1) Hold At Bay
Prerequisite: Outflank feat
Benefit: Whenever you and an ally who also has this feat are flanking the same creature, your flanking bonus applies to your armor class as well as your attack rolls.
2) Opportunistic Flanker
Prerequisites: Hold at Bay feat and Paired Opportunist feat
Benefit: Benefit: Whenever you and an ally who also has this feat are flanking the same creature, if that creature makes an attack on one of you, it incurs an attack of opportunity from the other.
I... like. Except for the fact that simply flanking would give you a +4 bonus to AC -- if it was just +2 I think I would be good.
What type of bonus to AC would that be by the way? Circumstance? Dodge?
I... like. Except for the fact that simply flanking would give you a +4 bonus to AC -- if it was just +2 I think I would be good.
What type of bonus to AC would that be by the way? Circumstance? Dodge?
I headed back to work after posting this, and while working the same thought occurred to me, that the +4 was probably too much. And I'm thinking circumstance, since it's more about the fact that your teammate is distracting the target than it is about you becoming a better dodger.
Yeah with those notes added in I would be down with allowing these feats in.
There is a question on the second one though:
If they full attack do they provoke for every attack that is part of the full attack -- or just once for the attack sequence (per target attacked that has access to this feat)?
Yeah with those notes added in I would be down with allowing these feats in.
There is a question on the second one though:
If they full attack do they provoke for every attack that is part of the full attack -- or just once for the attack sequence (per target attacked that has access to this feat)?
Ooh, good question. I'm inclined to say per attack, since the only way that can be exploited is if your teammate also has Combat Reflexes, but I'm not set in my ways about it and would be open to suggestions.
I'm not sure -- I don't like the thought that attacking with a full attack would provoke on each swing. It seems to me that a full attack in this case should be kind of like provoking with movement -- no matter how many squares would provoke for a single opponent you wouldn't get more than one AoO against someone moving around you.
I'm now thinking of things like cleave could prove problematic as well.
I'm not overly sure how to resolve that yet -- but I'll think on it.
I'm not sure -- I don't like the thought that attacking with a full attack would provoke on each swing. It seems to me that a full attack in this case should be kind of like provoking with movement -- no matter how many squares would provoke for a single opponent you wouldn't get more than one AoO against someone moving around you.
I'm now thinking of things like cleave could prove problematic as well.
I'm not overly sure how to resolve that yet -- but I'll think on it.
Yeah, I can see your point regarding attacks. On the other hand, given that the feat is intended to simulate an opportunistic ally hitting the target while they're focused on you, there should be some sort of penalty to the target for focusing completely on you vis-a-vis the Full attack. Perhaps a full attack still only provokes one AoO, but the target is treated as flat-footed ([Edit] Only for the purpose of resolving the AoO)?
How are you thinking Cleave could mess things up?
What other circumstance AC bonuses are there?
I really do like the flanking feat since I otherwise never ever see any AoO in combat (smart monsters, smart players make these unlikely).
The flanking AoO would likely only work once per full or standard attack (not each swing), though it seems like Outflank and Paired Opportunist would make more sense for prerequisites than Hold At Bay, which doesn't really make sense.
Also you shouldn't have to worry about Touch AC when PO and (Out) Flanking would be giving you +6~+8 to the attack roll. Alternatively you could just make it standard bonuses or Touch AC, whichever is lower (but not both).
I'm pretty much sold on it only allowing once per attack, not perswing, and making Outflank and PO the prereqs... yeah, sure. I had thought of that originally but my reasoning for making HaB a prereq was mechanical: I didn't want Opportunistic Flanker to be too easy to take.
I don't recall saying anything about touch AC -- flat-footed yes, touch no.
I think the extra attack should be enough:
They are already flanking the creature with an extra bonus and an extra dice of damage.
Just getting the attack is pretty potent too.
As such I would just allow an AoO and leave it there.
I don't recall saying anything about touch AC -- flat-footed yes, touch no.That would be because I don't know the difference!
Sweet idea feat ideas though, I've been looking into them recently and they have some great potential, just kind of a bummer you really need to be a feat heavy class to really get access to them (which many allies are not).
Touch Attack: Target gets DEX bonus to AC, but not his Armor Bonus.
Flat-Footed: Target gets Armor Bonus to AC, but not his DEX Bonus.Yeah, I know it's a bummer, but allowing characters to do this stuff without the feat investment, including making them tree feats, could potentially make them VERY game-breaking. If every time, flanking meant you got hit more often, could hit back less, AND you were vulnerable to AoO's... yikes. I like the idea of teamwork feats allowing for really nasty effects but requiring TWO characters both invest in them -- seems a good balancing act.
I think the extra attack should be enough:
They are already flanking the creature with an extra bonus and an extra dice of damage.
Just getting the attack is pretty potent too.
As such I would just allow an AoO and leave it there.
Yeah... intuitively it FEELS like a full attack should distract the target more than a standard action, but mechanically, you're probably right -- it would be too overpowering. I suppose I can hand-wave it as the difference being too fine--grain to simulate.
As far as full versus standard attacks, if the creature also made a move action the attention spent is likely similar (hence you can only take a full OR a standard+move).
Remember that it takes two feats AND specific positioning in order to benefit from the teamwork feats, so it likely isn't overpowered given how situational it is. Even still given Outflank and Paired Opportunist that's a pretty sizable likelihood boost.
For the purpose of determining how much a character can do, yes, Standard+Move takes up as much oftheir time, roughly, as Full Attack. For the puprose of these feats, I was more concerned with the fact that a full attack takes more focus and attention. But it's a moot point now, since I've conceded that for the purpose of game balance, it should be limited to the target provoking only one AoO per attack (regardless of whether it's full or Standard), and that it should not grant any additional bonuses to the AoO if it's triggered by a full attack by the target.
You're right, it ISN'T overpowered, I'm saying it WOULD be overpowered if it wasn't a feat.