|
The particular feat in question is:
You effortlessly pair melee and ranged weaponry.
Prerequisites: Dex 13, Point-Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Snap Shot, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: When you use the Two-Weapon Fighting feat while wielding a melee weapon and a crossbow or firearm, your attacks with the crossbow or firearm provoke no attacks of opportunity from foes that you threaten with your melee weapon.
Normal: Making a ranged attack provokes attacks of opportunity.
I'm playing a ratfolk gulch gunner who occasionally fights with a boarding axe in one hand and pistol in the other. The Gulch Gunner gives you the mechanic to regain grit the first time you provoke an opportunity for firing a ranged weapon in melee each round. Can I choose to not utilize Sword and Pistol for the first attack in a sequence, but then gain its benefit for my subsequent iterative attacks?
|
I think there is no hard rule and it is a GM call.
I, as a GM would allow you not to use a feat benefits but could ask you to renounce them for the full round, not only for an attack.
It is not easy to judge, as you want to get a benefit and still get most of the effect of your feat. At the same time you can take a 5' step between an attack and the next, so you can change your stance and be more vary in your second and following ranged attacks.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is not at all RAW, but I would rule yes with a bit of an addition. Provoking an Attack of Opportunity is a bad thing, but this feat makes it where your character is experienced enough to not do that. Choosing to do so would just be him choosing to be sloppy with that first attack.
Here comes the addition though. You declare that you are choosing to provoke, I will give the enemy a Sense Motive check to see that you did it on purpose. DC probably equal to a Bluff check with a +5 since the target wants to make that attack. If they succeed, they see you are attempting to bait them, and a smart enemy may not take the attack. After you attack without provoking an AoO, said smart enemy now knows you can do that even if they failed the Sense Motive. A dumb enemy or animal may not even notice then. DM's discretion.
Propose this to the DM. I think it would be a fair compromise. Alternatively, you could just do as LazarX and Diego say and lose the feat for one round. It would be simpler that way, and not really much punishment. How many enemies would be taking Combat Reflexes anyway? That's my two copper.
|
|
It sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it, too (Don't we all!)
Moreover, it sounds like you wouldn't have any benefit from the feat at all in your example.
Attack Round:
1st attack - Forgo feat benefit, fire pistol, trigger AoO, get grit point.
2nd attack - Must attack with other hand melee weapon.
3rd attack - Fire ranged weapon, probably don't trigger another AoO (unless opponent has Combat Reflexes). Feat useless (unless Combat Reflexes).
Now, you could reverse the order and get:
Attack Round:
1st attack - Fire weapon with feat, no AoO.
2nd attack - melee weapon
3rd attack - Fire weapon, forgo feat, now trigger AoO, get grit.
This is kind of beneficial, except you still trigger an AoO.
Am I missing something here?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
he's not trying to avoid the AoO, he's trying not to gain a grit point before he's spent it- so that he can regain it later in the around after he's spent it.
Eerr if I understood correctly anyway.
I disagree that you can't choose not to use a feat. I think it should be all or nothing for the round though- not pick and part as the round goes on (unless, of course, the feat allows otherwise).
I think its not so much that you can't as it is therules assume yuo won't.
I mean really- why wouldn't you use Dodge or weapon focus or something? Folks take feats as benefits though and if its not a benefit then it should be allowed to not use it if you decide to do so.
Rules wise the books are silent on it as far as I know- but it makes sense that you could choose not to do something if you wanted to.
I'd just draw the line at letting you wiggle aruond it in the manner described by the OP. Not use it for the round? sure. Try to off/on it in the round to get around something or other? probably not.
-S
Second of all, purposely inciting an AoO is NOT a matter of feat usage...it's a combat maneuver. Specifically, "Feint". Purposely inciting an AoO (or at least, attempting to give the appearance of having left an opening an enemy can exploit) is the very definition of the "Feint" combat maneuver.
I don't see it, Elbe-el. Feint does not provoke an AoO. Feint makes an enemy effectively flat footed. What he is requesting to do is not set out in the rules - I am more than willing to admit that - but I cannot find anything forbidding a character from ignoring a bonus. What I proposed was not RAW as I said, but ignoring the feat full-round as others proposed is certainly not the same as gaining a free Feint. He may take damage and doesn't get to use an ability he spent one of his precious feats for. Even Feint isn't that bad.
|
|
One thing I was looking at in the feat descriptions was that it says "Benefit: What the feat enables the character (“you” in the feat description) to do. If a character has the same feat more than once, its benefits do not stack unless indicated otherwise in the description." Emphasis mine.
Having the feat Sword and Pistol enables me to make a ranged attack in melee while TWF without provoking an AoO. What I want to do is intentionally not utilize the benefit given me by the feat during one of the attacks in my sequence. I need to provoke attacks when I fire a ranged weapon in melee combat to regain grit. I don't really want to provoke those attacks every single time. My understanding of feats is that they're essentially something you've learned how to do, I was hoping to find some rules support to indicate that I'm not stuck always doing it if I take the feat. Some feats (like Power Attack, or Metamagic feats) give pretty specific instructions on how and when they can be used, or the conditions for turning them on. Unfortunately, there aren't really any rules for not utilizing a feat you've taken.
|
|
As a DM, I would see absolutely no reason why you could not forgo the benefit of a feat for a given action and keep it for the next (assuming the feat represents training). If a player was using power-attack, for example, and wanted to ditch the damage bonus for their second attack to avoid killing a foe, I would let them do it (but they still take the penalty to attack rolls).
Feats generally represent extra training and capability, and I assume this to be true unless otherwise stated or obvious (Eldritch Heritage is not training, for example). A character who has figured out a good technique for a task should also be able to choose not to use that technique. Just because you can ride your bike with no handlebars does not mean you could not choose to use the handlebars anyway.
As someone mentioned earlier, a wise opponent might realize something is up. Sense Motive versus Bluff might be a good choice for this, but if the character was not doing it to deceive I would likely still require a DC 20 check for the opponent to notice (the "Hunch" DC). Since flubbing a maneuver in combat isn't exactly unlikely, I'd give the bluffer a +5 (+10 if the target has a big ego and would love to show off how big you screwed up).
|
No...you can't. First of all, I'm not aware of any mechanic that allows for the selective application of an "always active" feat (i.e., with specific exception...as noted in the feat description...feats don't have an "On-Off" switch). Obviously, some feats require an obvious "activation" (such as Power Attack, which must be declared before making the attack roll). Many feats, though, simply modify existing mechanics in some way (such as "Dodge" or "Mobility"), and unless specified, those feats aren't "activated"...they're always on.
Second of all, purposely inciting an AoO is NOT a matter of feat usage...it's a combat maneuver. Specifically, "Feint". Purposely inciting an AoO (or at least, attempting to give the appearance of having left an opening an enemy can exploit) is the very definition of the "Feint" combat maneuver.
You aren't "electing not to use a feat"...you're attempting to get a free combat maneuver
If I want to turn off Dodge then I should be able to...Personally I see no problem with turning off a feat when it involves a negative ramification for me.
If I want to get bashed in the face so I can blast a lock after the fight then so be it.