|
34 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
How would this work? The Inquisitor's Solo Tactics allow him to use teamwork feats, even if his ally doesn't have the corresponding feat. Broken Wing Gambit reads as follows...
Whenever you make a melee attack and hit your opponent, you can use a free action to grant that opponent a +2 bonus on attack and damage rolls against you until the end of your next turn or until your opponent attacks you, whichever happens first. If that opponent attacks you with this bonus, it provokes attacks of opportunity from your allies who have this feat.
So could the ally (who doesn't have the feat) allow the enemy to get the +2 bonus, thus giving the inquisitor an AoO? Or does the inquisitor give the enemy the bonus, giving his ally the AoO? Or can it work both ways, because of the Inquisitor's Solo Tactics ability?
I don't think this particular feat works with the inquisitors ability.
I could not figure it out either so I hit the FAQ button.
PRD wrote: Solo Tactics (Ex): At 3rd level, all of the inquisitor's allies are treated as if they possessed the same teamwork feats as the inquisitor for the purpose of determining whether the inquisitor receives a bonus from her teamwork feats. Her allies do not receive any bonuses from these feats unless they actually possess the feats themselves. The allies' positioning and actions must still meet the prerequisites listed in the teamwork feat for the inquisitor to receive the listed bonus.
1. It doesn't seem to work here because of the text "...for the purpose of determining whether the Inquisitor receives a bonus..." There aren't any bonuses associated with the Broken Wing Gambit feat that apply to the Inquisitor or her allies.
I'm pretty sure it would give the monster a +2 to hit you, and then all your allies who have the feat (which is none), would get to attack it. In other words, for an inquisitor with no one else around who has it, it just gives the opponent a +2 to hit them.
Bobson wrote: I'm pretty sure it would give the monster a +2 to hit you, and then all your allies who have the feat (which is none), would get to attack it. In other words, for an inquisitor with no one else around who has it, it just gives the opponent a +2 to hit them. This is how I would read it too, considering it specifically says it only provokes attacks from allies with the feat.
It wouldn't do anything but grant your opponent a +2 bonus to hit you since solo tactics only gives YOU the benefit of the feat, not your allies.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
On the other hand, a Cavalier with this feat is awesome...
|
2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
|
Okay, how about if the Inquisitor also had Paired Opportunist? Then he can treat his allies as if they had both feats. Can he then use Broken Wing Gambit on himself, act as if his allies gained attacks of opportunity when his opponents attack him, and then because he can act as if they got attacks of opportunity, he gets one himself?
As for Bobson's idea of an Inquisitor/Cavalier with Tactician and Solo Tactics with Broken Wing and let's make the other bonus Teamwork Feat Paired Opportunist.
The I/C uses Tactician to give everybody Paired Opportunist so if anybody gets an AoO, then the Inquisitor does.
He also uses Broken Wing Gambit to give an opponent a +2 attack/damage.
The opponent takes the attack.
The I/C hero gets to act as if all his allies just got attacks of Opportunity, and since he has Paired Opportunist, he can now get his AoO.
But of course, since he just used Tactician to give everyone Paired Opportunist feat, then everyone else gets the AoO anyway because the I/C hero just did.
This is not just a real loop, this is just a way of reliably gaining the benefits of Paired Opportunist.
Let's get in those FAQ requests: my PFS community looks for every excuse to shoot my ideas down.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: Okay, how about if the Inquisitor also had Paired Opportunist? Then he can treat his allies as if they had both feats. Can he then use Broken Wing Gambit on himself, act as if his allies gained attacks of opportunity when his opponents attack him, and then because he can act as if they got attacks of opportunity, he gets one himself? I think you get more play out of Outflank/Paired Opportunists with Solo Tactics, but I don't recall the exact wording. Remember when figuring your Attacks of Opportunity that you only get one attack per opportunity. For instance, if the enemy provokes, you inspire an AoO for your team mate, because the team mate got one you could get one if you had not used it.
In this case, I am talking about everybody getting just 1 AoO. The Initially, BWG would give everyone an AoO because the Inquisitor was using it, and the opponent attacked him. The allies don't really get it, because Solo Tactics don't really give it to them, but it lets the Inquisitor act as if they did, and since he has Paired Opportunist (and gets to act like everyone else does), he gets one.
Now if this Inquisitor were an Inquisitor/Cavalier and used his Tactician ability to give everyone Paired Opportunist, then everybody would gain the AoO because he did.
So BWG would provoke a sort of imaginary AoO from the Allies via Solo Tactics.
That would provoke a real AoO from the Inquisitor via Paired Opportunist and Solo Tactics,
and the that would provoke real AoO's from the allies because they all have Paired Opportunist, too.
But are you just pointing out that BWG itself only works 1/round, that it takes a free action to activate and lasts until that opponent (only 1) attacks you, or until your next turn, whichever comes first. The wording of the feat
"Whenever you make a melee attack and hit your opponent, you can use a free action to grant that opponent a +2 bonus on attack and damage rolls against you until the end of your next turn or until your opponent attacks you, whichever happens first. If that opponent attacks you with this bonus, it provokes attacks of opportunity from your allies who have this feat."
says to me that if the opponent get's multiple attacks, it can trigger multiple attacks of Opportunity.
But there are limits to the feat that make is less cool than I want it to be.
The "imaginary" AoO is a real grey area.
Counter Argument: Since your allies require the feat to receive an AoO and they don't get to operate as if they had it, they wouldn't receive one. That means Paired Opportunists wouldn't trigger.
Broken Wing Gambit doesn't work with Solo Tactics the way you want.
It lets you act as if they had the feat, but it doesn't let you act like they took an attack they didn't take.
Allies would actually need the feat to trigger those AoOs.
ErrantPursuit and TGMaxer,
With Paired Opportunist, it is not necessary that my allies actually TAKE their (imaginary) AoO for me to be entitled to mine. My opponent provokes from me because he provokes from them, or at least with Solo Tactics I can act as if he did.
But your interpretation is defensible. Please make sure you cast your vote to get this thread FAQ'd
APG Solo Tactics (Ex) wrote: : At 3rd level, all of the inquisitor's allies are treated as if they possessed the same teamwork feats as the inquisitor for the purpose of determining whether the inquisitor receives a bonus from her teamwork feats. Her allies do not receive any bonuses from these feats unless they actually possess the feats themselves. The allies' positioning and actions must still meet the prerequisites listed in the teamwork feat for the inquisitor to receive the listed bonus. UC Broken Wing Gambit (Combat, Teamwork) wrote: You feign weakness, making yourself a tempting and distracting target.
Prerequisite: Bluff 5 ranks.
Benefit: Whenever you make a melee attack and hit your opponent, you can use a free action to grant that opponent a +2 bonus on attack and damage rolls against you until the end of your next turn or until your opponent attacks you, whichever happens first. If that opponent attacks you with this bonus, it provokes attacks of opportunity from your allies who have this feat.
APG Paired Opportunists (Combat, Teamwork) wrote: You know how to make an enemy pay for lax defenses.
Benefit: Whenever you are adjacent to an ally who also has this feat, you receive a +4 circumstance bonus on attacks of opportunity against creatures that you both threaten. Enemies that provoke attacks of opportunity from your ally also provoke attacks of opportunity from you so long as you threaten them (even if the situation or an ability would normally deny you the attack of opportunity). This does not allow you to take more than one attack of opportunity against a creature for a given action.
*all bolds mine*
This doesn't work because they aren't allowed to take that attack of opportunity. For the same reason that it wouldn't work even if they had the feat, if they had already used their attack of opportunity, (without combat reflexes).
-YOU- get to count as if they had the feats for determining if -YOU- receive bonuses. However, the ally must still also meet "positioning and actions" portion of the feat, and they do not actually get to have that AoO because even though you would have caused the enemy to provoke, they have to have the feat to actually count it for this particular scenario.
The Solo Tactics ability is cool, but not supercool. If a combo requires you to do something, then the ally to do/qualify for something, then you get to do something... the ally still has to qualify for it outside of solo tactics.
The is the same reason Swap Places(APG) can be taken with solo tactics, but does nothing, as the ally needs the feat as well in order to move outside his turn.
There are a lot of teamwork feats that are great for inquisitors, but being able to take a couple feats, then take a -2 to ac and get free attacks is a little out of it's reach.
I suspect those "imaginary AoOs" must be part of those "unwritten rules" BBT is always bringing up.
"Provoke an attack of opportunity" doesn't mean make an attack of opportunity. The only action required is the opponent's attacking the Inquisitor. The positioning complaint is valid, but hardly a dealbreaker.
The price the Inquisitor pays is higher than a -2 to AC: it's to give the opponent a +2 to attack and damage.
But let's get the Dev Team to contribute.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: "Provoke an attack of opportunity" doesn't mean make an attack of opportunity. Unfortunately, since they do not possess the feat, they do not provoke. Remember, your allies to do not get the benefits of the feat because of how Solo Tactics works. (For the purposes of determining whether the Inquisitor receives a benefit.) Hence, the enemy does not provoke from them when it attacks you. I'm beginning to wonder how many AoO Teamwork Feats an Inquisitor can really take advantage of...
The inquisitor wouldn't get to act like his allies took attacks of opportunity, because they didn't. But he does get to act as though his allies were entitled to attacks of opportunity, because he can act as if they had the feat, even though they don't.
By drawing the attack and damage bonus onto himself, the inquisitor is the only one who is actually using a feat (at least at first). The only attack required to trigger the sequence of events then comes from the opponent's attack.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: The inquisitor wouldn't get to act like his allies took attacks of opportunity, because they didn't. But he does get to act as though his allies were entitled to attacks of opportunity, because he can act as if they had the feat, even though they don't. He doesn't get to act as if his team mates had the benefit of one feat (Broken Wing Gambit) to qualify for the benefits of a second feat (Paired Opportunists).
Yes, he does. Solo Tactics allows the Inquisitor to act as if his allies had ALL his teamwork feats.
Anyway, why not? When I went looking for the FAQ, all I found was this thread. I am only necroing it because I want the answer, too. If you can't find definitive evidence for your case, then join me in asking for an FAQ.
To put it differently, since they do not actually have the feat they do not receive the opportunity necessary for an attack of opportunity. The opponent does not provoke your allies because they don't have feat necessary. Since there is no provocation, there is no reciprocal opportunity.
Some teamwork feats work with solo tactics off the box, some need a little more investment. Besides broken wing gambit another example for the latter is amplified rage.
For both, the best route is to have an actual partner who takes care of some part that is necessary. But a multiclass inquisitor can make it work all by himself.
1 Level dip into cavalier and you can give your friends broken wing gambit. Then you use solotactics with paired opportunist to get an AoO, too.
Broken Wing Gambit sometimes grants attacks of opportunities to allies who also have it.
Paired Opportunist grants the privilege of an AoO to every member of the PO teamwork community whenever any member gets that privilege.
So if the Inquisitor the Right Honorable Lady Hester Estrella uses Broken Wing Gambit to grant her so gifted allies attacks of opportunity, whether or not they actually seize that opportunity, they are still entitled to it, and then Paired Opportunist entitles R.H. Estrlla to one, too. And allowing the Honorable Lady to pretend she has granted privileges to people to whom she has given NOTHING is precisely what the Solo Tactics ability does. That is how our system of justice works.
The fact that her allies fail to seize the opportunities she gives them is irrelevant in the mind of an Inquisitor. She has followed procedure, and so dispenses judgment.
E.P., It seems that you are saying that not responding to a provocation is the same thing as not being provoked. If Aggro the Axe (one of E.G.G.'s characters) fails to punch Bluto the Barbarian in the face for what he said about his mother, Bluto still did provoke Aggro. You don't have to respond to every provocation just to be provoked. And Paired Opportunist triggers on the provocation, not on the action.
Now comes the evidence:
Solo Tactics says. "...all of the inquisitor’s allies are treated as if they possessed the same teamwork feats as the inquisitor for the purpose of determining whether the inquisitor receives a bonus from her teamwork feats." http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/inquisitor#TOC-Solo-Tactics-Ex -"
In this case, the bonus is a bonus attack (of opportunity).
Paired Opportunist says, "...an ally who also has this feat...Enemies that provoke attacks of opportunity from your ally also provoke attacks of opportunity from you so long as you threaten them..." from TGMaxer, higher up on this thread
In conclusion,
Having comprehensively demonstrated and proved my point, and supported it with evidence, I insist that you bring forth contrary evidence of your own to prove me wrong, that you cast your FAQ lot to bring down the Development Team Inquisitors upon me, or that you agree that I am right.
Umbranus wrote: Some teamwork feats work with solo tactics off the box, some need a little more investment. Besides broken wing gambit another example for the latter is amplified rage.
For both, the best route is to have an actual partner who takes care of some part that is necessary. But a multiclass inquisitor can make it work all by himself.
1 Level dip into cavalier and you can give your friends broken wing gambit. Then you use solotactics with paired opportunist to get an AoO, too.
That works. But there is good reason for an Inquisitor to do what I am explaining to Errant Pursuit, if he can. Tactician only lasts a few rounds and is only available 1/day.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: The fact that her allies fail to seize the opportunities she gives them is irrelevant in the mind of an Inquisitor. She has followed procedure, and so dispenses judgment.
E.P., It seems that you are saying that not responding to a provocation is the same thing as not being provoked. If Aggro the Axe (one of E.G.G.'s characters) fails to punch Bluto the Barbarian in the face for what he said about his mother, Bluto still did provoke Aggro. You don't have to respond to every provocation just to be provoked. And Paired Opportunist triggers on the provocation, not on the action.
The problem is that no Attacks of Opportunity are generated by your allies for you to take advantage of because they don't receive those benefits as if they had the feat. Just like the Greater Bull Rush provides attacks of opportunity, but unless someone is actually capable of taking them, none are generated.
Solo tactics allows the inquisitor to receive bonuses as if allies had the feat.
However, allies actually have to have the feats for them BWG to provoke for them. So Paired opportunist won't work.
The bonus counts for you, but not for them. They still have to qualify in both placement and actions from solo tactics.
Because they don't have the feat, the enemy's action doesn't actually provoke from them (because it only provokes when you have the feat), so it doesn't proc Paired Opportunist.
This is similar to wanting to use Precise Strike (provides 1d6 when flanking) when your ally is unarmed and without Improved Unarmed Strike, they are in the right place, but they don't count as flanking because they don't have a weapon that threatens.
Now, if someone had the feat but had already used all their AoOs, it would work, because the feat does not require them to actually take the AoO, it only requires them to qualify for it.
I know it might sound like splitting hairs. Having no AoO's left is different than not being able to take one at all. If you have used your AoO's that round, movement past you still provokes, you just can't do anything about it.
I have an inquisitor and a Hunter (APG) that would both love for this to work, but I just can't see that from the wording.
If I'm wrong, those will be my next 2 feats, believe me.
EDIT: Actually, the Hunter does work, because your AC gets the benefits of any teamwork feats you have. so scratch that.
TMM & EP,
C’mon guys, I asked for evidence. Bring forth the evidence! Otherwise, I have evidence. You don’t. I win.
Not fair? How about this: I made my argument; I backed it with evidence; you failed to demonstrate that either my argument or my evidence is wrong; your counter arguments have no evidence.
Argument + evidence > than Argument.
I win.
But I’m not happy about winning like this. Come back with evidence.
At least explain what you think is false about my argument or what you don’t understand about it.
That’s what I’m doing for you in the following.
> The problem is that no Attacks of Opportunity are generated
That is no problem at all. I’ve already said this. For Paired Opportunist to work, attacks of opportunity do not need to be generated: they only need to be provoked. “Enemies that provoke attacks of opportunity from your ally also provoke attacks of opportunity from you”—above in this thread. Do you see the difference? It doesn’t say “If you take an attack of opportunity, all your allies get an attack of opportunity”—me, I just made that up.
Solo Tactics is precisely is for this purpose. Broken Wing Gambit doesn’t work with Solo Tactics by itself because it is triggered by actions that are granted by having this feat. The Inquisitor can act as if her allies have BWG, but she can’t pretend they took actions they didn’t. She can pretend her allies have Paired Opportunist, and so she can pretend they are provoked even when they aren’t, because no action is required. In this case, from the perspective of an Inquisitor with Solo Tactics, failing to take the AoO because you don’t actually have the feat you need is no different from failing to take the AoO because you suspect the opponent is really a Flowing Monk.
> allies actually have to have the feats for them BWG to provoke for them. So Paired opportunist won't work.
That’s no true.
“Solo Tactics says. ‘...all of the inquisitor’s allies are treated as if they possessed the same teamwork feats as the inquisitor for the purpose of determining whether the inquisitor receives a bonus from her teamwork feats.’ http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/inquisitor#TOC-Solo-Tactics-Ex -"—me, above in the thread
With Solo Tactics, Honorable Hester gets to act as if her allies have Broken Wing Gambit and Paired Opportunist.
> They still have to qualify in both placement and actions from solo tactics.
With Broken Wing Gambit, the Inquisitor IS taking the required action. She is granting her opponents +2/+2 so that her allies may be provoked in the event that their opponent also takes the required action: attacking her. Her allies don’t have to take any action for the inquisitor to use BWG. She has the ability to grant bonuses to her opponents when any allies are around.
With Paired Opportunist, placement, yes, action no. Paired Opportunist triggers on provocation, not on action. She may not be able to pretend her allies take attacks of opportunity, but there is no reason why she can’t pretend her allies have an opportunity to take. Unless you can find a reason…
> Because they don't have the feat, the enemy's action doesn't actually provoke from them (because it only provokes when you have the feat), so it doesn't proc Paired Opportunist.
But Solo Tactics lets the Inquisitor act as if her allies DO have the feat, so it her act as if the enemy does provoke from them. Why not?
> when your ally is unarmed and without Improved Unarmed Strike, they are in the right place, but they don't count as flanking because they don't have a weapon that threatens.
I’m not sure this is germane, but it’s interesting. But, again, no evidence. I think that you can indeed make Unarmed Strikes even if you don’t have IUS, so you do indeed threaten even when you don’t have your weapon. Please quote and cite the rules that say that.
> the feat does not require them to actually take the AoO, it only requires them to qualify for it.
Exactly! Thank you! Solo Tactics lets act as if you have the feat Paired Opportunist, so it lets you act as if it lets your allies qualify for the attacks of opportunity, so it gives you the attack of opportunity.
> I have an inquisitor and a Hunter (APG) that would both love for this to work, but I just can't see that from the wording. If I'm wrong, those will be my next 2 feats, believe me.
You are welcome to bring my argument to your DM. I appreciate attributions, though it's not strictly necessary. That is what these forums are for.
RAW it wouldn't do anything (useful), but...that's not acceptable to me. I'd at least try to accommodate it to do something.
Most logical and simple route to me would be that the inquisitor's allies can give the enemy the bonuses so the inquisitor gets the AoOs, but not the opposite way. The AoO is the benefit of the feat, so the inquisitor gets it and the allies do not. Giving the enemy a bonus to hit you is most certainly NOT a benefit of the feat and sounds more like a positioning/tactics issue, and... you shouldn't need a feat just to learn how to make yourself an easier target for the enemy (with no payoff for yourself out of it).
So yeah. Allies give the monster the bonus; Inquisitor reaps the AoOs.
I already stated that I disagree with what you get to count as a bonus from solo tactics.
I don't think you get to count your allies as provoking, because without the feat, they don't get to accept the provocation.
You do something, which allows people who have this feat to do something, which allows you to do something else.
The chain breaks when it doesn't actually provoke from your ally.
Say the feat instead read: When you attack an enemy, allies who also threaten this enemy may take an AoO with an off hand weapon.
and the second feat read: When an ally makes an off hand attack against an enemy you threaten, you may make an AoO against that same enemy.
If an ally only had a single one handed weapon out, or a two handed weapon out, would you still say you got your extra attack? (absent armor spikes, or boot blades, IUS etc.?)
I'm saying that because the target doesn't actually provoke from them, you don't get the chain. Because they actually need to receive the benefit for it to proc the Paired opportunist attack. You get benefits as if they had the feat only if it -actually- provokes.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: C’mon guys, I asked for evidence. Bring forth the evidence! Otherwise, I have evidence. You don’t. I win.
Not fair? How about this: I made my argument; I backed it with evidence; you failed to demonstrate that either my argument or my evidence is wrong; your counter arguments have no evidence.
Argument + evidence > than Argument.
I win.
Juvenile, inaccurate, and deliberately inflammatory.
An inability to understand or acknowledge your opponents arguments is not only not a victory, it's not a debate and no resolution can be reached.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: At least explain what you think is false about my argument or what you don’t understand about it. You misunderstand and are thus overstating the operational parameters of the lynchpin: Solo Tactics. This is where TGMAxMaxer and I interpret the same text differently from you. Since we are both examining and discussing the same literature, and in fact the same portion, there is no evidence to cite.
The section we're in disagreement upon is:
Solo Tactics wrote: At 3rd level, all of the inquisitor’s allies are treated as if they possessed the same teamwork feats as the inquisitor for the purpose of determining whether the inquisitor receives a bonus from her teamwork feats. Her allies do not receive any bonuses from these feats unless they actually possess the feats themselves. The allies’ positioning and actions must still meet the prerequisites listed in the teamwork feat for the inquisitor to receive the listed bonus. The specific call outs are: "...determining whether the Inquisitor receives a bonus..." and "...allies do not receive any bonuses from these feats unless they actually possess the feats..."
From this we can conclude two things:
1)Allies cannot receive any benefits that are provided explicitly by the feat. These are listed under the "Benefit" portion of every feat.
2) Only the Inquisitor receives the bonus, and even then only if the allies meet the other requirements.
The first conclusion is the one that tells us where to draw the lines. Unless an ally possess the feat, they do not receive any options listed under the "Benefits" section.
Broken Wing Gambit says...
Broken Wing Gambit wrote: If that opponent attacks you with this bonus, it provokes attacks of opportunity from your allies who have this feat. When the Inquisitor uses Broken Wing Gambit her allies count as qualifiers for the Inquisitor not themselves or each other. If the opponent strikes at +2, only allies who possess Broken Wing Gambit are provoked. Why? Because allies do not receive any bonuses from those feats unless they actually possess them. Being provoked is one of the bonuses of the feat Broken Wing Gambit.
Since no provocation occurred, then Paired Opportunists will not trigger.
A few feats that are clean examples of Solo Tactics might be: Lookout, Seize the Moment, Precise Strike, Combat Medic, Back to Back, Shake it Off. There are of course, others.
> Juvenile, inaccurate, and deliberately inflammatory.
I have to own and stand by that I think what I said is quite accurate, but I was making Juvenile and inflammatory remarks to be sure. I'm sorry, but it was really feeling like we were going around in circles, hearing the same things repeated over and over, and it was very frustrating.
Good post, but I still disagree with you. More to come.
Solo Tactics says my Inquisitor can act as if her allies have her teamwork feats, and feats have Benefits.
This is for the purpose of granting Inquisitors the benefits of Teamwork feats even if her team fails to take them along with her. And this applies to all her teamwork feats, in this case Broken Wing Gambit and Paired Opportunist. Putting feats and class abilities together for devastating synergy is the very heart and soul of building an effective melee character build.
Bear in mind that this tactical effect does not depend upon allies taking any action that would be granted by these feats, only that the allies be in the right position when and if the opponent takes the bait.
"When the Inquisitor uses Broken Wing Gambit her allies count as qualifiers for the Inquisitor not themselves or each other."--ErrantPursuit, above in this thread
Yes.
"If the opponent strikes at +2, only allies who possess Broken Wing Gambit are provoked." --also ErrantPursuit
I agree.
"Being provoked is one of the bonuses of the feat Broken Wing Gambit.... Since no provocation occurred, then Paired Opportunists will not trigger" --EP., above
Broken Wing Gambit does not trigger for the allies, and Paired Opportunist does not trigger for them either, assuming that none of them have both feats.
But for the purposes of the Inquisitor getting her attacks of opportunity--the benefit of the feats--Solo Tactics lets the Inquisitor treat her allies as if they did, because it lets her treat her allies as if they had those feats, and it still depends upon correct positioning and circumstances.
My application is more complicated than usual, but I can't see any contradiction with the RAW.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: Broken Wing Gambit does not trigger for the allies, and Paired Opportunist does not trigger for them either, assuming that none of them have both feats.
But for the purposes of the Inquisitor getting her attacks of opportunity--the benefit of the feats--Solo Tactics lets the Inquisitor treat her allies as if they did, because it lets her treat her allies as if they had those feats, and it still depends upon correct positioning and circumstances.
My application is more complicated than usual, but I can't see any contradiction with the RAW.
You cannot use Solo Tactics to give your opponents the benefit of a Feat, in this case the benefit is being provoked when the Inquisitor is Attacked. Solo Tactics explicitly states allies do not gain any bonuses. In order for Paired Opportunists to trigger, an AoO must actually be provoked.
We both agree that Broken Wing Gambit does not trigger for allies. If it cannot trigger on its own, it will not qualify for another effect that passively waits to be triggered. Why should it? To qualify, allies would need to receive a bonus they are expressly forbidden.
There are plenty of great uses for the Solo Tactics class features, Broken Wing Gambit just isn't one of them.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Or you could rule it as I suggested. Only the Inquisitor gets anything that could remotely* be considered a "bonus" and his already narrow class feature is no longer incompatible w/ one of the small handful of feats it's meant to do something with.
*
ErrantPursuit wrote, "If it cannot trigger on its own, it will not qualify for another effect that passively waits to be triggered. Why should it?"
Because the description of Solo Tactics says it can. It says that for the purposes of determining whether the Inquisitor gets the bonuses of his teamwork feats, "all of the inquisitor’s allies are treated as if they possessed the same teamwork feats as the inquisitor." If the allies all had Broken Wing Gambit and Paired Opportunist, and if she gave her opponents a +2 attack and damage after she hit her opponent, and if her allies also threatened that opponent, then the Inquisitor would get Attacks of Opportunity whenever she was attacked. And if she also was adjacent to any of her allies, she would get a +4. Solo Tactics gives her the attacks of opportunity just as if her allies had those feats.
Nobody is giving allies benefits, here.
And like Stream of the Sky said, it’s supposed to give you something. And the fact that it gives for all the feats, not just 1 of them, means that feat synergies are supposed to happen sometimes, too.
StreamOfTheSky wrote: Or you could rule it as I suggested. Only the Inquisitor gets anything that could remotely* be considered a "bonus" and his already narrow class feature is no longer incompatible w/ one of the small handful of feats it's meant to do something with. Solo Tactics is by no means trivial. Many Teamwork Feats are actually quite good. The marginalizing commentary in your spoiler tells me you haven't actually read what the Feat in question does, or if you have, then you didn't understand it clearly.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: It says that for the purposes of determining whether the Inquisitor gets the bonuses of his teamwork feats, "all of the inquisitor’s allies are treated as if they possessed the same teamwork feats as the inquisitor." Her allies do not receive any bonuses from these feats unless they actually possess the feats themselves. Being provoked is a listed benefit of Broken Wing Gambit. Nothing you have presented explains why your Allies are receiving a bonus they are not entitled to.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: Nobody is giving allies benefits, here. Broken Wing Gambit wrote: Benefit: ...it provokes attacks of opportunity from your allies who have this feat. Except that benefit. Having this feat provides that effect. That effect is unavailable without this feat. The AoO is a bonus granted explicitly by possessing this feat. Your allies are not provided that effect by Solo Tactics.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: And like Stream of the Sky said, it’s supposed to give you something. And the fact that it gives for all the feats, not just 1 of them, means that feat synergies are supposed to happen sometimes, too. Seriously? This class feature is awesome. I've already posted a short list of Teamwork Feats that benefit from Solo Tactics. It's absurd to think Solo Tactics will work with everything in every situation. There are limitations to what each class feature provides. What you want to do is, sadly, not available the way you want to do it. This trick works better as a Cavalier.
ErrantPursuit wrote: The marginalizing commentary in your spoiler tells me you haven't actually read what the Feat in question does, or if you have, then you didn't understand it clearly. While as the marginalizing commentary you have about me means what, exactly?
StreamOfTheSky wrote: ErrantPursuit wrote: The marginalizing commentary in your spoiler tells me you haven't actually read what the Feat in question does, or if you have, then you didn't understand it clearly. While as the marginalizing commentary you have about me means what, exactly? StreamOfTheSky wrote: Allies getting the "amazing opportunity" to get hit easier by the foe is not "benefiting" from the feat. Shocker, I realize. Broken Wing Gambit wrote: Benefit: Whenever you make a melee attack and hit your opponent, you can use a free action to grant that opponent a +2 bonus on attack and damage rolls against you until the end of your next turn or until your opponent attacks you, whichever happens first. If that opponent attacks you with this bonus, it provokes attacks of opportunity from your allies who have this feat.
> Her allies do not receive any bonuses from these feats unless they actually possess the feats themselves. Being provoked is a listed benefit of Broken Wing Gambit. Nothing you have presented explains why your Allies are receiving a bonus they are not entitled to.
Probably because I never said that her allies get any benefits. It is the Inquisitor who gets the benefits.
"Nobody is giving allies benefits, here."--me, above
Whenever the effect of a teamwork feat is to give the OTHER person an effect, it will not work with the Solo Tactics ability. It specifically says the Inquisitor gains the benefit and no one else.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
There is no need for an FAQ on this, it's already covered in another about the Inquisitors Solo Tactics. It's the same situation:
Link
Outflank wrote: Whenever you and an ally who also has this feat are flanking the same creature, your flanking bonus on attack rolls increases to +4. In addition, whenever you score a critical hit against the flanked creature, it provokes an attack of opportunity from your ally. FAQ wrote: Inquisitor: If an inquisitor uses Solo Tactics (Advanced Player's Guide, page 40) with the Outflank feat (APG, page 165), does the enemy provoke attacks of opportunity when hit with a critical hit?
Yes, but only when the inquisitors allies score a critical hit against a foe that they both flank. In this case, the enemy provokes an attack of opportunity from the inquisitor. The reverse is not true, since her allies can only gain bonuses from teamwork feats if they themselves possess them.
It should be exactly the same with Broken Wing Gambit as with Outflank.
And I noticed the posting date.... second time today.... ugh...
Gilfalas wrote: Whenever the effect of a teamwork feat is to give the OTHER person an effect, it will not work with the Solo Tactics ability. It specifically says the Inquisitor gains the benefit and no one else. ErrantPursuit and I have already said this. We all agree. Can you expand on what you're thinking, please?
Rub-Eta wrote: There is no need for an FAQ on this, it's already covered in another about the Inquisitors Solo Tactics. It's the same situation...
It should be exactly the same with Broken Wing Gambit as with Outflank.
I think there is still a need for an FAQ on this. Outflank is a lot more like Broken Wing Gambit than I realized. Thank you for the example.
By your example, using Solo Tactics and Broken Wing Gambit, the Inquisitor gets an attack of opportunity after an ally hits the opponent, grants the opponent a +2/+2 to hit back, and when the opponent attacks the ally. I am sure this is correct.
The problem with this is that there is no mechanism provided by Solo Tactics that allows you to grant your allies to grant your opponents that +2 attack and damage. Maybe the ally could run up and cast Greater Magic Weapon on the opponent? That would technically constitute an attack, and it could be used to give the opponent a +2/+2, but that's a silly thing to do. But doing silly things in combat is the heart and soul of Pathfinder, too.
"Nobody is giving allies benefits, here.
Broken Wing Gambit wrote:
Benefit: ...it provokes attacks of opportunity from your allies who have this feat.
[ErrantPursuit wrote:] Except that benefit. Having this feat provides that effect. That effect is unavailable without this feat. The AoO is a bonus granted explicitly by possessing this feat. Your allies are not provided that effect by Solo Tactics."
I'm not saying that the allies get a bonus do. Only the Inquisitor is getting a bonus.
If nobody had Solo Tactics, but the whole party had Broken Wing Gambit and Paired Opportunist, then the whole party could form a ring around a monster, the monster gets a +2 wherever he goes, and every attack provokes attacks of opportunity from every player, including the attacked player. And in this scenario, since every ally is adjacent to a Teamwork buddy, everybody gets a +4 on the AoO, forming a circle of death. That is the Benefit of Broken Wing Gambit combined with Paired Opportunist, right?
Solo Tactics gives the Inquisitor the benefit of her Teamwork Feats as if her allies have all her Teamwork Feats, too, right?
So given the right circumstances (positioning, granting bonus, attack trigger), she should get those attacks of opportunity.
I don't really see an issue with this feat. You give your opponent +2 to hit you and if they attack you your allies get an attack of opportunity if they have the feat. You are your own ally according the rules and you have the feat.
From The FAQ.
Ally: Do you count as your own ally?
You count as your own ally unless otherwise stated or if doing so would make no sense or be impossible. Thus, "your allies" almost always means the same as "you and your allies."
The only real teamwork component of this feat is when you have a group of people with this feat and you all activating it in situation where you have combat reflexes. Want to make deadly swarm of ninjas, use this with pair opportunist and invisibility. Ouch!
The feat can be used solo by anyone, solo tactics doesn't even bring anything to. It's just is -2 AC worth getting an Attack of opportunity? I'd say yes.
Well, holy crap, voska66, that does sound like the answer to the question.
The FAQ is big and unindexed. Would you or somebody link to that URL?
I found the FAQ.
http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9nda
"Ally: Do you count as your own ally?
You count as your own ally unless otherwise stated or if doing so would make no sense or be impossible. Thus, 'your allies' almost always means the same as 'you and your allies.' "
It's really helpful if the actual link to the evidence is included. If it were easy to find, then this argument would not have gone on for as long as it did.
So, via Solo Tactics, you can use Broken Wing Gambit, because according to the FAQ, you count as one of your own allies.
I want to take Paired Opportunist, anyway, as a Cavalier bonus teamwork feat, because when I use the Tactician ability, my allies will get the AoO's, too.
Also, BWG should stack with Snake Fang pretty well.
If you know you're coming to my table for dinner, best unpack your Combat Reflexes, cause I'm gonna pile the AoO's on your plate!
|
