| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I loved the idea of teamwork feats, but I think they ran into an issue that it frequently required two people to coordinate their builds from the start to make them useful. Alternately, having a class that could grant them, or could override requirements via Solo Tactics.
Combine this with how some of them we probably rather niche in their effect, most people probably discounted them quickly leaving it unlikely you would get to work with someone else who would have happened to chosen the same feat.
My idea is that rather than requiring a Teamwork feat to be had by both characters, the teamwork feat would be unlocked by one member having the feat. There might be something special that might get unlocked if both have the feat to start with, but don't 'require' it to be able to make use of it.
The initial idea I have, that I'm trying to consider. A character with a Teamwork feat keeps an eye out for a condition that makes him and a known ally in a specific condition (an ally is attacking an opponent you attacked during last turn, who is flanking the opponent with you). The individual with the teamwork feat spends their reaction, granting their ally the reaction in the feat.
So if we reinvented something a little akin to Precise Strike, you could do the above.
Enable Teamwork Precise Strike [reaction]
Condition: (an ally is succeeds on an attack against an an opponent that you attacked during last turn, and that is currently flanking the opponent with you)
Effect: the ally gets access to preform the following reaction Execute Precise Strike to modify their strike.
Execute Teamwork Precise Strike: [reaction]
Roll 1d6 and add it as extra precision damage for that attack (only to that specific opponent)
So net, one feat would allow two teammates flanking an opponent, if one has the feat to each spend their reaction to add +1d6 precision to a successful strike.
I for instance consider would it be too powerful to allow an ally you have trained with recently (shared morning preparations, or spent a certain amount of exploration time training as a group) to allow activate the Enable Teamwork reaction when the person with the feat could get the reciprocating use. (The individual with the feat attacks an opponent whom they are flanking with the other individual, who had been attacked by their ally.
Basically, 2 Reactions for +1d6 precision damage in a given circumstance.
And at least, potentially I'm considering would it likewise be too powerful to say if both individuals have the feat, the enable reaction becomes a free action, and only the one doing the Execute is the only one who has to spend the reaction to get the Execute reaction's effect?
(would in the given explicate circumstances, and both having invested the feat, to get the bonus damage for the cost of 1 reaction.)
Other potential examples:
Enable Teamwork Scuttle [Reaction]
Condition: you end a movement action/activity next to an ally.
Effect: the ally gets access to preform the Execute Teamwork Scuttle reaction.
Execute Teamwork Precise Strike: [reaction]
Effect: Executing ally gets to preform a free step.
Enable Teamwork Outflank [Reaction]
Condition: You get a critical hit on an enemy which you are flanking with at least one ally.
Effect: any allies which you are flanking that opponent, are treated as if they have the Attack of Opportunity reaction for this event, and your critical counts as a trigger to provoke an Attack of Opportunity from them. (they do not keep access to the reaction, it is only available to potentially resolve this event)
Enable Coordinated Maneuver [Reaction]
Condition: Your ally is preforming an attack maneuver against an ally in your range.
Effect: You grant the ally the Execute Coordinated Maneuver [Reaction]
Execute Teamwork Precise Strike: [reaction]
Effect: Make an equivalent attack roll as per the same maneuver, and treat it as an Aid action you had prepared for your ally, potentially granting your ally a bonus to their roll.
I'm trying to think if potentially two reactions is too much for the effects, for instance. I'm also considering if sometimes it might make sense to have the 'granting' action be a premediated action such as a single action and have it grant the reaction to their allies, which for instance would leave their reaction for other usage. (for instance some classes might really be forced into not being able to use teamwork feats, if they have conflicting reactions they need available) So maybe by default, it might be that you can use a reaction to grant the reaction, in a circumstance, or an action to grant it to your allies during your turn and they have it available until the end of your turn.
Another complication I've considered, is what if you wanted a teamwork feat affecting Shield Blocks. Since they are already using their reaction, so generally they can't 'pay' a reaction. So in those cases would it be ok/necessary for it to be niche enough to rely on it only costing the allies reaction to help? Requiring a setup action, especially for something shield related would be really expensive, since it already costs to raise a shield, unless you simply give them a different setup action, but then it really isn't really costing extra action, it would just potentially make it not work with things that work with other raise a shield actions.
Basically, part of the idea is to make teamwork feats include an aspect of their sharing as part of the feat itself, so it doesn't 'Require' people taking the same feat. I'm curious what others think the benefit of coordinating and have overlap should be. (reduced action cost, such as down from two reaction to one, like suggested) or if people both have the feat, having it have a 'Heightened' effect listed that is a bit better in those cases.
For starters, I love the concept of what you're going for here, but I think as written, they can get pretty powerful if they have free and clear access to the reaction at all times with triggers.
I thus got to thinking on a structure that takes what you have here and I had the idea that something along the following lines might be really cool.
Proposal:
All Teamwork Feats are General Feats. This is for multiple reasons, but also because the bucket of General Feats becomes a lot more interesting as a potential option.
All Teamwork Feats gain the "Cooperation" trait, which works like the Stance trait, but slightly different. It reads as follows:
"When you use an action with the cooperation trait you engage in a general combat strategy that you remain in for some time by choosing an ally. While you are cooperating, your chosen ally must meet the same requirements as you to maintain cooperation. Your cooperation benefits last until you get knocked out, until its requirements (if any) are violated, until the encounter ends, or until you perform another action with the cooperation trait, whichever comes first. After you use an action with the cooperation trait, you can't use another one for 1 round. You can only use cooperation in encounter mode."
Each Teamwork feat gains a listed benefit for the person that has the initial General Feat, and then a single ally who also satisfies the requirements of the Cooperation feat can use the reaction.
AKA something like this
Acrobatic Cooperation [one-action]
Cooperation, General
Prerequisites you are trained in Acrobatics
Requirements you are within 15 feet of your chosen ally
Effect You attempt to acrobatically position yourself to attack an enemy. As long as you meet the requirements, when you Tumble Through an enemy square you gain a +1 circumstance bonus to the check so long as your chosen ally could make a melee Strike against it. If you get at least a success, your chosen ally can use the Acrobatic Opening reaction until the beginning of your next turn. You may use the Tumble Through action as part of using this action. If you are at least a master in Acrobatics, the circumstance bonus increases to +2.
Acrobatic Opening [reaction] Requirements you are the chosen ally of Acrobatic Cooperation Trigger the required ally successfully used Tumble Through on an enemy you can make a melee Strike against Effect Make a melee Strike against the triggering enemy. Regardless of the result, the required ally no longer gains circumstance bonuses to their Acrobatics checks against that enemy and it is temporarily immune to Acrobatic Opening for 1 day.
Probably need to stew on it more, but your initial concept has some mustard, so this is where my head went with it.
I personally found the "stance" aspect of it the way to differentiate them but also create that "unity" between you and another character you're playing with while locking it down to one person. Not sure if you're familiar with RWBY, but the "team-up ability" aspect is sort of what I was going for here.
I'd certainly be open to seeing a whole slew of these. Perhaps it could work better as an Archetype with these all being class feats (I'll be honest, my proposed example is certainly a bit good for a General, maybe a level 7 one).
Anyways, that's my two cents. Can't wait to see what you come up with.
On further thought, these would have to be class feats, but with an archetype and some classes getting access to these (Rogue and Swashbuckler for instance for the proposed one) it would be a cool new structure of feats to add to the game.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I'm envisioning, just spitballs but here ya go: Teamwork Feat Trait
During daily preparation, the Character must spend time training, practicing, studying, or otherwise coaching with one other Character. Each Teamwork Feat includes two benefits, one for the Character who possesses the Feat, and another that is granted to both the PC and their training partner for the duration of that adventuring day.
Solo Benefit: XXXXX This benefit only applies to the Character who takes the Teamwork feat but does not require a partner.
Teamwork Benefit: XXXXX This benefit applies if both the PC with the Teamwork Feat as well as their partner(s). This would be a different benefit instead of an upgraded version of the solo benefit.
Additional follow-up Feats could allow the PC to undertake the training as part of a normal 10-minute rest instead of resting, refocusing, or other activities that can be done during this time. Others could include enabling the Training to benefit two or more partners during the same day.
I'd very much like to see them just added via the Trait to new Class, Ancestry, Skill, and General Feats as opposed to being locked behind a specific Class or Archetype. There is no problem with offering MORE of them to a new Teamwork-focused Class, Archetype, etc. but I think that allowing a fair number of them (maybe like 50/50) without needing a special Archetype/Class to qualify for them is a better approach to give them more widespread appeal to all Character Roles.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think we've seen how teamwork feats might work in PF2e with the Sniping Duo archetype.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Midnightoker
Thanks for the feedback, and your idea. I love that your idea pointed out the mental flaw that I was sort of presuming these feats needed to reflexive and enable actions both ways.
However, it is very easy to imagine someone being proficient in opening up opportunities to strike enemies with their knowledge of acrobatics, and that doesn't necessarily equate to getting to strike someone when someone else tumbles by the enemy. I feel like although I might not exclude the potential of something more basic being more open and reflexive, it should not be the standard and assumption.
One thing I'm not clear on, is your Acrobatic Cooperation activity/action something that includes the tumble, or was the statement of tumbling, a flavor statement? At least first read I was interpreting it as with investment in this general feat, you get a better tumble action that can be used to trigger an opportunity for an ally. And that seemed reasonable.
Then I questioned if it included the action, or if the one action was supposed to be a setup, allowing you to then later tumble. If that were the intent, then it seems awfully weak, especially given the limitation of it only being usable once a day against an opponent.
I'm glad you mentioned the topic of General feat. I think I agree, however, I confess I was probably 'thinking' class feat by a not well thought out default. Only thing I don't like about general is how few you typically get. However, I could imagine it isn't a bad default structure. If players really like to utilize this type of feat, then (granted it is already homebrew) it wouldn't be hard to give bonus Teamwork feats at certain levels, such as how free archetype (or double class feats, etc options) I would want it baseline to be available, but not overpowered, so I think general might be a decent target. If there was an archetype, it might allow you to spend class feats to buy teamwork feats, and potentially get some 'perks' based on how many you have bought, potentially bringing up the results from the investments. I'd generally imagine general feats being weaker than class feats normally, so there might be some room for perks going that route.
While I like your cooperation trait, and talking about having to maintain that cooperation relationship, somewhat like a stance, I at least question if there shouldn't be some teamwork feats that aren't limited to only two individuals. Certainly, I can see a default of someone only being able to be a part of one 'cooperation' group at a time. (with potential options for specialists invested in teamwork to increase this for themselves) I don't think that we should exclude the potential of having some cooperation abilities being able to center around more than just two individuals.
Honestly, if this type of relationship was always limited to pick a single person to train on this with, I think rather than being called Cooperation or Teamwork, as trait, it would need to be named Partner. However, honestly, I think there is room for teamwork feats that can potentially be granted/leveraged to the whole party.
Those specific abilities granted to a wider set of individuals might be lower power tier than perhaps ones that might have a tighter limit on who it is shared with, but I think there is room for both types.
Also, you came back and changed your mind, saying you felt they need to be Class feats, do you think it might be possible that they might exist in both realms? Potentially have feats based on granting actions/reactions to others that are your allies, having specific feats that might be considered general feats, and certain others that might be class specific? I think this is what TheMetricSystem was suggesting. It adds some complexity, as you are not saying all 'X' type feat are 'Y' type, however perhaps that is best. On the other hand, adding that complexity does make the idea of making a set of teamwork feats free a bit more difficult given that general and class feats have different times they arise, and different expected power levels.
Allow the framework to help you define who has the feat, what ability it grants that individual, what ability it can grant to others, and under what sort of requirements. Setting out a handful of examples, such that something might be dependent on a partner, while something else might be more general and might get granted to a whole set of their allies. [and if necessary, a limitation could be placed that only one ally can leverage that individually granted trigger for that incident.]
Again, I don't want this type of feat to be seen as too powerful, but I also don't want them to be too niche that they are considered almost invariably unworthy of the investment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Midnightoker
Thanks for the feedback, and your idea. I love that your idea pointed out the mental flaw that I was sort of presuming these feats needed to reflexive and enable actions both ways.
Of course!
One thing I'm not clear on, is your Acrobatic Cooperation activity/action something that includes the tumble, or was the statement of tumbling, a flavor statement? At least first read I was interpreting it as with investment in this general feat, you get a better tumble action that can be used to trigger an opportunity for an ally. And that seemed reasonable.
That was indeed the intent, though, I have sinec revised my position on General's, because I think that's a bit too good as a general (even a high level one).
Individual classes getting their own seems like a better play.
Also, you came back and changed your mind, saying you felt they need to be Class feats, do you think it might be possible that they might exist in both realms?
Absolutely, just not the one I've written as an example (would have to be a Class feat, it's just too good for General).
I do like the stance like structure of it with the reaction being granted to a designated ally as part of entering the "stance", the question just becomes what kinds of reactions can you allow while being interesting, unique, and worth spending a feat on.
While I like your cooperation trait, and talking about having to maintain that cooperation relationship, somewhat like a stance, I at least question if there shouldn't be some teamwork feats that aren't limited to only two individuals.
I also agree here, in fact, I dare say the reaction approach being the only thing allies can do is a bit limiting. One thing that I think would be really cool is something like a combo feat with things like Bon Mot or Antagonize.
IE "Coordinated Distraction"
Coordinated Distraction
Cooperation, General
Prerequisites you are trained in Intimidation
Requirements you do not use any actions with the attack trait
Effect You cause a distraction so your allies are more effective. When you make a Demoralize check against a target, you gain a +2 circumstance bonus to AC until the beginning of your next turn. Your allies gain the listed Ally Benefit
Ally Benefit Your allies treat the target as flat-footed to melee Strikes they make against the target while it is frightened.
Special If you possess the Bon Mot skill feat, you can use Bon Mot instead of Demoralize and your allies gain the listed ally benefit so long as your target is under the effects of your Bon Mot.
FWIW I used this for a the future Hunter from Legendary Games with a new trait called "tactic" that works much like I describe above.
I'm seeing if I can convince Jason (probably if Hunter does well) to port the same concept over to a Tactician/Warlord Class that uses the same feats but takes a "martial equivalent to the Bard" approach.
So if you like that, you can always check out what I and another colleague built there :)
|
I don't think we need to nail down every teamworkish feat to a single rigid framework.
There might be value in making a Teamwork trait, because you can use that to trigger other abilities, or boost rolls for things with that trait (sounds like a bard thing).
I think that spotter duo archetype is pretty nifty, it absolutely doesn't shackle you to just using it with guns. And it's got a ton in it.
If think for other teamwork archetypes, there does need to be a coherent theme to the kind of teamwork feats caught in it, too.
General teamwork feats I think are not a bad thing, or even skill teamwork feats. Why not? It's just a general trend of designing feats that require at least two participants to do something. Though I suppose the archetype approach does give you a bit more room for specifying a morning practice with a specific buddy.