|
2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
|
My main question is whether the +4 bonus on checks made to trip foes would apply to Tripping Strike.
I ask is because all the descriptions I've read of Improved Trip and Greater Trip never said the +2 was to CMB so that allows a caster to use those feats with Toppling Spell Metamagic (d20+CL+Relevant Cast Stat vs. CMD).
So that has me think the check would go something like this:
Roll 19 for possible Crit then Roll to confirm. After confirming Crit you'd add the +2 or +4 to what the conformation total was to see if you succeed the trip or not.
It seems odd not to apply the bonus because 1) Combat Expertise (which is a prerequisite to all 3) is going to give -2 to melee and CM rolls and 2) the CMB is going to be higher than the To Hit bonus for melee attacks by the time BAB +9 is gained.
Depending on the answer will determine whether I'll bother with Tripping Strike or not.
Tripping Strike.
You are not performing the trip combat maneouvre, so you don't get the bonus from improved trip or greater trip.
dragonhunterq wrote: Tripping Strike.
You are not performing the trip combat maneouvre, so you don't get the bonus from improved trip or greater trip.
You do not provoke an attack of opportunity when performing a trip combat maneuver. In addition, you receive a +2 bonus on checks made to trip a foe. You also receive a +2 bonus to your Combat Maneuver Defense whenever an opponent tries to trip you. You do not provoke when performing the trip combat maneuver. You receive a +2 on checks made to trip a foe. Notice how it doesn’t say you receive a +2 on trip combat maneuver checks?
I'd say, yes, you do gain the benefit of Improved Trip and Greater Trip when using Tripping strike, since you are making a check to trip your foe.
dragonhunterq wrote: Tripping Strike.
You are not performing the trip combat maneouvre, so you don't get the bonus from improved trip or greater trip.
Tripping Strike
"If you are tripped during your own trip attempt,"
Improved Trip
"In addition, you receive a +2 bonus on checks made to trip a foe."
Improved trip grants a bonus to trip attempts, NOT just trip combat maneuvers, and Tripping Strike does make it clear it is a trip attempt.
Mucronis wrote: dragonhunterq wrote: Tripping Strike.
You are not performing the trip combat maneouvre, so you don't get the bonus from improved trip or greater trip.
Tripping Strike
"If you are tripped during your own trip attempt,"
Improved Trip
"In addition, you receive a +2 bonus on checks made to trip a foe."
Improved trip grants a bonus to trip attempts, NOT just trip combat maneuvers, and Tripping Strike does make it clear it is a trip attempt. In dragonhunterq's defense, the description of Improved Trip says "when performing the Trip Combat Maneuver," it just doesn't say that with respect to the +2.
Thanks for the feedback so far.
I came up with the question because I'm going to play an Oread Monk of the Sacred Mountain which work best when they start and end the turn in the same place. Because of that and the ability the archetype has that makes them unable to be knocked prone or bull rushed I decided to incorporate Tripping to give him a way of keeping his btb foes from wondering off to easily. Plus it'll mesh well with Crane, Janni, and Boar Styles.
I had a 3.5 Tripping character that revolved around Elusive Target. With Elusive Target, if you provoked an Attack of Opportunity by Moving out of a Threatened Square, and if that AoO missed, you got to make a Free Trip Attempt with no possibility of being Tripped yourself. And in 3.5, Improved Trip let you make a Free Action Attack as your opponent was going down. So he would run all around the battlefield provoking AoOs all around him, tripping everybody and beating on them, gaining several attacks/round by level 6.
I had a d20 Modern Tripping character who combined Improved Combat Throw and Improved Trip. With ICT, you got to make a Trip attempt as an AoO whenever you were attacked and missed. Too bad I could never wear decent armor...
I had been thinking that if I built a Pathfinder Tripping character, I would wield a Warhammer in 1 hand and use a Sickle as my Tripping Weapon: I'd be the Soviet Union!
Scott Wilhelm wrote: I had been thinking that if I built a Pathfinder Tripping character, I would wield a Warhammer in 1 hand and use a Sickle as my Tripping Weapon: I'd be the Soviet Union! Hah, now I have an image of two players playing burly twins named Hammer and Sickle.
......
Oh god now I'm imagining a campaign/modular that's Batman themed.
There is no roll to trip that the bonus could apply to. There is 1) a confirmation roll, 2) a comparison to CMD, and 3) a consequence (being tripped). Improved Trip provides no bonus to critical confirmation rolls, which is the only roll being made here.
Manly-man teapot wrote: There is no roll to trip that the bonus could apply to. There is 1) a confirmation roll, 2) a comparison to CMD, and 3) a consequence (being tripped). Improved Trip provides no bonus to critical confirmation rolls, which is the only roll being made here. Huh, I always looked at it that you had to make a 3rd roll to trip your opponent. You're saying that your Crit Confirmation Roll doubles for your attempt to Trip. That seems like an unusual game mechanic, but I'm not certain you are wrong about that.
It seems to me that maybe if that same number on your die that just helped you confirm a Crit is now being compared to your opponent's CMD, then you should still get to add that +2 from Improved Trip to it, since now that number on the die constitutes a Trip attempt, and Improved Trip gives you a +2 on attempts to Trip.
It strikes me as a little weird that you need Improved Trip as a prereq for Tripping Strike but don't get to add the +2 to the roll, but that isn't strong evidence that you are wrong. Much stronger is the fact that when your Crit Confirmation Roll is being used to determine if you score a Trip, it is then a Trip Attempt.
It also occurs to me that it would be very unusual for the same roll that successfully Confirmed a Trip would fail by 10 or more compared with that same opponent's CMD, which possibility Tripping Strike specifically calls out. But that certainly makes the Tripping Strike Feat much more powerful. And now it sort of makes the Kukri a tripping weapon!
In addition, you interpretation of Tripping Strike means now get to add the +4 bonus you get from the Crit Focus Feat to your Trip Attempt--forget about Improved Trip! The question now is how do you pump up your Crit Conf rolls even higher? Halflings get the Low Blow Racial Trait, and can take Improved Low Blow as a Racial Feat, but there is a size limit on Tripping, and Halflings are Small.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: Manly-man teapot wrote: There is no roll to trip that the bonus could apply to. There is 1) a confirmation roll, 2) a comparison to CMD, and 3) a consequence (being tripped). Improved Trip provides no bonus to critical confirmation rolls, which is the only roll being made here. Huh, I always looked at it that you had to make a 3rd roll to trip your opponent. You're saying that your Crit Confirmation Roll doubles for your attempt to Trip. That seems like an unusual game mechanic, but I'm not certain you are wrong about that. I read it the same way as Manly-man teapot in that you only roll once for conforming the trip. This roll is then used against both AC and CMD for damage and a trip attempt, respectively.
But, as I've said before, I believe the bonus from Improved trip should be added when comparing the conformation roll against CMD. And you'd add whatever bonuses you have for the normal crit damage part.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: It also occurs to me that it would be very unusual for the same roll that successfully Confirmed a Trip would fail by 10 or more compared with that same opponent's CMD, which possibility Tripping Strike specifically calls out. But that certainly makes the Tripping Strike Feat much more powerful. And now it sort of makes the Kukri a tripping weapon! Huh? Maybe I'm reading your wrong, but you don't successfully trip and fail to trip an opponent at the same time.
You score a crit threat by rolling 20. You then roll again, adding your bonuses to a trip attempt. If this new value misses the target's CMD by 10 or more, you are instead tripped (or forced to drop your weapon).
Blymurkla wrote: Huh? Maybe I'm reading your wrong, but you don't successfully trip and fail to trip an opponent at the same time. I'm sorry. I meant to say It seems unsual for a roll that was good enough to confirm a Crit would also miss a Trip by 10 or more.
So Tripping Strike is more powerful than I realized, since every time it works, it is utilizing an already good die roll.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: Blymurkla wrote: Huh? Maybe I'm reading your wrong, but you don't successfully trip and fail to trip an opponent at the same time. I'm sorry. I meant to say It seems unsual for a roll that was good enough to confirm a Crit would also miss a Trip by 10 or more.
So Tripping Strike is more powerful than I realized, since every time it works, it is utilizing an already good die roll. Okey, yes. If you roll good, you'll most likely both confirm the cirt and succeed in tripping your opponent.
But the reverse is also true. If you roll bad, you'll both fail at confirming the crit and tripping. And if you roll really bad, you'll fall yourself or lose your weapon in addition to missing the crit confirm.
So I don't agree with your conclusion ;) If, after rolling a crit threat, you'd roll twice - for confirming and for tripping - you'd be more likely to have at least one of them succeed. As a player choosing Tripping Strike I'd probably prefer that variant, as I'd have twice the chance of actually doing something a bit impressive on a crit threat. Though maybe I'm silly.
Ok, what's this nonsense I see about a "trip" being different from a "trip combat maneuver"? Trip is a combat maneuver; all trips are the trip combat maneuver, just as all grapples, disarms, sunders, etc. are all combat maneuvers. There's no such thing as a combat maneuver that isn't a combat maneuver.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
The confirmation roll is an attack roll. Obscure fact: "attack roll" is a defined term, meaning the sum of your die roll and your attack bonus. Therefore, "use die roll, add completely different bonus" is not supported by the text.
Ok here is the stats for my Monk using Crane Style, Fighting Defensively and Tripping Strike at 13th lvl (he also has Improved and Greater Trip as well as Improved Crit (Unarmed)).
His to hit bonus non flurry is +13/+8 while his Flurry is +15/+15/+10/+10/+5
Let's say he's in a group of 4 with APL being 13 and they're fighting an Iron Golem (AC 28/CMD 39)
Tripping Strike would never work because even with a nat 20 in the first 2 Flurry it'd only be 35 on the conformation. The only chance of it succeeding is by either having Critical Focus or the total +4 from Improved and Greater applying (still needing a nat 20).
Conversely his CMB for Tripping is +21 so he'd only need to roll 18 to succeed.
That's why I'm wondering if Tripping Strike is even worth it against high CR monsters because those that can be tripped by a medium sized creature mostly have CMDs so high that a standard attack roll will never succeed without a ton of bonuses.
Kazaan wrote: Ok, what's this nonsense I see about a "trip" being different from a "trip combat maneuver"? I know it sounds like nonsense, but it isn't.
Tripping Strike wrote: you may knock your opponent prone as if from the trip combat maneuver. Implying that however Tripping Strike lets you Trip, it is doing so in a way that is different from performing a Trip Combat Maneuver.
Kazaan wrote: Trip is a combat maneuver; all trips are the trip combat maneuver, just as all grapples, disarms, sunders, etc. are all combat maneuvers. There's no such thing as a combat maneuver that isn't a combat maneuver. I'm afraid there is. Tripping Strike is an exception. There is another part of it that says so more explicitly.
Tripping Strike wrote: Normal: You must perform a trip combat maneuver to trip an opponent. So Tripping via the Tripping Strike Feat is different from performing the Tripping Combat Maneuver.
And it seems that you don't make a separate die roll after confirming the Crit. You use the Crit Confirmation Roll as your Trip Attempt, too.
Tripping Strike wrote: The force intrinsic to your critical hits can knock your foes down..... If your confirmation roll exceeds your opponent's CMD, Manlyman teapot and dragonhunterq are saying that you don't get to add the +2s from Improved Trip nor Greater Trip because you are using the Crit Confirmation Roll and not a Combat Maneuver Check.
dragonhunterq wrote: You are not performing the trip combat maneouvre, so you don't get the bonus from improved trip or greater trip. Manly-man teapot wrote: There is no roll to trip that the bonus could apply to. There is 1) a confirmation roll, 2) a comparison to CMD, and 3) a consequence (being tripped). Improved Trip provides no bonus to critical confirmation rolls, which is the only roll being made here. Mucronis, Blymurkla, and I disagree. Improved and Greater trip grant a +2 to all attempts to Trip, not just Trips attempted via the Trip Combat Maneuver.
Improved Trip wrote: you receive a +2 bonus on checks made to trip a foe. When you have Tripping Strike, your Crit Confirmation Roll is a check made to trip a foe, even if it isn't a Trip Combat Maneuver. It is possible for that Trip attempt to fail. It is possible to fail in your trip attempt by 10 or more forcing you to get tripped yourself or drop your Tripping Weapon, if you were cautious enough to be using a weapon with the Tripping Quality.
Manly-man teapot wrote: "use die roll, add completely different bonus" is not supported by the text. That's what you say, but
Greater Trip wrote: You receive a +2 bonus on checks made to trip a foe That is the text, and it supports adding your Tripping feat bonuses to your Crit Confirmation Roll when Checking to see whether the roll is high enough to execute a Trip or failed badly enough to be Tripped yourself.
I'd agree that the mechanic seems clunky and odd, but that is what the rules say.
Travis Hansel wrote: The only chance of it succeeding is by either having Critical Focus or the total +4 from Improved and Greater applying (still needing a nat 20). Well, I would definitely say that if you are taking Improved Crit and Tripping Strike, you should also take Crit Focus. If you want a Crit Build, you want Crit Focus.
It seems that everyone agrees that add your bonus from Crit Focus and, if you are a Halfling, bonuses from Low Blow or Improved Low Blow. And, according to Manly-man teapot, you would not suffer the -2 from being Size Small attempting to Trip, although I believe you would. Now I have a question: if Tripping via Tripping Strike is not a Combat Maneuver, doesn't that mean that a Halfling could use it to Trip an Iron Golem? Does the size limit on Tripping apply to all Trip attempts, or just to the Trip Combat Maneuver? Citation will be required!
It is perhaps a little out-of-place to give Advice on the Rules Thread, but you seem to be asking for it. One of the biggest problems with Tripping is that there is a Size restriction. A size Medium creature can't even attempt to Trip a size Huge creature. If I did put together a Trip build, I would take the Punishing Kick Feat, which sort of works like Stunning Fist, but instead of making your opponents Stunned, you make them Prone. Making someone Prone is different from Tripping someone, and not as good because it doesn't trigger an AoO from Greater Trip, but it does Trigger an AoO from the Vicious Stomp Feat. To determine the Success of Punishing Kick, the Golem gets a Fort Save, but an Iron Golem only gets a +6 Fort Save, and the DC vs. your Punishing Kick would be 16 + your Wisdom Mod, which would probably be pretty high since you want Flurry of Blows.
For a Crit Build, I would consider a different weapon from Unarmed Strike, which only Threatens on a 20. See if you can't find a Monk Weapon that doesn't have a higher Threat Range. If you take Aesetic Style feats, your Weapon Damage will increase with levels like with your Monk Unarmed Strike, though not as fast.
Remember that you will get to use your weapon's enhancement bonus to determine the success of your Trip via Tripping Strike, so that mitigates things.
I think you're misreading what it means by "as if making a trip combat maneuver". It doesn't mean, "this is a trip, but not the trip combat maneuver"; it means "this attack to deal damage concurrently counts as a trip combat maneuver". The normal line states that, normally, you must actually use the rules for making a trip combat maneuver to trip a foe. You can't normally trip a foe when you're attacking to deal damage because attacking to deal damage isn't a trip combat maneuver; it's either or.
Now, regarding adding bonuses to the Tripping Strike checks, we do have precedent in the Deadly weapon property which counts damage as +4 higher for the purpose of determining the fort save DC to avoid instant death even though that +4 isn't added as actual damage. So it isn't outside the realm of possibility that you can have a roll count for two separate things and add a bonus for only one of those purposes. So, first, you must threaten a critical. Then, you must confirm that critical. Once you confirm your critical, you have the option of checking that confirmation roll (with appropriate additional trip bonuses) against the target's CMD to see if the attack also tripped the target.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: Travis Hansel wrote: The only chance of it succeeding is by either having Critical Focus or the total +4 from Improved and Greater applying (still needing a nat 20). For a Crit Build, I would consider a different weapon from Unarmed Strike, which only Threatens on a 20. See if you can't find a Monk Weapon that doesn't have a higher Threat Range. If you take Aesetic Style feats, your Weapon Damage will increase... Tripping Strike is the only Feat I've looked at for my monk that relies on critting to work and the only reason I've even been looking at it is because it gives a chance to trip without giving up an attack to do so. Plus Improved Critical is one of the Bonus Feats for Monk. The Bonus Feat list for Monk doesn't change for the Of the Sacred Mountain archetype and doesn't offer much for a build whose purpose is to stand in one spot and move as little as possible from there.
The reason I'm gonna stick with unarmed is because I'm debating between Boar Style or Janni Style to round him out and they only work with unarmed strikes.
I started this thread because while I'm planning this character I want to make sure that what I pick will be effective. To do that I need to make sure I'm accounting for all bonuses. If I find that Tripping Strike's success rate in CR13+ encounters (that are not comprised of CR1-5) is abysmal (not the Crit Range but the Crit Conformation exceeding CMD) then I won't bother with it and get something else.
Kazaan wrote: I think you're misreading what it means by "as if making a trip combat maneuver". It doesn't mean, "this is a trip, but not the trip combat maneuver"; it means "this attack to deal damage concurrently counts as a trip combat maneuver". With respect to the OP, I think this question is academic: whether or not the "confirmation roll" in Tripping Strike is a "Trip Combat Maneuver, it is clearly a trip attempt, and Improved and Great trips enhance it in either case.
The distinction here is really important with my size limit question. Right now I am thinking of a Halfling Tripping build that utilizes Tripping Strike because if Tripping via Tripping Strike is not technically a Combat Maneuver, then that does an endrun around the size limitations on Tripping, a rule I have particulularly detested since I first heard of it. A Halfling can Trip an Iron Golem if Tripping Strike Trips in some way other than a Trip Combat Maneuver, and according to the interpretations of Manly-man teapot and dragonhunterq, they don't suffer the -2 for being size Small, and they can add to Crit Focus the bonuses of Low Blow and Improved Low Blow to the Trip roll.
So, Kazaan, I'd really like you to expand upon think what makes you think "as if making a trip combat maneuver" does not imply that you are not actually making a trip combat maneuver, but Tripping in some other way.
Travis Hansel wrote: Tripping Strike is the only Feat I've looked at for my monk that relies on critting to work and the only reason I've even been looking at it is because it gives a chance to trip without giving up an attack to do so. Plus Improved Critical is one of the Bonus Feats for Monk. Even though the effect is a Trip, since Tripping Strike only triggers on a Crit, I think of it more as a Crit Feat than a Tripping Feat. I recommend against it unless you were committing to a Crit build: choosing a weapon with a high Crit Threat Range such as Temple Sword or maybe even Kukri (although Kukri isn't a Monk Weapon), and Crit Focus. For reasons that don't have anything to do with the rules question, I don't think I'd recommend Tripping Strike to you.
Travis Hansel wrote: The reason I'm gonna stick with unarmed is because I'm debating between Boar Style or Janni Style to round him out and they only work with unarmed strikes. If you took Aesetic Style feats, the Boar and Janni style Feats would work on some other weapon like a Temple Sword. But then you would be taking more than 1 Style Feat, and that means you would have to be a Master of Many Styles, although I think you can be a Sacred Mountain Master of Many Styles. Just throwing that out there as an alternative.
There is no number that is generated to which +2 from Improved Trip would apply. Your confirmation roll is pasted in as your final total result for the trip.
Manly-man teapot wrote: There is no number that is generated to which +2 from Improved Trip would apply. Your confirmation roll is pasted in as your final total result for the trip. You're just repeating yourself here. Can you explain further? Do you have anything from the rules to support your claim?
I have something from the rules to support my claim. Tripping Strike says that the confirmation roll becomes the check made to trip a foe, and Improved and Greater trip add +2 each to checks made to trip a foe. The rules say that.
Can you prove that the confirmation roll is not a Trip attempt?
Earlier you asserted " 'use die roll, add completely different bonus' is not supported by the text." But Kazaan found precedent for just this thing: the Deadly Weapon Quality. And again the Trip feats themselves say they give the +2s. The whole point of Feats is that they give special bonuses and priviledges that normally the rules don't allow. You've said that it's not supported by the text, but we proved that it is. Prove that it isn't.
I'm trying to find the truth here, not force my notions of the truth on others. If you have evidence, I would like to examine it.
I like evidence.
Bring forth the evidence.
Or at least give us a more nuanced examination of the evidence that's already presented.
This is the same as Shield Slam, which uses the Shield Bash Attack roll as the total for the Bull Rush Maneuver check.
You do not get to add bonuses that would be applied to a straight maneuver roll, you use the full total of you attack roll (or crit confirmation in the case of Tripping Strike).
However, it does not have the same limits of the combat maneuver either, so far as I read it.
TGMaxMaxer wrote: This is the same as Shield Slam, which uses the Shield Bash Attack roll as the total for the Bull Rush Maneuver check.
You do not get to add bonuses that would be applied to a straight maneuver roll, you use the full total of you attack roll (or crit confirmation in the case of Tripping Strike).
However, it does not have the same limits of the combat maneuver either, so far as I read it.
I see there might be linkage between Tripping Strike and Shield Slam, too. But just like Improved Trip, Improved Bull Rush adds +2 to all checks made to Bull Rush, not just Combat Maneuver Checks. And in both cases, the Attack Roll in 1 case and the Crit Conf Roll in the other, aren't both rolls checks to perform the maneuver? And don't both Feats say they enhance (not Enhance!) all checks to perform their respective maneuvers?
What makes you think it is otherwise? Manly-man teapot seems to be observing that it is problematic that you take the same number on the die applied to different uses and apply different bonuses to it for the different uses. But as Kazaan pointed out, there is precedent for this.
Also, it might be significant that Shield Slam uses the word "substitute," and Tripping Strike doesn't.
Tripping Strike:
1) Whenever you score a critical hit with a melee attack, you can trip your opponent, in addition to the normal damage dealt by the attack.
2) If your confirmation roll exceeds your opponent’s CMD,
3) you may knock your opponent prone as if from the trip combat maneuver.
4) This does not provoke an attack of opportunity.
5) If you are tripped during your own trip attempt, you can drop your weapon to avoid being tripped.
1) This is either a separate line allowing you to roll a trip attack every time you confirm a crit, in addition to the other effects of the feat, or an intruduction creating an overview of the mechanics to come. Obviously the latter.
2) It says "your confirmation roll". What you have made is a confirmation roll. Improved Trip does not apply to confirmation rolls. It then says "if [this roll which is not a trip CM but a confirmation roll] exceeds your opponent's CMD, [then]". It absolutely does not say "add your trip-specific bonuses", which you have to have in order to take the feat, nor does it say "take you die roll and add a different bonus".
3) "as if from the Trip combat maneuver". Meaning, the target has to be trippable by you, and any riders you have on a succesful trip attempt (Ki Throw, Greater Trip) apply.
4) and 5) seem uncontested.
The order of operations is:
*Make a specific roll that is not a trip attempt.
*If succesful, use the same roll (that is, die roll + bonus total) in a different comparison.
*If succesful, apply effect of combat maneuver.
You don't make a trip roll, you make a confirmation roll. At no point are you instructed to add an additional bonus, that the writer knows that you must have.
Manly-man teapot wrote: The confirmation roll is an attack roll. Obscure fact: "attack roll" is a defined term, meaning the sum of your die roll and your attack bonus. Therefore, "use die roll, add completely different bonus" is not supported by the text. ? 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. You make an attack roll when making a combat maneuver check and are specifically told to add a "completely different bonus".
fretgod99 wrote: Manly-man teapot wrote: The confirmation roll is an attack roll. Obscure fact: "attack roll" is a defined term, meaning the sum of your die roll and your attack bonus. Therefore, "use die roll, add completely different bonus" is not supported by the text. ?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. You make an attack roll when making a combat maneuver check and are specifically told to add a "completely different bonus". To be fair, what he meant was that it isn't supported by the cherry-picked parts of the rules that agree with the position he is espousing. Didn't you know internet debates work differently?
Kazaan wrote: To be fair, what he meant was that it isn't supported by the cherry-picked parts of the rules that agree with the position he is espousing. Didn't you know internet debates work differently? Good point. Forgot about that. My bad.
Manly-man teapot wrote:
2) It says "your confirmation roll". What you have made is a confirmation roll. Improved Trip does not apply to confirmation rolls. It then says "if [this roll which is not a trip CM but a confirmation roll] exceeds your opponent's CMD, [then]". It absolutely does not say "add your trip-specific bonuses", which you have to have in order to take the feat, nor does it say "take you die roll and add a different bonus".
Riddle me this: Why would Improved Trip be a requirement for Tripping Strike if it has nothing to contribute by your above statement?
From all the Feats I've read I've yet to find an example of where the effects/bonuses of a prerequisite Feat are utterly disregarded.
There are a TON of pre-req feats that do nothing for later feats in a chain. Combat Expertise being an obvious culprit. Using that feat actually makes every other maneuver worse. Same with Power Attack. (since all penalties on attack rolls apply to maneuvers)
Tripping Strike has Imp Trip as a pre-req, and the reason behind it can be anything.
In order to trip, you normally have to sacrifice an attack, in this case you are so good at it that you get to do it for free anytime you land a particularly good strike (crit).
However, as an add-on, it doesn't get its own roll with attendant bonuses, you just trip exactly as well as you crit. Whatever that number is.
In the same manner that I wouldn't expect to add another +6 to my Bullrush total from my shield slam (+4 feats, +2 Dwarven racial sub for stability), I wouldn't expect to add my bonuses from my feats to an add-on trip.
However, if that is the ruling handed down, it just makes my characters better than I thought.
TGMaxMaxer wrote: There are a TON of pre-req feats that do nothing for later feats in a chain. Combat Expertise being an obvious culprit. Using that feat actually makes every other maneuver worse. Same with Power Attack. (since all penalties on attack rolls apply to maneuvers)
Tripping Strike has Imp Trip as a pre-req, and the reason behind it can be anything.
In order to trip, you normally have to sacrifice an attack, in this case you are so good at it that you get to do it for free anytime you land a particularly good strike (crit).
However, as an add-on, it doesn't get its own roll with attendant bonuses, you just trip exactly as well as you crit. Whatever that number is.
In the same manner that I wouldn't expect to add another +6 to my Bullrush total from my shield slam (+4 feats, +2 Dwarven racial sub for stability), I wouldn't expect to add my bonuses from my feats to an add-on trip.
However, if that is the ruling handed down, it just makes my characters better than I thought.
I miss worded that earlier statement. Of the Feats I've read the Prerequisite and subsequent feats have a way of interacting directly with each other, whether it's making a bonus/situation stronger by stacking effects or by mitigating penalties the original incurs.
In the case of Combat Expertise and the Improved/Greater Combat Maneuver Feats:
While using Combat Expertise by taking a -1 penalty to melee attack rolls and combat maneuver rolls you gain a +1 dodge bonus to AC. When your BAB reaches +4, and every +4 thereafter, increase the penalty by -1 and bonus by +1.
So by giving up your offense you gain an equal defense.
Now let's use Trip and Bull Rush for my next part. The Improved and Greater forms do 3 things. 1) The modify what happens during the maneuver by first having you not provoke an AoO from the target then later making your target provoke an AoO. 2) Your CMD against the maneuver in increased by +2. 3) You gain a +2 bonus on checks made to Trip/Bull Rush with Improved and an additional +2 with Greater.
So with Improved and Greater we have a bonus to mitigate the penalty from Combat Expertise as well as boons for the offense with a bonus to defense.
It seems like too much of a step backwards to not apply the bonus to the strikes because even without Combat Expertise active the Strikes are already at a disadvantage by having to use your bonuses to hit with your melee attack which, more often than not, is much lower than your CMB.
Manly-man teapot, first of all, I commend you on a coherent response. I didn't think you had it in you.
Manly-man teapot wrote: 2) It says "your confirmation roll". What you have made is a confirmation roll. Improved Trip does not apply to confirmation rolls. It then says "if [this roll which is not a trip CM but a confirmation roll] exceeds your opponent's CMD, [then]". But we are still just talking in circles around each other. Yes, I see that the roll being made to determine the success of the Trip is almost definitely meant to be the Crit Confirmation Roll. And certainly Improved Trip does not apply to Crit Confirmation Rolls.
Except for the fact that when you use the Crit Confirmation Roll to check to see if a Trip is successful, that roll is now a Trip Check, and Improved and Greater trip bonuses WOULD apply.
You see, I'm not saying it's not a Crit Conf Roll. But it is also a Trip check: you are checking the roll against your opponent's CMD to see if a Trip occurs. Prove that this is not a "check made to trip a foe."
Manly-man teapot wrote: It absolutely does not say "add your trip-specific bonuses", which you have to have in order to take the feat, nor does it say "take you die roll and add a different bonus". Tripping Strike doesn't have to say it. Improved and Greater trip do. What you have to do here is prove that the roll you are checking against the CMD to check if you Trip the foe is not "a check made to trip a foe!"
Manly-man teapot wrote: 3) "as if from the Trip combat maneuver". Meaning, the target has to be trippable by you, and any riders you have on a succesful trip attempt (Ki Throw, Greater Trip) apply. So, Kazaan's and Fretgod99's treatment of you in response to this point was not nearly as bad as your treatment of me on a different thread, but I still don't approve of it. It feels more like an attack on your person, and not your argument. I disapprove of that being done to anyone, not just myself.
That being said, it does feel like you are cherry picking here. The only place a size restriction on Tripping exists that I know of is the upon the Trip Combat Maneuver. And what you are doing with Tripping Strike either is a Trip Combat Maneuver, or else it isn't. If it is, you get the restrictions. If it isn't, not so much.
Can we find any official rules source that puts a size restriction on Tripping in any manner other than the on Trip Combat Maneuver?
Because if we can't, and if Tripping via Tripping Strike is not a Trip Combat Maneuver, then a Halfling can use Tripping Strike to Trip an Iron Golem!
I was simply pointing out the rule that contradicted the stated claim. Then joked about stereotypical internet debates. Not really a personal attack, but whatever.
It was a humorous way to point out a cherry picking fallacy. Point out a fallacy is not an "attack on the person". It is, very much, a refutation of their argument. It doesn't even matter if the fallacy was deliberate or inadvertent on his part.
It just felt that way to me. If you say you didn't mean it that way, that's good enough for me.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
