RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
There was this game I was in where I got missed by 2 while using combat expertise. It was against as a magus who was alpha striking me and I would have lost the character. I respect that feat.
There was this game I was in where I got crit-confirmed by 2 while raging. It was against a magus who was alpha striking me and I lost the character. I have no respect for rage.
Point buy does exist. It's right in the rules. Believe!
The INT thing doesn't bother me, but that's because I don't believe in dumping stats, because I don't believe in point buy.
I'm aware, but it isn't standard.
But then again neither are my stat generation methods.
|
So are archetypes, PrCs, everything not core, etc.That was only as an optional rule.Actually, you aren't. In 3.5 you could take drawbacks to get extra feats (2 of them) so a PF character only gets more feats at lvl 19, and until 17 they are a feat behind (since the 3.5 character would get those 2 feats at 1st level).Look at it this way:
You take Combat Expertise. Even if you never, ever use it, you're still two feats up on a 3.5 character :)
Theoretically every rule is optional. But the Character Flaws were from Unearthed Arcana - none of which was considered the default way to play. Drawbacks were optional in the same way as armor = damage reduction, gesalt characters, spell points, and sanity. None were in any way considered the default way to play.
I'm aware, but it isn't standard.Point buy does exist. It's right in the rules. Believe!
The INT thing doesn't bother me, but that's because I don't believe in dumping stats, because I don't believe in point buy.
Actually - it is. It wasn't in 3.5, but in Pathfinder point-buy is the default method and rolling is the optional one.
Actually - it is. It wasn't in 3.5, but in Pathfinder point-buy is the default method and rolling is the optional one.I'm aware, but it isn't standard.Point buy does exist. It's right in the rules. Believe!
The INT thing doesn't bother me, but that's because I don't believe in dumping stats, because I don't believe in point buy.
Standard: Roll 4d6, discard the lowest die result, and
add the three remaining results together. Record this total
and repeat the process until six numbers are generated.
Assign these totals to your ability scores as you see fit.
This method is less random than Classic and tends to
create characters with above-average ability scores.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, what would make Combat Expertise good?
Removal of Intelligence requirement or changing to Int or Dex of 13+, making it easier for martials to obtain?
+2 AC per -1 To Hit, rather than +1/-1?
Allow to stack with Total Defense?
Any other ideas?
Here's my idea.
Combat Expertise
Prereq: INT 13
Benefit: Add your INT modifier to your CMB and CMD.
It's not a perfect solution, but it now at least provides a benefit that is relevant to most of the feats that use it as a prereq. Also if your INT is higher than 13, it provides more benefit, which means Magi and Alchemists are suddenly solid options for trip builds and the wizard might occasionally want to cast Fox's Cunning on the Fighter.
|
So, what would make Combat Expertise good?
Removal of Intelligence requirement or changing to Int or Dex of 13+, making it easier for martials to obtain?
+2 AC per -1 To Hit, rather than +1/-1?
Allow to stack with Total Defense?
Any other ideas?
Here's my idea.
Combat Expertise
Prereq: INT 13
Benefit: Add your INT modifier to your CMB and CMD.
It's not a perfect solution, but it now at least provides a benefit that is relevant to most of the feats that use it as a prereq. Also if your INT is higher than 13, it provides more benefit, which means Magi and Alchemists are suddenly solid options for trip builds and the wizard might occasionally want to cast Fox's Cunning on the Fighter.
Why bother even having the int requirement? Just say "Add your int bonus" instead and leave it without pre-requisites. No-one will take it without at least 12 int anyway.
(I know the pre-requisites exist to make odd numbers worthwhile, but I find feat prerequisites are usually silly and unneeded.)
Actually - it is. It wasn't in 3.5, but in Pathfinder point-buy is the default method and rolling is the optional one.I'm aware, but it isn't standard.Point buy does exist. It's right in the rules. Believe!
The INT thing doesn't bother me, but that's because I don't believe in dumping stats, because I don't believe in point buy.Standard: Roll 4d6, discard the lowest die result, and
add the three remaining results together. Record this total
and repeat the process until six numbers are generated.
Assign these totals to your ability scores as you see fit.
This method is less random than Classic and tends to
create characters with above-average ability scores.
It's the standard rolling method - that doesn't mean that rolling is the standard method to begin with.
There is also a standard point buy. (15 points)
|
So are archetypes, PrCs, everything not core, etc.That was only as an optional rule.Actually, you aren't. In 3.5 you could take drawbacks to get extra feats (2 of them) so a PF character only gets more feats at lvl 19, and until 17 they are a feat behind (since the 3.5 character would get those 2 feats at 1st level).Look at it this way:
You take Combat Expertise. Even if you never, ever use it, you're still two feats up on a 3.5 character :)
Every thing in core...
Here's my proposed fix. Works well in my home games,players feel like it's worth using.
Combat Expertise: This feat now provides a +2 dodge bonus to AC for every point of attack bonus sacrificed.
A character that is only weilding a light weapon in one hand instead gains +3 dodge bonus to AC per point of attack bonus sacrificed.
It's basically Power attack for AC...seems fair,
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Look at it this way:
You take Combat Expertise. Even if you never, ever use it, you're still two feats up on a 3.5 character :)
Actually, you aren't. In 3.5 you could take drawbacks to get extra feats (2 of them) so a PF character only gets more feats at lvl 19, and until 17 they are a feat behind (since the 3.5 character would get those 2 feats at 1st level).
Further, many of the feats Combat Expertise is a prereq for are now 2 feats instead.
Ah, but PF is (in theory) backwards compatible, so 3.5 drawbacks are still technically an option for PF characters.
|
|
In PFS, my standpoint would be:
Yes, it's a feat tax. But, if you're gonna play a character that really wants maneuvers, then it might just be worth paying. Swallow your medicine and get on with things.
Or, just live without Maneuver feats. Reach weapons, powers that deny AoOs - you don't absolutely need them.
In my home game I've houseruled it away.
|
|
In PFS, my standpoint would be:
Yes, it's a feat tax. But, if you're gonna play a character that really wants maneuvers, then it might just be worth paying. Swallow your medicine and get on with things.
Or, just live without Maneuver feats. Reach weapons, powers that deny AoOs - you don't absolutely need them.
In my home game I've houseruled it away.
This is the really funny thing about the Combat Expertise tax to me. It means the only time I see people use these are when they get some (free) class ability that skips the AoO anyway, or when they're out of reach of the AoO. And even then it's only sometimes. Which basically means they're making people pay 2 feats for something that they will often choose not to do even if it was free.
Even without that first tax, I've never seen anyone take any of the Power Attack requiring ones either.
I think Combat Expertise is a fantastic feat for certain character builds. Sure, players who tweak all their points to keep their intelligences low to max out their strength, etc, would whine about the Int 13 requirement.
Trade attack rating for AC? Sounds good to me. Don't like the feat, don't take it. If you hate being required to take it as a pre-req, think of it as "free" since you got more feats back in '09 anyway.
It's a great game. Try concentrating on your character and less on his stats.
I think most would agree that it's a sub par feat that could use improvement. Especially when it's the cornerstone for so many other abilities.
Even with an intelligent character it's a hard trade at 1 for 1.
Suddenly, every character created by point buy disappears. This is accompanied by sudden explosions at Lone Wolf, and computers around the world, as Herolab fails to adapt to the sudden change. Paizo hit by the complete disruption of PFS play, takes up GoblinWerks Knitting as a new sideline.I don't believe in point buy.
Strawman much?
As to the other response of mine, Standard means standard. Not standard rolling, just standard.
It is the first method listed, and it is titled standard, followed by classic, followed by point buy.
Rolling stats is the standard way of play despite what the internet assumes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As it stands, Combat Expertise is subpar. the fact you can't even use it at a distance from combat is lousy.
Make it into a feat worth taking.
Combat Expertise should stand for the skills of a truly gifted, intelligent melee combatant. Therefore, it should interact with other feats to an amazing degree so that you WANT to take it, so you WANT that 13 Int so you can have the Feat.
Combat Expertise
req: Int 13.
-1/+1 th/Dodge AC per 4 levels, like Power Attack. This is considered a variant use of Power attack, and may not be used at the same time.
This AC bonus only applies when you have started Melee combat.
If you are a Fighter and take this as a feat, the bonus applies immediately, even if you are out of combat, as long as initiative has been rolled, and the bonus will stack with the Full Defense Option.
You now have a Total Offense combat option, the opposite of Defensive Fighting (-4 to AC, +2 to attack).
IN addition, Expertise does the following:
Your Improved Initiative Bonus is improved by your Expertise modifier.
If you have Weapon Finesse, you may add your Expertise bonus to your damage modifier with a finessable weapon (this replaces Dex to damage). This damage does stack with your Str modifier.
YOu may add your Expertise to your AoO's allowed by Combat Reflexes.
If you choose Improved Manuvers, you gain the Improved Manuver for a number of manuvers equal to your Expertise bonus (You do not provoke AoO's when using those manuvers). You gain a bonus on CMD and CMB equal to your Expertise bonus with those manuvers.
If you have Power Attack, you may reduce your effective Str for damage by 2 to raise your To Hit by 1 (Powerful Finesse).
If you have Vital Strike, you may combine it with a Charge.
If you have TWF, you may employ your primary and secondary weapons once each as part of a standard action.
If you have Skill Focus, Skill Synergy, or other Skill Feats in skills with military applications (knowledge/history, weapon/armor/bowyer, Perform/weapon drill, Engineering (siege), etc) You may add your expertise bonus to those skill rolls.
=======================
There! You are a highly trained, professional, intellectual warrior, a cut above a mere sword-swinging grunt, and it will show!
That's a feat worth 13 Int.
==Aelryinth
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Combat Expertise scales correctly. Why?
Combat Expertise, Power Attack, and Deadly Aim all trade a feat to gain a feat.
Think about it. +1 to hit is worth a feat (Weapon Focus). So is +1 to AC (Dodge/Shield Focus). But +1 damage is not worth a feat, +2 damage is (Weapon Specialization).
Every time you use one of those fears, you effectively trade Weapon Focus for either Dodge or Weapon Specialization. If anything, Power Attack is the feat that is out of line because of the whole +50% for two-handing thing.
There is no meaningful way to show what is the standard way to generate stats in PF.
Except that it is identified as such in the rule book, followed by classic and then purchase.
Standard Fantasy is the wording that exists in the book, to differentiate it from low fantasy, high fantasy, and epic fantasy.
The standard way to generate ability scores is 4d6 drop lowest.
My personal preference is Heroic, though I have never tried Dice pool and I think I may want to since it gives exactly as much control over your stats as point buy does.
But that is for another thread, point is, don't say that the words in the book don't exist to suit your needs.
There is no meaningful way to show what is the standard way to generate stats in PF.Except that it is identified as such in the rule book, followed by classic and then purchase.
Standard Fantasy is the wording that exists in the book, to differentiate it from low fantasy, high fantasy, and epic fantasy.
The standard way to generate ability scores is 4d6 drop lowest.
My personal preference is Heroic, though I have never tried Dice pool and I think I may want to since it gives exactly as much control over your stats as point buy does.
But that is for another thread, point is, don't say that the words in the book don't exist to suit your needs.
This does not disprove the thread thesis that Combat Expertise is the worst.
There it does not exist.
There is no meaningful way to show what is the standard way to generate stats in PF.Except that it is identified as such in the rule book, followed by classic and then purchase.
Standard Fantasy is the wording that exists in the book, to differentiate it from low fantasy, high fantasy, and epic fantasy.
The standard way to generate ability scores is 4d6 drop lowest.
My personal preference is Heroic, though I have never tried Dice pool and I think I may want to since it gives exactly as much control over your stats as point buy does.
But that is for another thread, point is, don't say that the words in the book don't exist to suit your needs.
This does not disprove the thread thesis that Combat Expertise is the worst.
There it does not exist.
IMO Crane Style (even post nerf) is still better.
|
|
This is the really funny thing about the Combat Expertise tax to me. It means the only time I see people use these are when they get some (free) class ability that skips the AoO anyway, or when they're out of reach of the AoO. And even then it's only sometimes. Which basically means they're making people pay 2 feats for something that they will often choose not to do even if it was free.
Even without that first tax, I've never seen anyone take any of the Power Attack requiring ones either.
I've occasionally said "screw it, I'll just take the AoO" when maneuvering against lightly armed opponents. A wizard's dagger isn't going to stop me from grappling him. My alchemist held down a mystic theurge twice his level for long enough to tie him up.
I've also deliberately triggered AoOs with movement just so I could make a maneuver afterwards. Combat Reflexes is rare on non-Reach NPCs.
I use a lot of reach weapons for maneuvers. If someone is moving towards me and provokes from my longspear, I'll just trip him rather than try to damage. I'll do the damage on my turn, I just stopped that guy from moving and attacking me.
I've also used stuff like Litany of Sloth to clear the way for maneuvers.
I have to admit, I haven't actually taken Combat Expertise+Maneuver Feats yet. I probably will at some point, but I usually prefer broader feat choices.
If you're trying to move around the battlefield, just take Mobility. Then put 3 ranks into Acrobatics. Spend a standard action to go Total Defense, and when you move, your AC will be +10 higher vs. the AoO.
I pulled off exactly that maneuver with my Halfling vs like 4 Ogre barbs with longspears. They all took their reach AoO's at me as I crossed in on them, and strangely enough, none of them rolled the nat 20 they needed to hit me.
==Aelryinth
I personally have nothing against Combat expertise as it is, but I gave it for free along with Power attack and Deadly aim as a feature if they meet the prerequisites. Foes get access to this as well, so PC's get to be a bit different from the usual and I get to do all sorts of stuff with enemies. If enemies would have some of the feats mentioned earlier they get replacing feats. We are one game down, so I don't know how much of an impact it will have.