| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So on the advice forum there are numerous threads about how the recent errata update to Crane Wing has put gimp masks on characters that take advantage of it, and now offer them to the riding crops of the melee enemies they face.
So, I am unfamiliar with Crane Wing since I never used it.
Can someone offer a before and after of it?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Used to be fantastic, now it's just functional.
100% chance to outright deny an attack? Yes please. Bad enough that they can do it to archers.
Used to be fantastic, now it's just functional.
100% chance to outright deny an attack? Yes please. Bad enough that they can do it to archers.
That's assuming it's a Monk; Crane Wing wouldn't let you deflect arrows, as it only functions versus melee attacks.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Before: While fighting defensively, you can ignore one melee attack per round that would otherwise hit you.
Now: Once per round, while fighting defensively, you can add +4 to your AC against a single attack, before it's rolled. If you, for some bizarre reason are in Total Defense, you can do the deflection.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ah, so since I build encounters with many enemies this wouldn't even be something I would bat an eye-lash at.
Interesting.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
There was a feat called Crane Wing in Ultimate Combat that allowed you to automatically deflect a single melee attack a round. Prior to the errata, this was noted as one of the largest problems in PFS by campaign leadership, and had spawned countless threads from frustrated GMs asking how to deal with a crane wing character, as the GM was not able to challenge the character without hurting the rest of the party. Lots of arguments over its balance.
In the end, the Design Team decided it was far too good and when the UC errata was released, people discovered that the feat changed to be something more reasonable and in the power level of other feats, rather than being the amongst the strongest feats in the game.
For reference, "take a level of Master of Many Styles monk for Crane Wing" was a dip that was highly recommended due to the astronomically large boost to defenses that Crane Wing gave a character.
A few people didn't agree with this decision, and have been fairly vocal about their displeasure.
|
Crane Wing used to allow you to deflect an attack after you saw if it hit.
Now, you have to select an attack coming at you, before it is rolled. If you are fighting defensively (able to make attacks, but at a penalty) you can get +4 dodge bonus to AC against that attack. If you are on total defense (unable to make attacks, including attacks of opportunity) you can choose to deflect that attack instead.
So, the earlier version let you wait to see if an attack was going to succeed, and if it did, you could completely deflect it. It would do no damage at all. Now, you have to choose an attack before it is rolled, which is a far less powerful situation.
The Crane Style progression of feats allow you to fight defensively with less penalties than normal fighting defensively allows. It is a major strength. Completely deflecting an attack while fighting defensively was very strong. Now, however, if you are fighting defensively, you only get a +4 AC against the selected attack. You have to be totally defensive for a deflection, which means you are not attacking at all (Except for Crane Riposte's specific attack of opportunity).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
no, um, actually, I cannot.
Crane Wing used to allow you to deflect an attack after you saw if it hit.
Now, you have to select an attack coming at you, before it is rolled. If you are fighting defensively (able to make attacks, but at a penalty) you can get +4 dodge bonus to AC against that attack. If you are on total defense (unable to make attacks, including attacks of opportunity) you can choose to deflect that attack instead.
So, the earlier version let you wait to see if an attack was going to succeed, and if it did, you could completely deflect it. It would do no damage at all. Now, you have to choose an attack before it is rolled, which is a far less powerful situation.
The Crane Style progression of feats allow you to fight defensively with less penalties than normal fighting defensively allows. It is a major strength. Completely deflecting an attack while fighting defensively was very strong. Now, however, if you are fighting defensively, you only get a +4 AC against the selected attack. You have to be totally defensive for a deflection, which means you are not attacking at all (Except for Crane Riposte's specific attack of opportunity).
So one could still defeat an enemy that is built to have a single big hit if using Crane Riposte?
Total Defense: deflect attack.Crane Riposte: Single Attack of opportunity.
It actually sounds much better this way, since otherwise it would just boil down to all of the enemies magically being Gishes, or purposefully focusing targets.
@Terquem:
An attack of opportunity is a single melee attack, and most characters can only make one per round. You don't have to make an attack of opportunity if you don't want to.
So yes, assuming that you're fighting defensively (or totally) Crane Wing could trigger off an AoO (assuming you had not used it previously in the round).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Taku...I'm in the same boat. I use a couple big hitters and a slew of mooks in most of my encounters, don't have anything against ranged weapons or spells, and don't mind my players being good at the things they try to be good at...so when I first saw the Crane Wing feat my first thought was "eh, that's almost worth spending a feat on."
When I saw all the complaining I was completely baffled...didn't really hit me that people were serious about having issues with it until the errata thing hit.
Crane Wing used to allow you to deflect an attack after you saw if it hit.
Now, you have to select an attack coming at you, before it is rolled. If you are fighting defensively (able to make attacks, but at a penalty) you can get +4 dodge bonus to AC against that attack. If you are on total defense (unable to make attacks, including attacks of opportunity) you can choose to deflect that attack instead.
So, the earlier version let you wait to see if an attack was going to succeed, and if it did, you could completely deflect it. It would do no damage at all. Now, you have to choose an attack before it is rolled, which is a far less powerful situation.
The Crane Style progression of feats allow you to fight defensively with less penalties than normal fighting defensively allows. It is a major strength. Completely deflecting an attack while fighting defensively was very strong. Now, however, if you are fighting defensively, you only get a +4 AC against the selected attack. You have to be totally defensive for a deflection, which means you are not attacking at all (Except for Crane Riposte's specific attack of opportunity).
So one could still defeat an enemy that is built to have a single big hit if using Crane Riposte?
Total Defense: deflect attack.
Crane Riposte: Single Attack of opportunity.It actually sounds much better this way, since otherwise it would just boil down to all of the enemies magically being Gishes, or purposefully focusing targets.
Keep in mind that the folks saying it was needed aren't telling you the several ways to overcome it. The reason it was an issue in PFS is because they aren't allowed to modify encounters on the fly, like a GM in a home game can. A large part of the outcry has to do with the confirmation bias this decision implies. I'm in the camp that it was a bit much but now is largely useless. BTW: that list of counters includes off the top of my head:
1. archers.2. enemies with multiple natural attacks
3. spellcasters
4. Ignoring them. note that this one is best used after the crane winger in question gets a reputation.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Green Smashomancer:
@Green Smashomancer:
** spoiler omitted **
Agreed, but this is part of the "debacle" the OP refers to, the players who feel the nerf was unnecessary and too broad.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ignoring them. note that this one is best used after the crane winger in question gets a reputation.
A single feat so massively powerful that it justifies an entire campaign world learning that no one should ever fight you in melee.
Right.
Good riddance to a ridiculously overpowered feat. ^_^
Ignoring them. note that this one is best used after the crane winger in question gets a reputation.A single feat so massively powerful that it justifies an entire campaign world learning that no one should ever fight you in melee.
Right.
Good riddance to a ridiculously overpowered feat. ^_^
wow!
much selective quote
You quoted the last in a list of methods (which is nowhere near complete, by the by) to counteract the feat, and then claim that justifies the change?
In home games, the most common counter to Crane Wing is to throw more than one opponent against the Fighter. The fact that PFS doesn't have this option doesn't justify the scope of the reduction in power; it justifies reducing the way the feat works in PFS.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Clearly monks should be punished each and every time they have something they're good at.
No joke. Should we expect a nerf to Deflect Arrow next since it negates one projectile attack a round?
Not a fan of the errata, but we don't play in PFS so it never was much of an issue. Our DM is more than capable of dealing with whatever we throw at them.
That said, I would say the "debacle" is that Paizo actually destroyed the feat chain. They've made the Crane Riposte feat unusable, the only time you deflect an attack is when you are using total defense, but that disallows making attacks of opportunity. I expect they'll FAQ/errata Crane Wing or Crane Riposte in the near future to make it function, but as it stands they've broken it in the current form.
Agreed, but this is part of the "debacle" the OP refers to, the players who feel the nerf was unnecessary and too broad.@Green Smashomancer:
** spoiler omitted **
I know - thus why I spoiler'd it. :)
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
So you quote the last in a list of methods (which is nowhere near complete, by the by) to counteract the feat, and then determine that it is balanced based on that singular counter?
Since I have never GM'd a long campaign with a Crane Wing monk in an ongoing online game, never played Pathfinder before, and never read the feat itself, yes, my refutation of one of your comments is the complete and entire extent of my argument against it.
Or the opposite of those things.
In home games, the most common counter to Crane Wing is to throw more than one opponent against the Fighter. The fact that PFS doesn't have this option doesn't justify the scope of the reduction in power; it justifies reducing the way the feat works in PFS.
Doesn't work. Crane Wing is not a stand-alone defense, it is the capstone to an invincibility build. Other abilities (fighting defensively, massive AC, etc.) make it extremely easy in many ways to achieve an "unhittable" armor class normally only vulnerable to critical hits. Crane Wing negates the critical hits - even with five foes against her, you're not going to see more than one crit per round, usually.
Crane Wing fights don't go like this, as those who don't understand the feat believe:
GM: "I attack!"
Crane: "Crane wing."
GM: "CURSES! FOILED AGAIN!"
Instead, they go like this:
GM: "Does a 32 hit?"
Crane: "No."
GM: "19 misses... 28 misses... 31 misses... does a 36 hit?"
Crane: "No."
GM: "The dragon's bite attack is next... nice! Does a 52 hit you?"
Crane: "Crane Wing."
GM: "@%#$ this feat."
Then, repeat that every round.
|
Not a fan of the errata, but we don't play in PFS so it never was much of an issue. Our DM is more than capable of dealing with whatever we throw at them.
That said, I would say the "debacle" is that Paizo actually destroyed the feat chain. They've made the Crane Riposte feat unusable, the only time you deflect an attack is when you are using total defense, but that disallows making attacks of opportunity. I expect they'll FAQ/errata Crane Wing or Crane Riposte in the near future to make it function, but as it stands they've broken it in the current form.
You mean maybe this?
You mean maybe this?Not a fan of the errata, but we don't play in PFS so it never was much of an issue. Our DM is more than capable of dealing with whatever we throw at them.
That said, I would say the "debacle" is that Paizo actually destroyed the feat chain. They've made the Crane Riposte feat unusable, the only time you deflect an attack is when you are using total defense, but that disallows making attacks of opportunity. I expect they'll FAQ/errata Crane Wing or Crane Riposte in the near future to make it function, but as it stands they've broken it in the current form.
Yep, I stopped paying attention to it the last few days. Between work and the thread post counts sky rocketing with nothing new really being added, it was just a matter of time before something was done and I'd read about it in another thread lol.
So you quote the last in a list of methods (which is nowhere near complete, by the by) to counteract the feat, and then determine that it is balanced based on that singular counter?Since I have never GM'd a long campaign with a Crane Wing monk in an ongoing online game, never played Pathfinder before, and never read the feat itself, yes, my refutation of one of your comments is the complete and entire extent of my argument against it.
Or the opposite of those things.
In home games, the most common counter to Crane Wing is to throw more than one opponent against the Fighter. The fact that PFS doesn't have this option doesn't justify the scope of the reduction in power; it justifies reducing the way the feat works in PFS.Doesn't work. Crane Wing is not a stand-alone defense, it is the capstone to an invincibility build. Other abilities (fighting defensively, massive AC, etc.) make it extremely easy in many ways to achieve an "unhittable" armor class normally only vulnerable to critical hits. Crane Wing negates the critical hits - even with five foes against her, you're not going to see more than one crit per round, usually.
Crane Wing fights don't go like this, as those who don't understand the feat believe:
GM: "I attack!"
Crane: "Crane wing."
GM: "CURSES! FOILED AGAIN!"Instead, they go like this:
GM: "Does a 32 hit?"
Crane: "No."
GM: "19 misses... 28 misses... 31 misses... does a 36 hit?"
Crane: "No."
GM: "The dragon's bite attack is next... nice! Does a 52 hit you?"
Crane: "Crane Wing."
GM: "@%#$ this feat."Then, repeat that every round.
First, it was not my comment. Second, since you seem to be missing the point, selectively quoting to make your argument look valid does not actually make your argument valid.
Second, as someone who has seen a high-level Monk with Crane Wing, it is in no way, shape, or form "the capstone to an invincibility build". Since such a high AC build generally requires a focus that results in a lower damage output, the enemy has no real impetus to continue trying to beat on you ineffectually.
In your example above regarding multiple attacks and high AC, you want to know what really happens if the GM is smart? As soon as the foe realizes that the Monk's AC is so incredibly high, the Monk gets ignored completely and the dragon goes and eats the Wizard.
Not to mention that Crane Wing has absolutely no effect on wonderful things like Disintegrate or Fireball or any other spell, or on a dragon who is under a Haste effect and who decides to bite you twice. Or maybe the dragon just decides to breathe on the Monk instead. What happens then?
Monk: "@%#$ this dragon."
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yep. It's completely cool to punish someone for building around defense to the exclusion of a lot of their offensive prowess. Crane wing ain't exactly cheap to operate given the required stat allocation and feat taxing, and now I suspect hardly anyone will be "operating it" at all. Oh no, you can't hit them with melee attacks! Too bad most of the crap in the game that's actually dangerous either blows you up with magic or spams breath weapons.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Instead, they go like this:
GM: "Does a 32 hit?"
Crane: "No."
GM: "19 misses... 28 misses... 31 misses... does a 36 hit?"
Crane: "No."
GM: "The dragon's bite attack is next... nice! Does a 52 hit you?"
Crane: "Crane Wing."
GM: "@%#$ this feat."Then, repeat that every round.
Pretty much the above.
Crank the Ac to be hard to hit, and on the off chance something DID get through you just deny it. And you get to pick and choose at whim instead of having to declare beforehand.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Instead, they go like this:
GM: "Does a 32 hit?"
Crane: "No."
GM: "19 misses... 28 misses... 31 misses... does a 36 hit?"
Crane: "No."
GM: "The dragon's bite attack is next... nice! Does a 52 hit you?"
Crane: "Crane Wing."
GM: "@%#$ this feat."Then, repeat that every round.
Pretty much the above.
Crank the Ac to be hard to hit, and on the off chance something DID get through you just deny it. And you get to pick and choose at whim instead of having to declare beforehand.
Or y'know use ranged touch attacks which every spell caster on the planet happens to be good at. Can't get'em with deflect arrows, can't get'em with crane wing and all that AC work you did probably means a lot less 'cause touch AC.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or y'know use ranged touch attacks which every spell caster on the planet happens to be good at. Can't get'em with deflect arrows, can't get'em with crane wing and all that AC work you did probably means a lot less 'cause touch AC.
Yes, yes, everyone knows monks have a low touch AC.
I do find it funny that everyone arguing that Crane Wing isn't very powerful are the ones so very upset that it's making their characters so very weak as a result. "The one good thing martials had going for them" doesn't sound like a well-balanced feat. You mean that there's one feat so massively better than all other feats that any martial who can fit it into their build needed it? And that removing this feat cripples their defensive abilities?
Almost sounds like it's much more powerful than other feats, and needed to be nerfed to bring it back in line... but that's crazy talk. :)
|
|
Not a fan of the errata, but we don't play in PFS so it never was much of an issue. Our DM is more than capable of dealing with whatever we throw at them.
That said, I would say the "debacle" is that Paizo actually destroyed the feat chain. They've made the Crane Riposte feat unusable, the only time you deflect an attack is when you are using total defense, but that disallows making attacks of opportunity. I expect they'll FAQ/errata Crane Wing or Crane Riposte in the near future to make it function, but as it stands they've broken it in the current form.
Crane Riposte: With the changes made to Crane Wing, how does Crane Riposte work?
While the feat still reduced your penalty when fighting defensively, there is a change to the text the follows.Update: Page 93, in the Crane Riposte feat, in the benefits paragraph, change the second sentence to read as follows: Whenever you are fighting defensively, and you use Crane Wing to add a dodge bonus against one attack, that attack provokes an attack of opportunity from you if it misses. In addition, when you deflect an attack using Crane Wing while taking the total defense action, you may make an attack of opportunity against that opponent (even though you could not normally do so while taking the total defense action).
—Pathfinder Design Team, Monday
Edit: Ninja'd by Fomsie
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So on the advice forum there are numerous threads about how the recent errata update to Crane Wing has put gimp masks on characters that take advantage of it, and now offer them to the riding crops of the melee enemies they face.
If it matters, martials already had quiet a bit of that going for them which is partially why there was some discontent. There are a lot of reasons for why there was some malcontent.
"The one good thing martials had going for them" doesn't sound like a well-balanced feat. You mean that there's one feat so massively better than all other feats that any martial who can fit it into their build needed it? And that removing this feat cripples their defensive abilities?
On the other hand, it might mean that a lot of martial feats suck, are boring, or don't do much so it really is one of the few good things they have going for them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or y'know use ranged touch attacks which every spell caster on the planet happens to be good at. Can't get'em with deflect arrows, can't get'em with crane wing and all that AC work you did probably means a lot less 'cause touch AC.Yes, yes, everyone knows monks have a low touch AC.
I do find it funny that everyone arguing that Crane Wing isn't very powerful are the ones so very upset that it's making their characters so very weak as a result. "The one good thing martials had going for them" doesn't sound like a well-balanced feat. You mean that there's one feat so massively better than all other feats that any martial who can fit it into their build needed it? And that removing this feat cripples their defensive abilities?
Almost sounds like it's much more powerful than other feats, and needed to be nerfed to bring it back in line... but that's crazy talk. :)
I don't have a horse in this race. I do not have a Monk and have no intent to play one, nor do I have any characters that have Crane Wing.
I do, however, have a problem with a feat being called "overpowered" when there are in fact numerous and satisfactory ways to counter it. If you ran into problems with it in the online game of Pathfinder that you never ran while busy not playing the game and not ever reading the feat, might I suggest that the problem was perhaps not the fault of the feat being overpowered?
I can do sarcasm too... I generally try to be polite, but I will always answer in kind.
Crane Wing fights don't go like this, as those who don't understand the feat believe:
GM: "I attack!"
Crane: "Crane wing."
GM: "CURSES! FOILED AGAIN!"Instead, they go like this:
GM: "Does a 32 hit?"
Crane: "No."
GM: "19 misses... 28 misses... 31 misses... does a 36 hit?"
Crane: "No."
GM: "The dragon's bite attack is next... nice! Does a 52 hit you?"
Crane: "Crane Wing."
GM: "@%#$ this feat."Then, repeat that every round.
If the DM is playing a low magic melee centric game I suppose that would happen. But the default of the PFRPG is high fantasy, getting touch attacks to the point you are complaining requires a ridiculous investment and isn't really possible within the guidelines of the game(wealth by level) at low to mid levels. A caster or combat maneuver based character or any number of other builds will not run into that issue. It is only an issue if your DM plays a ton of mooks with a single BBEG who is based on a single large strike to be effective (which from what I'm hearing about PFS is the majority of encounters, so it is biased for the old Crane Wing to be *very* effective).
Toughness is broken. There's no way to counter it! Better nerf it...[/joke]
|
|
Guys, I think craft wondrous item is OP. This needs to be fixed ASAP. < -- This is what I think of when I hear complaints about old crane wing. So what if you can't inflict melee damage on someone? Don't try to. Blast them with an empowered disintegrate instead. Just make them waste their deflection for that round on a mook. Trust me, it will do the trick.
|
|
Thus far it's seemed like the forums have more people against the nerf than for it. Well, I guess a lot of the people for it probably just wouldn't say anything. It's difficult to gauge just based on who posts.
Buuut yeah, I do have personal experience with crane wing. As a GM I have never experienced any difficulty what so ever in bypassing it in either high or low level play.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
When you have one enemy, with one attack, and no ranged options, then you had a problem Crane Wing.
It would seem, that PFS has a number of encounters with one enemy, with one attack, and no ranged options.
Sounds a bit like bad encounter design, mixed with DMs being unaware of things like "options", and "alternate tactics".
Not bad feat design.
Just my opinion though.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The issue is not that Crane Wing made a character able to win 100% of all fights. The issue is that once Crane Wing is factored in, many encounters do become auto-win. When you need to create special "just for you" encounters, metagame to challenge your players, and tailor everything you run just for the benefit of a single player feat, you've got problems.
"I found a way to handle the feat, despite its problems" is not a good excuse for not fixing a broken feat. I'm glad Paizo makes its rule decisions based on what's good for the health of the game, because this was a needed change. I think, perhaps, they nerfed it way too hard (I'd like to see the +4 added after the attack "hits" you, but that is a different discussion).
SO my one question is what is the big deal? deflect arrows does the exact same thing only with ranged attacks. why is/was Crane wing any different?
I never take deflect arrows I have never wanted to spend the feat tax to take crane wing.
I just guess I am having a hard time seeing the value in giving a feat that blocks one attack per round any errata. most of the guys at higher levels have multiple attacks. Am I missing some strange gaming culture current here? it seems to be no different than deflect/snatch arrows?
in fact we got gloves of arrow snatching in a recent game and it came in handy but not "spend a feat" handy.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nerf Slumber, it's an auto-win button! Ignore the fact that there are many ways that proper encounter design and flexible GMing make it not an issue at all - the fact that in certain situations it's an automatic I Win means it's bad!
|
|
And now since there isn't a refutation available, the arguments stop and the sarcasm begins. The eternal cycle is complete. *solemn nod*
At this point I'm pretty convinced that even the people claiming the feat was "totally balanced, man" know how broken it was compared to other feats, and justified it by saying "martials are weak, they deserve an OP feat to 'fix' them."
The martials vs. casters issue is, again, a different discussion - it's just been brought up a lot recently due to Crane Wing being one of the sacred cows martial characters had left.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And now since there isn't a refutation available, the arguments stop and the sarcasm begins.
The fact that you disagree that there's been valid refutation does not necessarily indicate a lack of refutation; it just means that you disagree with that refutation. Likewise, my disagreement that you've provided a valid justification for the errata to Crane Wing does not indicate that you're wrong - only that in my opinion you are.
I will say that your attempted reduction of the suggestions provided to "metagaming" and "designing for one player\feat" was sarcastic in itself (at least in my opinion), so at least in my view the sarcasm never stopped.
Smart encounter design easily counters Crane Wing. That's not "designing an encounter for one character", it's "designing smart encounters that will be challenging in general" and that happen to reduce the usefulness of Crane Wing as a secondary benefit.
Smart enemy tactics easily counter Crane Wing. That's not "metagaming", it's recognizing that foes on a battlefield aren't mindless automatons that have to futilely beat on the first thing that they come across in combat.
No one has necessarily indicated that you should use the aforementioned items, among other suggestions, solely to combat Crane Wing; the suggestions that happen to turn Crane Wing from an "I Win" to "Just another useful tactic" aren't implemented for that purpose, but for the purpose of having a realistic and challenging encounter.
At this point I'm pretty convinced that even the people claiming the feat was "totally balanced, man" know how broken it was compared to other feats, and justified it by saying "martials are weak, they deserve an OP feat to 'fix' them."
And at this point I could be pretty convinced that the people claiming that the feat was totally overpowered are actually aware that it was only broken in poorly-designed encounters. But the fact is that I don't believe that to be true, and such vilification of your opposition does nothing to foment useful discussion.
|
|
The thing that strikes me the most is that it's clear many people had an issue with it, yet the "opposition" claims that there were no issues, while asserting that only inferior and unskilled players and GMs would ever have problems handling such a balanced and fair feat. The elite noble caste of "true gamers" of course, would never be hindered in their gameplay, due to their superior intellects and superhuman gaming skill.
Is it so hard to imagine that a free-form tabletop RPG is played in many ways by many people, and that the feat that happens to not have caused any problems for your specific gaming experience was problematic for many, many others?
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
First, those claiming there was a big problem with CW or that it was overpowered continue to ignore the fact that there are numerous NORMAL and COMMON combat encounter tactics that either reduce or negate the effectiveness of the feat. Just that fact alone completely counters the OP argument.
However, with the new erratta to Crane Riposte, I actually like the new feat tree better. It actually is more powerful now. Before, my fighter would only use CW maybe 2-3 times (if that much) against a main enemy in a combat and almost none in any other fights, thus only giving me that many AoOs with CR. Now I can designate my CW versus the attack with the lowest bonus and get my riposte practically every round. Sure, I'll get hit slightly more often (but my very high AC still prevents that from being a big threat), but now I'm getting an extra AoO every round (big offensive boost).