The first one is alright; he's looking to keep the AOO-happy CM builds a bit more under control. Though, frankly, after the first half dozen levels only builds that are made to do CM have any real chance at succeeding with them, so it really depends if you've got any Maneuver Monks or the like in your party. If you do, then this can be pretty hurtful to their usefulness.
The second is no good. Casting a spell is a very obvious activity that fits the requirements for readied actions. Sounds like he can't figure good ways to keep players away from his casters. Melee characters can't really use this since the caster can just five back before casting, but Ranged characters can definitely screw over a caster.
It is a hard problem for the GM. A single alchemist can effectively disable a spell casting boss by readying a bomb against the caster. Archers can do a number on them too, though there are items and spells that can be set up to protect the caster.
It would be a little less "stop messing me up" if he broadened it to no readied actions at all. It would simplify the game a bit, speed combat up, and effect both sides of the combat. I'd push for this solution if he won't relax the restriction.
I'm looking for opinions on my DM's house rules about AoO's:
Attacks of opportunity can ONLY be a single melee strike. No trips, disarms, or sunders. (Unless you have it "always on", like a wolf's trip)
also.. somewhat related:
You can't ready an action to strike a spellcaster if they start to cast a spell.
For the first one: I would say just build around it. Probably won't be worth expending any resources on being good at trip if the ability to use it on AoOs is lost. On the plus side, now you can provoke without worrying about being tripped!
About the second: making spellcasters even MORE powerful and taking a key ability away from combat characters seems way unbalancing. There's no way you could convince me to play a combat character with that rule, and I would be more inclined to lean on the GM to change it. But if he insists, hey now you can play an awesome caster!
But he requires a fighter-type and a rogue in the party
RED FLAG
Seriously, the GM is telling you what character you have to play? I would tell him that if they're that essential, he can play them as GMPCs while I play a character I actually want to play.
|
The first is partially correct. In 3.5 the rules compendium clearly stated you could only take an attack of opportunity with a weapon or attack you were proficient with. If you did not have improved unarmed strike, you could not make a melee touch attack as an attack of opportunity, and therefor could not make a trip or grapple attempt as an attack of opportunity. If you take improved unarmed strike, however, such attacks are perfectly legal. I know the melee touch attack has been removed from the mechanics in Pathfinder, but the sentiment is still there. No improved unarmed strike, no trips or grapples.
The wolf's trip ability is somewhat of a poor example to use. In the case of a wolf taking an attack of opportunity, it isn't making a trip attempt AS it's attack. It simply bites and the trip attempt is a "bi-product" of the successful attack.
The rule of no readied actions against spell casters casting spells is complete crap. That is exactly the kind of situation a readied action is for.
My advice...quit. I don't mean to speak poorly of your friend but he sounds like a crappy DM who is trying to alter the rules and fix the game in his favor because he can't figure out how to present a challenge to the PCs with the rules as they stand. Granted, the DMs job is to bend the rules when necessary for story progression or to make the game more enjoyable, but these should be temporary changes. Not something permanent to make the player's experience more tedious.
The first rule is bad, it basically just makes AoOs less interesting and nerfs melee.
The second is unbelievably awfully bad, to the point I probably wouldn't play in such a game because the DM's basically declared, "play a spellcaster or you fail at life."
Readied attacks on casters is practically the only way TO stop them from casting...
So his rules make spellcasters too good, meaning he has to keep PC-casters in check somehow.. hence the rule that two people must be fighters or rogues :)
|
Check the messageboards for threads giving advices on DMing, they should be easy to find with the amount of suggestions already given. :)
Check the thread about the worst DM stories to gain a better perspective of what a DM should never do.
Check roll20 or the PBP system to find a game in your town or online ; it's better not to play, than play with a control-freak who basically wants you to play the characters of the awesome story he wrote and have no fun as a result.
The first is partially correct. In 3.5 the rules compendium clearly stated you could only take an attack of opportunity with a weapon or attack you were proficient with. If you did not have improved unarmed strike, you could not make a melee touch attack as an attack of opportunity, and therefor could not make a trip or grapple attempt as an attack of opportunity. If you take improved unarmed strike, however, such attacks are perfectly legal. I know the melee touch attack has been removed from the mechanics in Pathfinder, but the sentiment is still there. No improved unarmed strike, no trips or grapples.
In Pathfinder you can trip with any weapon, it doesn't have to be unarmed. Since a trip attempt is made in place of a melee attack, you can trip on an AoO (although this will provoke an AoO from the foe you're trying to trip unless you have Improved Trip.)
Grapple is a standard action, and is not made in place of an attack, so you cannot grapple on an AoO.
The second is no good. Casting a spell is a very obvious activity that fits the requirements for readied actions. Sounds like he can't figure good ways to keep players away from his casters. Melee characters can't really use this since the caster can just five back before casting, but Ranged characters can definitely screw over a caster..
I think you can five foot step as part of a readied action.
I think you can five foot step as part of a readied action.
The second is no good. Casting a spell is a very obvious activity that fits the requirements for readied actions. Sounds like he can't figure good ways to keep players away from his casters. Melee characters can't really use this since the caster can just five back before casting, but Ranged characters can definitely screw over a caster..
If you did not move on your turn, yes you can.
I love that rule. Smug casters thinking they can just 5 ft back and cast... :)
Even nastier on other warriors, though. Say you are fighting someone with a reach weapon (so he either can't hit adjacent or has to use a much crappier weapon for it). Ready such that when he stops his movement and is about to attack, you quickly dash forward 5 ft and deliver an Iaijutsu-style slash! (Or if YOU also have a reach weapon, attack, then step).