|
4 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
|
Hello pathfinder peoples, we have a rule that needs some outsider rules lawyering. Even if you don't have a rule finding, maybe you can list how you would play it.
The question is over a swashbuckler and if it can use Dodging Panache and/or Opportune Parry and Riposte vs a combat maneuver (example: Player A tries to Grapple player B and Player B tries to uses Dodging Panache to get out of reach). If you believe he can us it these abilities vs combat maneuvers, how would grapple and dodging panache work if the grappler won the attempt?
One person believes that the combat maneuver is treated as an attack and believes the player should be able to dodge the grappler and be 5 ft away.
Another player believe that Dodging Panache and Opportune Parry can only be used against a melee attack. That players says the rules state that combat maneuvers can substitute for a melee attack, if its substituting for it, that it can't still be a melee attack.
Here are the abilities in question and some rules that they found. You might not even need to read them if you already know all the rules.
Thank you for your time and thoughts.
"Dodging Panache (Ex) : At 1st level, when an opponent attempts a melee attack against the swashbuckler, the swashbuckler can as an immediate action spend 1 panache point to move 5 feet; doing so grants the swashbuckler a dodge bonus to AC equal to her Charisma modifier (minimum 0) against the triggering attack. This movement doesn't negate the attack, which is still resolved as if the swashbuckler had not moved from the original square. This movement is not a 5-foot step; it provokes attacks of opportunity from creatures other than the one who triggered this deed. The swashbuckler can only perform this deed while wearing light or no armor, and while carrying no heavier than a light load."
"Opportune Parry and Riposte (Ex) : At 1st level, when an opponent makes a melee attack against the swashbuckler, she can spend 1 panache point and expend a use of an attack of opportunity to attempt to parry that attack. The swashbuckler makes an attack roll as if she were making an attack of opportunity; for each size category the attacking creature is larger than the swashbuckler, the swashbuckler takes a –2 penalty on this roll. If her result is greater than the attacking creature's result, the creature's attack automatically misses. The swashbuckler must declare the use of this ability after the creature's attack is announced, but before its attack roll is made. Upon performing a successful parry and if she has at least 1 panache point, the swashbuckler can as an immediate action make an attack against the creature whose attack she parried, provided that creature is within her reach."
"When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver. The DC of this maneuver is your target's Combat Maneuver Defense. Combat maneuvers are attack rolls, so you must roll for concealment and take any other penalties that would normally apply to an attack roll."
"An attack roll represents your attempt to strike your opponent on your turn in a round. When you make an attack roll, you roll a d20 and add your attack bonus. (Other modifiers may also apply to this roll.) If your result equals or beats the target's Armor Class, you hit and deal damage."
"While many combat maneuvers can be performed as part of an attack action, full-attack action, or attack of opportunity (in place of a melee attack)"
"Some combat maneuvers substitute for a melee attack, not an action. As melee attacks, they can be used once in an attack or charge action, one or more times in a full-attack action, or even as an attack of opportunity. Others are used as a separate action"
Combat Maneuvers are attacks:
SRD, Combat, Combat Maneuvers wrote: When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Dodging Panache works in response to a melee attack. You probably move 5' but certain combat maneuvers might prevent it, such as Grapple and Trip. The ability says the attack is not negated and it is still resolved as if you have not yet moved so if that maneuver prevents you from moving, you've simply wasted a point of panache. If it were another maneuver, like Disarm or Sunder, you might finish your movement but your weapon is lying on the ground in the square you just left, etc.
Opportune Parry and Riposte works in response to a melee attack. If you succeed the attack is negated and you get your AoO. Otherwise the attack works as normal. This applies even to combat maneuvers.
I agree with DM_Blake on this one.
I'd also say that if you are already in a grapple, you can use dodging panache to increase your AC but you will be unable to move from your square due to the grappled condition.
DM_Blake wrote: Combat Maneuvers are attacks:
SRD, Combat, Combat Maneuvers wrote: When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Dodging Panache works in response to a melee attack. You probably move 5' but certain combat maneuvers might prevent it, such as Grapple and Trip. The ability says the attack is not negated and it is still resolved as if you have not yet moved so if that maneuver prevents you from moving, you've simply wasted a point of panache. If it were another maneuver, like Disarm or Sunder, you might finish your movement but your weapon is lying on the ground in the square you just left, etc.
I'd also allow the movement against a trip. You'd just end up sprawled out in the next square if the trip were successful.
kyrt-ryder wrote: DM_Blake wrote: Combat Maneuvers are attacks:
SRD, Combat, Combat Maneuvers wrote: When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Dodging Panache works in response to a melee attack. You probably move 5' but certain combat maneuvers might prevent it, such as Grapple and Trip. The ability says the attack is not negated and it is still resolved as if you have not yet moved so if that maneuver prevents you from moving, you've simply wasted a point of panache. If it were another maneuver, like Disarm or Sunder, you might finish your movement but your weapon is lying on the ground in the square you just left, etc.
I'd also allow the movement against a trip. You'd just end up sprawled out in the next square if the trip were successful. This movement doesn't negate the attack, which is still resolved as if the swashbuckler had not moved from the original square.
So, if it is a Trip or such, he should wind up prone in the original square.
kinevon wrote: kyrt-ryder wrote: DM_Blake wrote: Combat Maneuvers are attacks:
SRD, Combat, Combat Maneuvers wrote: When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Dodging Panache works in response to a melee attack. You probably move 5' but certain combat maneuvers might prevent it, such as Grapple and Trip. The ability says the attack is not negated and it is still resolved as if you have not yet moved so if that maneuver prevents you from moving, you've simply wasted a point of panache. If it were another maneuver, like Disarm or Sunder, you might finish your movement but your weapon is lying on the ground in the square you just left, etc.
I'd also allow the movement against a trip. You'd just end up sprawled out in the next square if the trip were successful. This movement doesn't negate the attack, which is still resolved as if the swashbuckler had not moved from the original square.
So, if it is a Trip or such, he should wind up prone in the original square. Using Dodging Panache is an immediate action and thus would resolve before the attack (whether it be a trip or otherwise). Thus, they would move first, and then the trip attempt would be made. It is -resolved- as though they had not moved from the original square, thus the trip attempt can still be made despite no longer being within reach, flanking bonuses from the previous square would still apply, etc.
On the plus side, you wouldn't get stabbed if he has greater trip, or stomped with vicious stomp.
So you guys are saying because combat maneuvers have an attack roll to treat it as a "melee attack" for purposes of panache.
If your saying this is true...then your also saying that a player could use this on crane wing to deflect combat maneuvers.
"Once per round, when fighting defensively with at least one hand free, you can designate a single opponent you can see. You receive a +2 dodge bonus to AC against that opponent for one round. If you using the total defense action instead, you can deflect one melee attack that would normally hit you. An attack so deflected deals no damage and has no other effect (instead treat it as a miss). You do not expend an action when using this feat, but you must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed."
Seravix wrote: So you guys are saying because combat maneuvers have an attack roll to treat it as a "melee attack" for purposes of panache.
If your saying this is true...then your also saying that a player could use this on crane wing to deflect combat maneuvers.
"Once per round, when fighting defensively with at least one hand free, you can designate a single opponent you can see. You receive a +2 dodge bonus to AC against that opponent for one round. If you using the total defense action instead, you can deflect one melee attack that would normally hit you. An attack so deflected deals no damage and has no other effect (instead treat it as a miss). You do not expend an action when using this feat, but you must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed."
Correct, this is why things that boost your attacks boost your CMB and why things that boost certain aspects of your AC it boosts your CMD.
As a player who just joined a campaign as a Swashbuckler, I approve this thread.
I'm forced to wonder why they didn't just make CMB/CMD based off AC and chance to hit, rather than different calculations like they currently are...
Ah well.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
alexd1976 wrote: As a player who just joined a campaign as a Swashbuckler, I approve this thread.
I'm forced to wonder why they didn't just make CMB/CMD based off AC and chance to hit, rather than different calculations like they currently are...
Ah well.
Because armor doesn't stop trips or disarms.
A big issue I see with some of the wording here: Combat Maneuvers do not miss. They fail, which is not the same thing.
So if, like Parry/Reposte and Crane Wing, they 'make the attack miss', a combat maneuver does not care, because you did not make the combat maneuver fail.
Oh, and to address the Dodging Panache question, you would trip, disarm, sunder, etc in the new square, but grapple would drag you back as per the grapple rules.
Aydin D'Ampfer wrote: Oh, and to address the Dodging Panache question, you would trip, disarm, sunder, etc in the new square, but grapple would drag you back as per the grapple rules. I rather like that visual.
Seravix wrote: The question is over a swashbuckler and if it can use Dodging Panache and/or Opportune Parry and Riposte vs a combat maneuver (example: Player A tries to Grapple player B and Player B tries to uses Dodging Panache to get out of reach). If you believe he can us it these abilities vs combat maneuvers, how would grapple and dodging panache work if the grappler won the attempt?
One person believes that the combat maneuver is treated as an attack and believes the player should be able to dodge the grappler and be 5 ft away.
Another player believe that Dodging Panache and Opportune Parry can only be used against a melee attack. That players says the rules state that combat maneuvers can substitute for a melee attack, if its substituting for it, that it can't still be a melee attack.
I just wanted to point out that not all combat maneuvers can be used in place of a melee attack, just certain maneuvers: bull rush (when charging), disarm, sunder, and trip. In particular, grapple is a standard action per the Core Rulebook, and can't replace a melee attack. Because of that, neither Dodging Panache or Opportune and Riposte can apply in the case as presented.
A contrary opinion:
My tetori monk was recently thwarted by an minion using In Harm's Way to take the grapple in place of his master:
"While using the aid another action to improve an adjacent ally's AC, you can intercept a successful attack against that ally as an immediate action, taking full damage from that attack and any associated effects (bleed, poison, etc.)."
I didn't think it should work (especially as it was a "maintain the grapple" check on an already grappled creature). But two five-star GMs at the table agreed that a grapple check was an "attack" for the purposes of applying this feat in this circumstance. (One of those GMs also happens to be a grapple guru, so...)
Using the "If it burns you, it warms you" principle*, if a grapple check counts as an attack in this case, then counts as an attack for all other feats that respond to or alter an attack roll.
So a swashbuckler would absolutely be able to use Dodging Panache and Parry/Riposte against a grapple check, and by extension, any combat maneuver.
*Rules must be applied consistently: if a grapple check counts as a melee attack when it harms the player, then a grapple check must count as a melee attack when it helps the player.
In Harm's Way states that you can "intercept a successful attack", but Dodging Panache and Opportune Parry and Riposte reference the more specific "melee attack" action. I think that's the key difference here.
While a Grapple may not be a "melee attack" per the RAW, I think it's certainly reasonable to say that a Grapple is an "attack" and allows In Harm's Way to apply, at least for the initial grapple attempt. Having it apply when maintaining the grapple seems a little fishy to me. However, since succeeding on the check to maintain the grapple allows you to do damage I can see that interpretation.
Regardless, Grapple is certainly not a "melee attack". The rules are quite clear on that. So I can't see Dodging Panache or Opportune Parry and Riposte applying on a grapple attempt, initial or otherwise.
Chess Pwn wrote: alexd1976 wrote: As a player who just joined a campaign as a Swashbuckler, I approve this thread.
I'm forced to wonder why they didn't just make CMB/CMD based off AC and chance to hit, rather than different calculations like they currently are...
Ah well.
Because armor doesn't stop trips or disarms. Also, because as things get larger they should be easier to hit but harder to grapple. And as things get smaller they should be harder to hit, but easier to grapple.
DM_Blake wrote: Combat Maneuvers are attacks:
SRD, Combat, Combat Maneuvers wrote: When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Dodging Panache works in response to a melee attack. You probably move 5' but certain combat maneuvers might prevent it, such as Grapple and Trip. The ability says the attack is not negated and it is still resolved as if you have not yet moved so if that maneuver prevents you from moving, you've simply wasted a point of panache. If it were another maneuver, like Disarm or Sunder, you might finish your movement but your weapon is lying on the ground in the square you just left, etc.
Opportune Parry and Riposte works in response to a melee attack. If you succeed the attack is negated and you get your AoO. Otherwise the attack works as normal. This applies even to combat maneuvers.
You mentioned wasting a point of Panache, not entirely accurate... Gaining your CHA bonus as a dodge bonus would up your CMD, which MAY make the difference between getting grappled/tripped or not...
Dustin Campbell wrote: In Harm's Way states that you can "intercept a successful attack", but Dodging Panache and Opportune Parry and Riposte reference the more specific "melee attack" action. I think that's the key difference here.
While a Grapple may not be a "melee attack" per the RAW, I think it's certainly reasonable to say that a Grapple is an "attack" and allows In Harm's Way to apply, at least for the initial grapple attempt. Having it apply when maintaining the grapple seems a little fishy to me. However, since succeeding on the check to maintain the grapple allows you to do damage I can see that interpretation.
Regardless, Grapple is certainly not a "melee attack". The rules are quite clear on that. So I can't see Dodging Panache or Opportune Parry and Riposte applying on a grapple attempt, initial or otherwise.
Dustin, could you explain how a grapple is not a melee attack?
It is an attack, yes?
It is done in melee, as it is not a ranged attack (except in rare cases), yes?
So, attack, done in melee, how not?
Now, unless you have certain feats or abilities, it cannot be used to replace a regular weapon attack, but it is still an attack made in melee, just as a Standard Action, not (usually) available to be used as part of a Full Attack Action....
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
kinevon wrote: Dustin, could you explain how a grapple is not a melee attack?
It is an attack, yes?
It is done in melee, as it is not a ranged attack (except in rare cases), yes?
So, attack, done in melee, how not?
Now, unless you have certain feats or abilities, it cannot be used to replace a regular weapon attack, but it is still an attack made in melee, just as a Standard Action, not (usually) available to be used as part of a Full Attack Action....
Sure thing! It's just a matter of looking at what the rules say on the subject.
First of all, not all attack actions made within a melee are "melee attacks". Yes, it's a bit more complicated than it probably should be. :)
A melee attack is a specific type of attack action that is defined like so:
Core Rulebook, pg. 182 wrote: Melee Attacks: With a normal melee weapon, you can strike any opponent within 5 feet. (Opponents within 5 feet are considered adjacent to you.) Some melee weapons have reach, as indicated in their descriptions. With a typical reach weapon, you can strike opponents 10 feet away, but you can't strike adjacent foes (those within 5 feet). (link to PRD)
Essentially, melee attacks are all about striking an opponent with a weapon. You mentioned "regular weapon attacks" in your reply and that's exactly what the rules clearly state that "melee attacks" are. Note that the rules go on to describe other specific types of attacks like Unarmed Attacks, Ranged Attacks, Natural Attacks, etc.
Next, Grapple is described within the Special Attacks section under Combat Maneuvers. The rules to perform a Combat Maneuver make it very clear that not every maneuver can be used as part of attack action:
Core Rulebook, pg. 199 wrote: Performing a Combat Maneuver:When performing a combat maneuver, you must use an action appropriate to the maneuver you are attempting to perform. While many combat maneuvers can be performed as part of an attack action, full-attack action, or attack of opportunity (in place of a melee attack), others require a specific action. (link to PRD)
The important distinction is that while Combat Maneuvers are special attacks, they are not necessarily performed as part of an attack action.
Each set of Combat Maneuver rules specifically states what action is needed to perform the maneuver and whether it can be used in place of a melee attack. This is in the very first sentence of each Combat Maneuver's description.
Below are the maneuvers that can be performed as part of a melee attack:
Core Rulebook, pg. 199 wrote: Bull Rush
You can make a bull rush as a standard action or as part of a charge, in place of the melee attack.
Core Rulebook, pg. 199 wrote: Disarm
You can attempt to disarm your opponent in place of a melee attack.
Core Rulebook, pg. 201 wrote: Sunder
You can attempt to sunder an item held or worn by your opponent as part of an attack action in place of a melee attack.
Core Rulebook, pg. 201 wrote: Trip
You can attempt to trip your opponent in place of a melee attack.
The other maneuvers in the CRB lack the text that allows them to be performed as part of a melee attack. Note my added emphasis to the Grapple text below.
Core Rulebook, pg. 199 wrote: Grapple
As a standard action, you can attempt to grapple a foe, hindering his combat options.
Nowhere in the description of Grapple does it say that it can be used in place of a melee attack.
For completeness, here is the last Combat Maneuver defined by the CRB:
Core Rulebook, pg. 201 wrote: Overrun
As a standard action, taken during your move or as part of a charge, you can attempt to overrun your target, moving through its square.
So, given the descriptions in the rules, I would say that Grapple is certainly an attack. After all, it's in a section called Special Attacks and requires an attack roll. Heck, it necessitates putting your hands on an opponent in an aggressive manner.
That said, as I read the rules, they do not support Grapple being a melee attack. So, I would rule that "Dodging Panache" and "Opportune Riposte and Parry" do not work against a Grapple as those class features are written because they specifically reference "melee attacks"... even though I love playing my Swashbuckler! :-)
Hmn, Dustin, you present a strong argument.
While I think most GMs would be agreeable with you using swashbuckler abilities on combat maneuvers, you may technically be correct.
I'm FAQing the original post thanks to your reasoning.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
