Shield of Swings, Pin Down and combat maneuvers?

[Maxximilius]

Hi all, I was wondering if you could use the two previous feats with combat maneuvers acting through an attack.

Shield of Swings says :

d20pfsrd wrote:

"When you take a full-attack action while wielding a two-handed weapon, you can choose to reduce the damage by 1/2 to gain a +4 shield bonus to AC and CMD until the beginning of your next turn. The reduction in damage applies until the beginning of your next turn."

Pin Down :

UC wrote:

"Whenever an opponent you threaten takes a 5-foot step or uses the withdraw action, that opponent provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If the attack hits, you deal no damage, but the targeted creature is prevented from making the move action that granted a 5-foot step or the withdraw action and does not move."

Could you make any combat maneuver you can substitute to an attack, like Trip of Disarm, with these feats ? Like a full-attack action with only tripping attempts ? A trip attempt as an attack of opportunity ?

The first one still reduces damage until the next turn, thus reducing damage on eventual attacks of opportunity, so I can see why the answer would be a clear yes, since you are always at risk from suffering a penalty for using the feat.
Pin down, on the other hand, says the creature cannot move. I guess this means the 5-foot step/withdraw action is lost and the opponent must choose something else to do during it's turn. What if the opponent is tripped ? Does he have his full turn and actions left to get up ? Can you even use a combat maneuver instead of your attack of opportunity dealing no damage ?

Thanks for your answers !

[Jiggy]

My best guess is that these two feats would require you to make "real" attacks - ones that would actually deal damage, so that you have the damage to give up in the first place. I'm not sure any GM would let you trade damage for a benefit if there was never going to be a damage roll in the first place (like with a disarm). That said, they might allow the AoO granted by the second one to be replaced by a trip/disarm, but I would think that replacing the attack with the maneuver would do just that - replace it.

[Stynkk]

I'm in agreement with Jiggy on this one. You'd have to make attacks that deal damage, using a Combat Maneuver would negate the usage of these feats.

The only thing I can think of is that you would probably be able to use Shield of Swings and Sunder during your turn.

[Maxximilius]

Thanks for the opinions. :)
Shield of Swings applies until next round, and thus you would have to make only combat maneuvers to not get any malus from it.
Still, you have to take your full-attack action ; and if you decide you finally need to deal damage afterhand (let's say someone provokes by standing up and you can only trip them, which you can't do when they are standing up since they are still considered prone), you are still doing it at half damage. There are not a lot of two-handed weapons allowing for several combat maneuvers with them, and it is pretty much a given that the character will have either to deal no damage at all, or to make at least one attack when not doing so would result in simply losing an action.
I can see this feat used for combat maneuvers only, since by RAW, absolutely nothing in the writing stops me from doing so. And balance-wise, you are still at risk to deal crap damage if you suddenly have to attack for real, which will happen more often than believed and reduce significatively the efficiency of your 2H build. Plus, it costs you a feat, and as a warrior with a 2-handed weapon, your are probably dependant on damage to begin with.

Pin Down is a bit more tricky. About action economy, reading the sentence again shows the word "prevented", which means the opponent doesn't take his movement at all - thus, he retains all his actions and simply is stopped from doing either a 5' step or a withdraw, at the cost of one attack of opportunity from the character. It is a great way to do battlefield control. The wording still seems to imply this must be a "real" attack, even if again, by RAW, nothing stop me from doing a maneuver attack roll instead during the opportunity.
And balance-wise, maneuvers are pretty much always harder to use than a real attack ; when this isn't the case, I think the character invested enough feats for this strategy to work, and since it still uses an attack of opportunity, there is little to no difference between someone provoking by moving in his zone and someone provoking by using a 5' step or withdrawing - especially at the cost of an attack of opportunity + a feat + the fact it needs the character to be a level 11 fighter (one of the Pin Down prerequisites).

Unless an official answer comes out, I think I will allow the two previous feats to work with combat maneuvers. This is neither unbalanced nor a distortion of the rules, it sometimes gives advantages but you never truly get rid of the inconvenients and taxes.