| 23 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
FAQ question (concise version):
The implementation of the Net weapon, and its interactions with the Net Adept line of feats contains a lot of convoluted rules, and redundant abilities: this makes the RAI hard to understand, and the RAW hard to implement.
This is further complicated by errata that have made certain parts of the feat line redundant as well.
This is a request to get the net weapon, snag net weapon, and net adept line of feats errata'd and FAQ'd into a place that allows easy use in game, without having to troll forums, write flow-charts or argue endlessly with your GM/players.
In-Depth Explanation:
The weapons in question are:
The feats in question are:
Net Adept
Net and Trident
Net Maneuvering
Net Trickery
Equipment Trick: Net
There is also unclear functionality with regards to interaction with:
Exotic Weapon Proficiency
Two weapon Fighting line
improved trip
improved drag
improved reposition
improved dirty trick
Most of these feats were released with Ultimate Combat (August 2011), and since then there have been a number of threads asking for clarification.
Responses from the community have ranged from: "RAI is clear", to "RAI is unclear" all the way down to "RAW is so unclear that we can't run it at our table"
Here is a list of threads on the topic:
2011
All Tangled up This thread contains Beldhyr's write-up
2012
Nets and two weapon fighting
Snag Net and Net feats
Net Adept and Nets
2014
Net (and net and trident) rules are very weird and unclear, sometimes contradictory; they NEED erratas to clear things up
Net and Trident question
Throwing a net - one handed or two handed?
Cliff Notes summary:
- Net default handed-ness, without reading the feat line seems to indicate a 1-handed exotic weapon, the feat line is the only thing contradicting this
- It is unclear whether snag nets qualify for net adept line feats
- It is unclear whether snag nets are a separate proficiency from regular nets
- Net Adept line feats provide abilities that are available to characters already, such as tripping with your net (you can trip with any melee weapon)
- Net and Trident provides some abilities that are superseded by Net Adept abilities, despite Net Adept being a pre-requisite for Net and Trident
- Net Maneuvering/Trickery feats do not mention whether or not they provoke, action-type used, or attack type replaced in several locations.
- Valid actions for non-entangled net, already-entangled net, and whether you can use a normal offhand net attack an entangled target with the net you have it inside are very muddy.
- 10 ft reach and adjacent threatening are not spelled out
The best (fair and clear) input I have found on the topic so far was Beldhyr's explanation and suggested rewrite (2011) of the feats, located here:
Since this is clearly a source of confusion from a RAW perspective, I think it's about time we got a FAQ on the issue.
If you are interested in this at all, or have read the feats/discussion and realised that the RAW is convoluted to the point of being banned at some tables: please press the FAQ button on this post, and help people bring these feats into their games.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
That is quite the post. However, I would advise you to read this section of the FAQ guidelines.
What's the best way to get a FAQ answered?
A short, concise question is much more likely to get a FAQ than a post that is a page of supposition, links to other discussions, with no actual question presented or with a question buried in the middle of a paragraph.
A post with one question on one topic is much more likely to get a FAQ than a post with multiple questions, especially if they are about different topics. This is because the staff can't clear a FAQ-flag for just part of a post, which means they have to answer all questions in that post to clear it, and some of those questions may be harder to answer (meaning “takes more research and time”) than others. In other words, the most difficult or complex question in a multi-question post tends to slow down getting any questions in that post answered.
Book names and page references help the staff find what you’re asking about. There are a lot of feats, traits, spells, magic items, and rules subsystems in the game now, and even something like “Ultimate Combat page 226” makes it a lot easier for the staff to look up what you’re asking about.
You don't want an FAQ, you want an entire blog or something of similar caliber.
Your point is valid, I'll edit the main post to start with a summary question.
Unfortunately, due to the interactions of the style as a whole, if you fix only one feat, the entire thing will remain problematic.
Oh I do agree that it would be good to have some clarification on all of this. I don't really play net users myself, but I've heard enough people complain about it to know it's confusions. I just don't think an FAQ could possibly be large enough to answer all of the questions.
Oh I do agree that it would be good to have some clarification on all of this. I don't really play net users myself, but I've heard enough people complain about it to know it's confusions. I just don't think an FAQ could possibly be large enough to answer all of the questions.
While I agree with you, there is no button to click to request "blog" therefore faq.
"Request for Blog" would seem rather presumptuous on my part, I think :P
It is also worth noting that Net Adept does not mention whether or not the melee net attack is still a touch attack, or whether it provokes if it is one.
(This is covered in Beldhyr's writeup, but I did not include it in the OP)
Net Maneuvering/Trickery feats do not mention whether or not they provoke, action-type used, or attack type replaced in several locations.
This one is beyond easy, if the feat doesn't change the action in any way you use the default rules. So for example using drag or reposition is a standard action that provokes unless you have the respective improved feats.
Snag net is a separate weapon from net, unlike scorpion whip there is no vague language allowing you to use snag nets as nets or any other ambiguity. It is clearly a separate weapon with it's own entry on the weapons table and requires it's own proficiency, no matter how similar they may be.
Weapon Reach needs to specify it threatens adjacent. If it doesn't spell that out then the default rules apply and you do not threaten adjacent - this is really basic stuff that does not need an FAQ. I feel like people have got so caught up in the complexity of nets in general they are losing sight of the fundamentals.
Speaking of fundamentals, melee attacks don't provoke unless specifically called out that they do. Doesn't matter if it is a normal melee attack or a melee touch attack, it doesn't provoke by default.
Net adept turns it from ranged touch to normal melee. You can infer that it should be touch still, but melee weapons are not normally touch attacks and Net Adept doesn't make them touch attacks.
You can't normally perform any combat manoeuvers with a ranged weapon. This is the big plus of net adept.
Beldhyrs post has a couple of incorrect assumptions too, the most glaring being that "in melee" infers only being within 5'. that is false. "in melee" means "threatening or threatened by"
Shooting or Throwing into a Melee: If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target engaged in melee with a friendly character, you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll. Two characters are engaged in melee if they are enemies of each other and either threatens the other. (An unconscious or otherwise immobilized character is not considered engaged unless he is actually being attacked.)
With those two clarifications we see that Net Manoeuverings first sentence is a clarifying one that you can only use it while using the net as a melee weapon (granted via net adept).
Combat manoeuvers other than trip, disarm and sunder don't benefit from your weapon enhancement bonuses or feats such as weapon focus. Allowing you to use Drag and reposition with a net is a big plus.
Net and Trident clarifies that a net is normally a 2 handed ranged weapon - handedness and nearly all ranged weapons are unclear, having that clarification is handy. It does not contradict the CRB as the CRB does not tell you what handedness it defaults to.
I am not seeing where 'net and trident' and 'net adept' overlap, they do very different things. They both increase versatility in different directions.
The only thing that I see really needs clarifying are whether snag nets qualify for net adept etc. and whether net Adept should be errata'd to melee touch attacks (currently they are strictly speaking not, but I can see an argument that they should be)
Net feats? It's the feats you have left after all the feat taxes as compared to the gross feats which is before they are subtracted. xD
@Dragonhunterq:
Much of your analysis is spot on, in breaking down the RAW:
However, people tending to make incorrect assumptions based on complicated wording is a large bulk of why the language of the feats needs to be re-written. Confusing language, the need to refer between separate books for one item, etc is a valid enough reason in and of itself.
If you need to draw yourself up a table of valid actions under certain circumstances, to understand the style, the language needs simplification (rewrite) or clarification (FAQ).
If Net and Trident has the correct clarification for the handed-ness, the CRB net entry needs to be amended with the information: If only for people using CRB alone, who do not own Ultimate Combat.
The snag net text "A snag net works like a typical net exotic weapon" is open for interpretation as to the extent of that comparison.
Net Adept/Net and Trident redundancy:
EWP Net:2 hand, ranged 10 touch (provokes if threatened)
Net Adept: 1 hand, melee, reach 10 non-touch
Net and Trident: 1 hand, ranged, range 10 non-touch (provokes if threatened)
The 'bonus' of using it as a ranged weapon (again) is a redundant bonus, that only seems to allow it to function with ranged feats, which isn't particularly useful. Since it also doesn't mention touch attacks, (by your previous logic) you're losing that again.
I'm not really understanding the benefit of the ranged 1-hand net + melee (irrespective of the loss of ranged touch attack) over the reach 10 net + melee. If you could shed some light in that regard, It would help me, and possibly others to appreciate the benefit of this clause.
What benefit is there to doing maneuvers 'at range' if the range is identical? Other than something niche like improved precise shot, I'm stumped.
Touch Attacks:
I am personally inclined to actually think that RAI would not remove the touch attack ability on any form of the weapon: and that the lack of explicit repeat of the 'touch' is an oversight. You obviously disagree on that interpretation. Many people would state that since 'touch' was never explicitly removed in the text, it is not removed.
It might be similar to argue (disingenuously) that since the entangling function is not mentioned in the Net Adept text, that you can only attack, and do no damage (obviously silly). Now, no one is arguing this, and you could accuse me of making a strawman here, but the logic is identical: the text does not re-instate any of those powers, they are done so by implication.
Maneuvers:
Regarding Drag and Reposition: It also doesn't state whether or not you add the enhancement bonus etc, despite spelling out that you use the weapon, so a RAW interpretation would be that you do not, though some would argue because of the way the errata works, you should.
Net Trickery also uses interesting language like "In place of one of your melee attacks", where usually it is "a melee attack" not "one melee attack": which RAW means only one per round, I assume? Quick Dirty Trick allows one melee of highest bonus to be replaced: should it be that one? Or is this feat free to use any?
Net Maneuvering/Trickery do explicitly allow you to attack adjacent (with certain maneuvers) while you control the trailing rope of the net. Whether this supports or disproves regular adjacent threatening or not is open for interpretation.
Their wording is also convoluted in that maneuvering allows trips vs non-entangled targets, but not vs entangled targets. Trickery allows trips vs entangled targets, and dirty tricks vs non-entangled targets. Equipment Trick: Net only applies to entangled targets, which cannot be targeted with net trickery's dirty tricks, you need to do a standard one. There is a lot of backtracking to other feats to see the valid combinations: which is fine, but many people will mis-read these feats without doubling back and correcting themselves.
So: I agree with almost all of your interpretation of the RAW (barring perhaps the touch attack issue, where I could be convinced either way), I also believe that either way, it does not match the implied RAI (which is confusing, and open to interpretation): and when used in conjunction with confusing language, this feeling is compounded.
I also think that even if the RAW is RAI, that the feats should be clarified to be less prone to misinterpretation.