-Casters become very vulnerable without it. The rules you refer to (casting defensively) are there for a reason but if engaged casters have no other options, their power is significantly reduced.
I fail to see how this aspect is a negative.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My only real world fighting talent is fencing,
I've been looking for an example of real world fighting that goes by turns! :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually (in my real-world fighting experience, which is mostly in the martial arts arena), I don't think disengaging is that difficult. You simply have to check the opponent's forward motion for a few seconds, which is very easy to do, for example, by feinting with a jab to the face (or its equivalent if you're using a weapon). The instinct to avoid that particular blow by pulling back out of its reach is pretty powerful, which gives you the time you need to adjust your own footing.
What you're saying makes sense, and I don't think that our statements are in opposition. You probably said it better though. I described it as "when an opportunity presents itself" and you said "check the opponent's forward movement for a few seconds". Checking movement would cause an opportunity to present itself, I think. You say this could take a few seconds to do it. It would require some concentration and could be more difficult against an opponent with more skill. Not something I would describe as "no action".
I still like the 5-ft Step action, because this is a game.
What you're saying makes sense, and I don't think that our statements are in opposition. You probably said it better though. I described it as "when an opportunity presents itself" and you said "check the opponent's forward movement for a few seconds". Checking movement would cause an opportunity to present itself, I think.Actually (in my real-world fighting experience, which is mostly in the martial arts arena), I don't think disengaging is that difficult. You simply have to check the opponent's forward motion for a few seconds, which is very easy to do, for example, by feinting with a jab to the face (or its equivalent if you're using a weapon). The instinct to avoid that particular blow by pulling back out of its reach is pretty powerful, which gives you the time you need to adjust your own footing.
Well, the primary difference is that my description implies actively creating an opportunity instead of passively waiting for one.
And, no, I said the opening lasts a few seconds--creating it is as fast as one can jab, which of course is subsumed into the abstraction that is the six-second combat round. The idea and expression that round-based combat is explicitly an abstraction dates back at least to AD&D; a fighter is making many more attacks (and defending herself from many more attacks) over the course of a round, but the effect is that one gets only a few "serious" attacks while throwing fakes, bobbing, weaving, and otherwise Flynning around.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My only real world fighting talent is fencing,I've been looking for an example of real world fighting that goes by turns! :)
Actually, fencing, at least using foil and sabre, is a turn-based combat system!
You'll probably see a lot more player deaths. With a five foot step, a wounded character can step back, draw a potion, and drink it in one round. Without it, a character will provoke one AoO from drawing the potion and another one from drinking the potion. If the character is hurt badly enough to use a potion, they probably won't survive one AoO, much less two.
I think half bab classes should provoke on 5 ft syeps.
find a new dm
You'll probably see a lot more player deaths. With a five foot step, a wounded character can step back, draw a potion, and drink it in one round. Without it, a character will provoke one AoO from drawing the potion and another one from drinking the potion. If the character is hurt badly enough to use a potion, they probably won't survive one AoO, much less two.
I'm pretty sure 3d8+5 wont save you from anything. You would be better off full retreating into someplace safe than using a potion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
if you're willing to axe a core fundamental part of the system because you don't agree with it, what are you willing to do later? I see the 5ft step as a really basic mechanic to play the game, let alone run one.
It is a core mechanic. Seems to me, though, that this GM doesn't realize that. He needs to be educated. :-)
And only 4 class have access to it, IIRC... Fighter, Ranger, Slayer and Zen Archer.People make archers that aren't one of those?
Marksman, Soul Bolt soulknives, and some path of war disciplines from dreamscarred press. but that is just what floats my boat.
You'll probably see a lot more player deaths. With a five foot step, a wounded character can step back, draw a potion, and drink it in one round. Without it, a character will provoke one AoO from drawing the potion and another one from drinking the potion. If the character is hurt badly enough to use a potion, they probably won't survive one AoO, much less two.I'm pretty sure 3d8+5 wont save you from anything. You would be better off full retreating into someplace safe than using a potion.
The Pathfinder ruleset doesn't support full retreating very well without a VERY lenient GM. Nearly every monster has superior movement.
And only 4 class have access to it, IIRC... Fighter, Ranger, Slayer and Zen Archer.People make archers that aren't one of those?
Archer paladins are amusingly powerful.
Archer Bards are pretty cool too. Barbarians actually make really good archers, even without archetypes. Inquisitors are supposed to be good archers too... But other than bow proficiency, they aren't particularly well-suited for that combat style.
And let's not forget about Gunslingers... Which aren't archers, but suffer just as much with the removal of 5ft step.
Besides... Even if an archer can survive in melee, it's pretty sad to have your best trick shut down or heavily nerfed by any critter who manages to stand next to you.
The Pathfinder ruleset doesn't support full retreating very well without a VERY lenient GM. Nearly every monster has superior movement.You'll probably see a lot more player deaths. With a five foot step, a wounded character can step back, draw a potion, and drink it in one round. Without it, a character will provoke one AoO from drawing the potion and another one from drinking the potion. If the character is hurt badly enough to use a potion, they probably won't survive one AoO, much less two.I'm pretty sure 3d8+5 wont save you from anything. You would be better off full retreating into someplace safe than using a potion.
While true, retreating hase these benefits
-they likely cant full attack you
-you can position behind allies and either body block or force AoOs
-you can draw a reach weapon if you so prefer
-the time the monster waits chasing you can let your party (this game isnt solo) gain the advantage.
-no seriously that full attack is deadly yo.
As for the Archer debate. I think it could be very sucessfully argued that it would be a reasonable price for their superior damage in a large number of situations.
The other big problem I see is that Pathfinder pretty much forces martials to stand still all the time... 5ft steps are the one rule that gives them some mobility and a little tactical decision making...
Not only this rule would exarcebate existing balance problems , it also makes the game more static, boring and dull.