely was explaining the concept as I understand it. While I appreciate your willingness to listen, this is one argument I do not care to engage in.
i tend to agree that stand still is a bit useless due to using cmb, but i think combat patrol in combination with step up and strike, and teleport tactician actually does make it possible to at least make it painful for monsters to just try and walk around you. it's highly feat intensive though. and is it just me, or as written does combat patrol extend your threatened area upwards as well?
Unless I miss something, I read it in that way. I used it for a flying monk :P
i tend to agree that stand still is a bit useless due to using cmb, but i think combat patrol in combination with step up and strike, and teleport tactician actually does make it possible to at least make it painful for monsters to just try and walk around you. it's highly feat intensive though. and is it just me, or as written does combat patrol extend your threatened area upwards as well?Unless I miss something, I read it in that way. I used it for a flying monk :P
Yep, thats why it is cubic feet. The limit however is that you muse be able to move to a point from which you are able to make the attack. That is why it really at its most useful in combination with flight.
If I maze a caster he can probably get out on his own with or without the intelligence check. They did figure out that flying out of reverse gravity works, but since I don't use the same spells for every fight they will be stuck again when the next idea comes up.
The CMB is high enough that the monsters will be hard pressed to not put the fighter on the defensive. Wall of Force is hard to break, and I will state the issue is more along the lines of the fighter not figuring out I am holding back.
In short, the combat is not as believable since I know I can do more, but in the spirit of fun I don't always use the best tactic. That is why I was asking how you did it. The fighter does roll well, extremely well, but if he ever starts rolling dice like the rest of us he will get an unpleasant surprise.
So how are you keeping the fighter in the game without it being obvious that there is DM sleight of hand going on?Well, how exactly the caster gets out? With plane shift? Remember to scatter 5d100 miles then. Wizard COULD then teleport back, barring forbiddances - but druid?
You can just JUMP OUT from reverse gravity if the terrain allows it, or you managed the reflex save anyway. Seriously, Maze is a nasty, nasty and maybe overpowered spell but reverse gravity is not (at least ALONE).
Moreover - ok, a wizard cast maze and one party memer could be screwed for a combat - barring anchors, barring simply roll high. Does it happens every time? Attacks screwing a certain kind of character exist. No knockout poison attacks (maybe pimped by an alchemist or a poisoner rogue) because otherwise low fortitude playrs are removed from play?
An high level Weapon Master can easy cut a wall of force. A barbarian can ignore hardness. And that's not even the point. Ward party mind, counter control and heal are caster shtick - nothing wrong if it's a disintegrate to manage the wall of force.
I wish t point out that I talk to understand and maybe point out possible fault of he game...
I played a game tonight and I when the fighter charged in to attack the dragon I used my attack of opportunity to disarm him. Now he will probably get smart any get the lock gauntlets next time, but he can't keep up, with every new thing that comes up until after the fact.
Back to maze, getting out in 2 rounds is better than being stuck there for a lot longer. Barbarians can ignore hardness? What archetype is that? In any event taking an archetype for a spell that comes up single digit times is not cool at all. Now I understand that it only really has to work really well one time to get the party in trouble. I also know the casters can probably help him bypass it, but I don't like the level of dependency on casters at high levels.
This is not about right or wrong gaming. I just don't like holding hands so to speak.
Also, any approach along the lines of "get them to waste buffs on traps" really just means "party runs through traps and is better off than if they did not".Shame on your DM for that.
If they don't have things go far tougher for you barging and stomping around then why bother not doing so?
Not sure what 3,600gp item you were referring to either, was it your adamantine tool to destroy the 150gp locks that others would have collected?
-James
1: Traps are trivial in PF.
Not in my games. I noticed a long time ago traps = free XP. I am very much against free XP so if I have a trap and it goes someone someone(s) because I always design them to affect several people will either be on their to dying or have a serious affliction. I normally throw the trap in front of a fight so they party goes into the fight weaker, and I make sure it is not a safe zone for resting. Hitting someone with (insert bad thing) just so they can rest and prep the correct spell before they continue on is pointless to me.
PS:I am well aware we are not talking about my games. The point was if anyone is going to use a trap then don't make it convenient to go back to town/rest/etc to get rid of the bad thing. Codzilla I was just using your post to get a point across.
"I houseruled traps to be massively buffed" is completely irrelevant to the subject matter. Because the only way PF traps are doing that is if you throw level +8 traps at the party constantly. Given that level +4 encounters do the same thing as well or better, that still proves traps are trivial.
I understand traps in most AP's suck, and by the rules they suck. My point was that a DM should take precautions to fix it, since traps don't have to be easy XP. It is no different than giving a CR monster gear/buffs that boost his attack bonus by 20 or more to hit a high level fighter.
Mmm, i am pretty sure that a level 20 fighter can with reasonable reliablity stop every CR20 monster but the Tarn Linnorm, Nightwave and Iathavos, before it has gone more than 15' through his or her threatened area. Even those three it can stop fairly often before it get to anyone else. With an addition of just a bard to the party, even the Tarn Linnorm, Nightwave and Iathavos will struggle to get more than 15 feet into the protected zone.While combat maneuvers and Stand Still is all well and nice in theory, the gap between monster CMD and player CMB leaves much to be desired in terms of their usefulness.
Good against... well... stuff that doesn't want to muscle through...
I don't see that happening, and I would need a build to be convinced. If someone has already commented on this post feel free to ignore me.
I'm kind of a noob at high level play.
Why can't fighter's defend casters? They have a metric ton of feats. Assume the guy playing the fighter knows that spells wins encounters and he wants to be sure the caster can do what he does, why doesn't taking the following defend the caster well enough:
Combat Reflexes
In Harms Way
Combat Patrol
Lunge
Stand Still
Monkey LungeBy level 20, that is less than 1/3 of your feats. You could still have a ton of stuff besides this.
Teleport, and very high CMD's alone are issues. Summoning SLA's mean I bring my buddies into the fight where ever I need for them to be, among other things.
Ignores hardness of less than 20. You do not chisel through the lock. You slice through the rock as if you were putting a hot knife through butter.So either they hear you either way, or the bolt is better. If the former, cast Silence. If the latter, you're still better off bypassing the borked mechanic that is lockpicking.I'm sorry but chiseling at a lock does make A LOT more noise than picking one. Orders of magnitude.
Let's say that the average wall is about 1'6'' thick. It feels low for a castle compared to those I've been in, but it shouldn't be TOO low. That means it has 135 hit points. It's a lot of butter to cut through with a weapon that deals 1d4+Str.
|
If the monster must move to engage either of the characters, it has no incentive not to walk around, since it is not getting a full attack anyway.
I only responded to explain the reason behind 'walking around'. I'm not going to waste time defending the position, because no one here is going to change their mind.
I think there are few things at play, and as usual we don't disagree as much as it seems.
If an intellegent monster needs to move, and therefore won't get a full round attack, all things being equal it will try to go around the enemy with high ac and hit points that can kill it with a full round attack to eat the low ac/low hit point alternative that now has to cast on the defensive.
Which is why you try to surround your arcane caster when possible and have high perception somewhere in the party so you can spot an enemy as far out as possible. Going around takes movement, and if going around requires so much movement that it doesn't get any attack, it will charge who it can hit.
Now, if a melee monster can get a full round attack while taking no damage vs a single attack while risking an AoO for moving from a highj damage dealing opponent, you take the full round and kill the threat in front of you.
Either way, you can have a major effect on action economy and positioning.
I played a game tonight and I when the fighter charged in to attack the dragon I used my attack of opportunity to disarm him. Now he will probably get smart any get the lock gauntlets next time, but he can't keep up, with every new thing that comes up until after the fact.
Not to be harsh, but use locked gauntlet should be something one could learn before level 16. Moreover, the dragon was not flat footed (or had dex 13 for Combat Reflexes) to AOO the fighter, apparently. And you can play around things like these with several counter-moves. Say, charge with a "dummy weapon", being disarmed and drop it quickdrawing the good one, as an example. Attempt acrobatics (even if against a dragon is dire).
If really there is not way, prepare an action with deadly aim and/or vital stike to distrupt the next dragon casting (say). Were the casters or other party member in the threat range of the dragon? in that case, the fighter taking the AOO could be a gain (don't know party composition).
Back to maze, getting out in 2 rounds is better than being stuck there for a lot longer.
This is the case of wizards and withces. I do not think clerics and druids are faster than fighters and monks :)
Barbarians can ignore hardness? What archetype is that? In any event taking an archetype for a spell that comes up single digit times is not cool at all.
Is just a rage power, Smasher. An is not useful for walls only - is useful for every time you sunder or break things. (to be fair, smash a wall of force in several rounds would need level 17 (exit /enter rage trick) but to enclose enemies is better the far more vulnerable wall of stone, more plasmable. Since Wall of force is straight, I do wonder if is better just smash what's around the wall and pass through there.
Now I understand that it only really has to work really well one time to get the party in trouble. I also know the casters can probably help him bypass it, but I don't like the level of dependency on casters at high levels.
The fighter is there with the sword ready when the wizard is down observing the runes into the floor. Is there when enemies are nearby, was there when the wizard was just a 1st level student. It's really too much ask wizard spend few spell slot to buff the fighter?
This is not about right or wrong gaming. I just don't like holding hands so to speak
I just wanted to point out that because apparently is not always foregone.
The assumption is that Big Bad Monster can ignore the AoO and then full move and single attack the squishy mage.
This is largely predicated on a few somewhat faulty assumptions.
1) That the Big Bad Monster knows which target is the most vulnerable and is the biggest threat to them. Cleric likely looks functionally the same as the Fighter or Paladin and unless the wizard is sporting a robe and wizard hat he just looks like an unarmored fellow with a quarterstaff unless he's actively casting. So why bypass the guy with the big pointy sword to go hit the guy with a quarterstaff?
2)It pretty much assumes that AoOs are not worth worrying about. Either they Big Bad needs to have so many hit points that the AoO doesn't matter or he has some way of avoiding being hit. Some big solo monsters (Dragons in particular) can absorb AoOs but then we get back to the bankrupt design that is team awesome (PCs) vs one big solo.
3)That the monster can freely move and avoid interception while closing with the squishy caster. This basically assumes that monster is fighting the PCs on a flat featureless plain and that the monster can simply fly/tumble/burrow/teleport around the front lines before snacking on a wizard. However the default assumptions for the game is that while flying creatures are common in the higher levels space to fight is still relatively a premium.
If we assume that Big Bad is Large+ just getting around the fighter likely requires at least 2 opportunities for AoOs. If you have a low ceiling and more than one front line martial type it's even possible to prevent the Big Bad from having enough movement to engage the caster.
Fighters have a ton of feats, I see absolutely no reason why a mid to high level fighter wouldn't have invested in combat reflexes in order to punish the Big Bads stupid enough to try to bypass him.
Good positioning and feat choices should allow the fighter to force the monster to at least respect him. Later on SLAs like Greater Teleport at will can help a Big Bad avoid the fighter screen but that's a pretty risky maneuver when the outsider can't actually guarantee that the squishy wizard will be open for a full attack or grapple the following round.
Also, that squishy wizard, he has 6 mirror images, almost as much HP as the fighter, and is just going to d-door away anyway, or throw up a wall, or just use the invisibility wand and slink away.
So the monster eats an AoO, takes out a mirror image, and the fighter moves in for the kill.
I fail to see any real issue here.
I played a game tonight and I when the fighter charged in to attack the dragon I used my attack of opportunity to disarm him. Now he will probably get smart any get the lock gauntlets next time, but he can't keep up, with every new thing that comes up until after the fact.Not to be harsh, but use locked gauntlet should be something one could learn before level 16. Moreover, the dragon was not flat footed (or had dex 13 for Combat Reflexes) to AOO the fighter, apparently. And you can play around things like these with several counter-moves. Say, charge with a "dummy weapon", being disarmed and drop it quickdrawing the good one, as an example. Attempt acrobatics (even if against a dragon is dire).
If really there is not way, prepare an action with deadly aim and/or vital stike to distrupt the next dragon casting (say). Were the casters or other party member in the threat range of the dragon? in that case, the fighter taking the AOO could be a gain (don't know party composition).
Back to maze, getting out in 2 rounds is better than being stuck there for a lot longer.This is the case of wizards and withces. I do not think clerics and druids are faster than fighters and monks :)
Barbarians can ignore hardness? What archetype is that? In any event taking an archetype for a spell that comes up single digit times is not cool at all.Is just a rage power, Smasher. An is not useful for walls only - is useful for every time you sunder or break things. (to be fair, smash a wall of force in several rounds would need level 17 (exit /enter rage trick) but to enclose enemies is better the far more vulnerable wall of stone, more plasmable. Since Wall of force is straight, I do wonder if is better just smash what's around the wall and pass through there.
...
Now I understand that it only really has to work really well one time to get the party in trouble. I also know the casters can probably help him bypass it, but I
Most of those tactics would not have worked, and I am still waiting for you to let me know how you keep them relevant in your game. To make a long story short I use a variety of tactics. We could be going back and forth for days. I have might trip the fighter next time, who knows.
@ Wraithstrike: I do not adjust the game to make player relevants - are players that manage to be relevant in my games.
And BTW, it does not mean they succeed 100% of times - but they remember locked gauntlets (example above) so maybe the dragon can trip them (if hits) but not disarm them. I mean, they try to cover as much As weakness as possible. Maybe the trip could have missed too, because of some miss chance like displacement. Or invisibility. Or fogs timely dismissed..
Of course there will always be something very nasty taking them out but is part of the game I think.
A thing to point out, I see they try to buff up the most they can, and to combine class features and attacks. Maybe that's the key, and I do see you don't like it (reading above about casters buffing meleers). But it's how my players act.
I did see them once use a tower and gain/grant cover during long hit and run fights with humanoids walking alongside with summoned monsters, help cover with smoking stick. The second part of the fight has been more "standard". This hepled caster finish summons, buffs, controls and to position in a way to grant optimal offense (as said above, casters buff the heck out of them generally and sometimes teleport).
They surprise me because sometimes they try aggressive tactics (say meleers approach quickly to force reaction instead of action - dangerous indeed) sometimes the former thing is done by summons and meleers guard, other times they try stealth by maginc and mundane means and then assault (thinkering about second waves).
I try to design encounters generally in this way: in dungeons, a lot are under CR and are speed bumps, false alarms, possible patrols and similar things - resources are expended and players often tricked. If possible are combined with terrain features and traps.
Then there are high CR fights, very high sometimes, a real pool of XP. I try to create a boss, two sidekicks and several mooks. Variants exist (as an example, can be very fun a couple of high mobile, well played sidekicks). I assume monsters buff up, expecially if alarms are raised.
Random "assmonsters" can exist, hit and run mainly, to harass and do not give rest. Things like wraiths and babau are nice for these things.
In the wilderness, random low CR ones are ridiculous and funny, but the "serious" one are scary (metagame reason for resource management).
I'm not so generous on treasure in general (no laundry list loots) but I do think at high level both casters and melee need items, the latter more because of weapons and mobility means. So I grant loots, rewards, quests to manage my players feel like heroes if worthy (they generally are in my view).
I wish to point out they are a lot - from 6 to 11 (12 this Christmas time). So maybe all things above work better in large groups for a number of reasons (XP pool, buffs first things in my mind).
Questions about your post: your post:I don't understand why switch weapon to ranged or fake the main weapon could not have been worked. Moreover, will the dragons faced always win initiative? If the fighter wins when he's in the right position, trips and AOOs are not an issue until the second round. I ask because you seem sure next time the fighter will be tripped.
With equal levels of optimization, Wizard, Cleric, Druid, and Sorcerer will all by significantly more powerful than Bard, Rogue, and Monk.
To this, I disagree. IMO, it should be "With equal levels of optimization, Wizard, Cleric, Druid, and Sorcerer will fill significantly different roles than Bard, Rogue, and Monk."
IME a wizard that takes find trap when there is a rogue in the party is trying to step on the toes of the rogue. That spell is generally for rogue-less groups.
My current band of adventurers consists of a fighter, spell-less ranger, caviler, summoner, and wizard. I fully expect the wizard to take spells like find trap. I don't expect him to take spells like summon monster, since we have a summoner in the group.
|
|
Also, that squishy wizard, he has 6 mirror images, almost as much HP as the fighter, and is just going to d-door away anyway, or throw up a wall, or just use the invisibility wand and slink away.
So the monster eats an AoO, takes out a mirror image, and the fighter moves in for the kill.
I fail to see any real issue here.
So that is how the squishy Wizard is using the first round, if they win initiative, since it's only minutes per level?
And how many times are you memorizing mirror image in a 4 encounter day?
And that dimension door provokes and AoO. So does invisibility. And if it's a wand, your move action is retrieving it (which is an AoO itself without a handy haversack)
Fortunately, you were behind the fighter who blocked the BBEG and you are now positioned to safely cast effectively without having to waste extra rounds or resources, and be a big damn hero.
Teamwork is awesome.
|
|
I played a game tonight and I when the fighter charged in to attack the dragon I used my attack of opportunity to disarm him. Now he will probably get smart any get the lock gauntlets next time, but he can't keep up, with every new thing that comes up until after the fact.
First, praise for posting an actual play scenario. It is too rare on her, and always useful.
Second, what type of dragon. I didn't see improved disarm as one of the normal feats when I was skimming dragons, but I was skimming and it may be specific to that dragon and certainly not illegal. Otherwise it would have provoked an AoO right back.
Also, without knowing the level and type of dragon, it's hard to tell what the respective CMB vs CMD should be. Fighters have the highest you can get, so if anyone can avoid a disarm, it would be them.
Quick draw is a must have fighter feat, imho, for weapon switching purposes if not for times like this. If they have it, they have succeeded in grounding the dragon or getting an AoO if he tries to fly off (in addition to the charge attack) which isn't bad.
The dragon could elect to take combat reflexes, even if it only has a 10DEX. Sure it won't do much for it beyond when it's flatfooted, but there's no DEX requirement on combat reflexes.
You are right. BTW yeah, if the dragon has reach, does not incurs in AOO even if does not have maneuver feats - in the same way for reach weapons versus humanoids.
I don't understand why switch weapon to ranged or fake the main weapon could not have been worked. Moreover, will the dragons faced always win initiative?
Such things require planning and even though they won init they did not have time to set it up, and that was the first time I used that tactic against them. Most DM's just take the regular attack of opportunity. I used mine to remove a weapon from his hand. The group does win initiative 95% of the time. They are very focused on it since they realize going first means a lot. The next fight is another "new" spell.
I have not grappled anyone in a long time now that I think about it. :)
I played a game tonight and I when the fighter charged in to attack the dragon I used my attack of opportunity to disarm him. Now he will probably get smart any get the lock gauntlets next time, but he can't keep up, with every new thing that comes up until after the fact.First, praise for posting an actual play scenario. It is too rare on her, and always useful.
Second, what type of dragon. I didn't see improved disarm as one of the normal feats when I was skimming dragons, but I was skimming and it may be specific to that dragon and certainly not illegal. Otherwise it would have provoked an AoO right back.
Also, without knowing the level and type of dragon, it's hard to tell what the respective CMB vs CMD should be. Fighters have the highest you can get, so if anyone can avoid a disarm, it would be them.
Quick draw is a must have fighter feat, imho, for weapon switching purposes if not for times like this. If they have it, they have succeeded in grounding the dragon or getting an AoO if he tries to fly off (in addition to the charge attack) which isn't bad.
The dragon does not have improved disarm, but you can't take am AoO unless the dragon is in hit range. The dragon(green wyrm, 3.5) had a reach of 20. I allowed him(the fighter) to get to within 15, and knocked the weapon away. I had a CMB of over 50 while his CMD is probably around 50. I am in AoW at the moment, so I had to rebuild the dragon.
Such things require planning and even though they won init they did not have time to set it up, and that was the first time I used that tactic against them.
I don't understand why switch weapon to ranged or fake the main weapon could not have been worked. Moreover, will the dragons faced always win initiative?
I prefer use maneuvers too. As an example, one time a giant (a lucky giant :P) won initiative (talk turned into a fight) and great cleaved several maneuvers here and there. The fun.
I do not say you should pull punches - I just explained above how I run things (If you want, I add more details or say what classes are involved).
My point above was not that you don't have to do those things: I just said that players covering more corners have them slight less vulnerable - If GM (say) uses 4 tactic in rotation, only 2 of them will work or at least always work.
About planning - if you use maneuvers in this way (again, you do it right) the player should be prepared for that. Locked Gauntlet. Full attack with a quickdrawn bow. Cover with tower shield. Use a trained beast to eat up the AOO (not likely o work with dragons, 'tough).
And If I continue to eat up AOOs, well, not so bad, since I'm allowing rogues and summoned beast and druid companion to move, attack, an not being in the same place and eat up AOOs.
Batman Wizards, always prepared, are advocated. Why fighters should be different?
For Overrun fun, take a look into the barbarian rage powers Overvearing Advance and Overbearing Onslaught, and the feat Charge Through.
|
|
You are right. BTW yeah, if the dragon has reach, does not incurs in AOO even if does not have maneuver feats - in the same way for reach weapons versus humanoids.
The dragon could elect to take combat reflexes, even if it only has a 10DEX. Sure it won't do much for it beyond when it's flatfooted, but there's no DEX requirement on combat reflexes.
Reach weapons have limitation which force you to use them at distance. Natural weapons do not, and I believe (but I am willing to be corrected) therefore expose your natural weapons to being the target for the AoO.
In short, you can attack hands in a way you can't attack a spear and you can't fail a disarm by 10 and have to drop your claw.
By the same logic, I can try to disarm your spear as my AoO if you don't have disarm.
Like I said, I'm open to a rules cite showing otherwise, but I'm not seeing one in core and logically you should be able to attack natural weapons and should then be added as a penalty on the manuver per page 199 of core.
|
|
The dragon does not have improved disarm, but you can't take am AoO unless the dragon is in hit range. The dragon(green wyrm, 3.5) had a reach of 20. I allowed him(the fighter) to get to within 15, and knocked the weapon away. I had a CMB of over 50 while his CMD is probably around 50. I am in AoW at the moment, so I had to rebuild the dragon.
I played a game tonight and I when the fighter charged in to attack the dragon I used my attack of opportunity to disarm him. Now he will probably get smart any get the lock gauntlets next time, but he can't keep up, with every new thing that comes up until after the fact.First, praise for posting an actual play scenario. It is too rare on her, and always useful.
Second, what type of dragon. I didn't see improved disarm as one of the normal feats when I was skimming dragons, but I was skimming and it may be specific to that dragon and certainly not illegal. Otherwise it would have provoked an AoO right back.
Also, without knowing the level and type of dragon, it's hard to tell what the respective CMB vs CMD should be. Fighters have the highest you can get, so if anyone can avoid a disarm, it would be them.
Quick draw is a must have fighter feat, imho, for weapon switching purposes if not for times like this. If they have it, they have succeeded in grounding the dragon or getting an AoO if he tries to fly off (in addition to the charge attack) which isn't bad.
See my other post. Reach IMH reading of the rules is not the same as reach weapons. They don't have the same limitations of where they can attack or risk of being disarmed. And being a part of the enemy, they would be subject to AoO.
So if the dragon attempted to disarm without improved the fighter should get an AoO on the claw trying to grab the weapon, and any damage dealt is added to the save DC for disarm.
But as I said I am open to a citation saying otherwise. The reach section in combat seems to me to be clearly talking about wielded reach weapons and not reach in general.
Reach weapons have limitation which force you to use them at distance. Natural weapons do not, and I believe (but I am willing to be corrected) therefore expose your natural weapons to being the target for the AoO.
A wonderful house rule, but sadly not supported in the rules.
There is a feat that allows you to do this, if I recall correctly but requires a readied action.
-James
Yep. Strike Back. The lamest feat in the Core Rulebook IMHO. Allows what should be an obvious combat option.
|
|
Reach weapons have limitation which force you to use them at distance. Natural weapons do not, and I believe (but I am willing to be corrected) therefore expose your natural weapons to being the target for the AoO.
A wonderful house rule, but sadly not supported in the rules.
There is a feat that allows you to do this, if I recall correctly but requires a readied action.
-James
Not to be difficult, but I still have not seen the citation. The disarm rule says it provokes an AoO and the reach weapons rules apply to specific weapons that allow use of specific combat manuvuer options, spelled out under each weapon what the specific use is.
If you are reaching in with a part of your body to disarm, and the rule says it provokes an AoO, I don't see why it wouldn't.
Otherwise a creature with reach can functionally ignore the AoO penalty for combat manuveurs, and that doesn't make sense.
|
|
Yep. Strike Back. The lamest feat in the Core Rulebook IMHO. Allows what should be an obvious combat option.
Reach weapons have limitation which force you to use them at distance. Natural weapons do not, and I believe (but I am willing to be corrected) therefore expose your natural weapons to being the target for the AoO.
A wonderful house rule, but sadly not supported in the rules.
There is a feat that allows you to do this, if I recall correctly but requires a readied action.
-James
Strike Back is a readied action against a reach attack. It is basically holding until your opponent reaches in to hit you, the hitting them as they reach in as if the attack provoked an attack of opportunity.
Disarm (and the most of the combat manuveurs) by their nature provoke an attack of opportunity. Like I said, otherwise anything that has reach can use them without provoking, and that makes no sense to me.
Might be an FAQ but it has alway been clear to my group that was how it works.
|
|
If you are reaching in with a part of your body to disarm, and the rule says it provokes an AoO, I don't see why it wouldn't.
It provokes, but you have no attack that can hit them.
If you could strike the natural weapon used, then you could do so as a readied action for when they normally struck at you... without the use of that silly 'strike back' feat.
I agree with you that it should work that way, even more than I believe that BAB & saves should be fractional.
Both will make very fine house rules.
In 3.5 I would rules lawyer getting an AOO against a creature with reach attempting to grapple or make an unimproved unarmed strike against an armed opponent.
-James
The strike back feat only allows you to ready an attack against someone outside of you reach if they attack you. It has nothing to do with attacks of opportunity or provoking.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/strike-back-combat---final
So far no one has posted a rule that says reach negates attack of opportunities coming from Combat Maneuvers. The main point of the improved maneuvers feat chains is learning how to do something without provoking, so it would make no sense to me to have any creature with reach be able to do combat maneuvers without provoking an attack of opportunity.
If untrained you reach in to take a weapon, you are by rule exposing yourself to an attack of opportunity, unless you are using a reach weapon. Having reach in and of itself is not the same as having a reach weapon, which is the only exception I can find.
If there is a rule, point me to it and we can discuss it, but I can't find anything that supports your position.
If there is a rule, point me to it and we can discuss it, but I can't find anything that supports your position.
To me, just the general rules on attacks and AoO support his position. I've always seen it played that way going back through all of 3E and through lots of organized play, wherein someone will invariably bust you down on common rules misconceptions fast. It's one of the advantages of having greater reach.
I mean, if I'm 20' away from you and I cast a spell without casting defensively that provokes attacks of opportunity, you just can't take them unless you have 20' reach.