Has there ever been an explanation of how Paizo decides to make a particular action part of the rules or part of a feat? I mean, logically we could have something like:
Feat: Flank
Prerequisites: Combat Expertise, Int 13.
Benefit: When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.
And, as an entry in the rule book:
Combat: Power Attack
You can choose to take a –1 penalty on all melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks to gain a +2 bonus on all melee damage rolls. This bonus to damage is increased by half (+50%) if you are making an attack with a two-handed weapon, a one handed weapon using two hands, or a primary natural weapon that adds 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier on damage rolls. This bonus to damage is halved (–50%) if you are making an attack with an off-hand weapon or secondary natural weapon.
--
So why do you have to take a feat for Power Attack while you get to flank for free? If anything it seems like it would take more training to coordinate attacks with another person than it would to sacrifice accuracy to swing harder.
I often feel like when I'm using a martial character I have to take feats in order to be able to do something that a real person in the setting would be able to do without hyper-specialized training. Imagine you have a character that's proficient with a whip. What's one of the first things you think of? For me, it's the Indiana Jones whip grappling hook swing maneuver. I know how to use a whip, so can I do it? Maybe some kind of dexterity check? Haha, nope, you get to take three more feats after gaining whip proficiency before you can even try.
How different would a martial play if all full BAB characters had access to all or most of the combat feats all the time, with (say) a -2 or -3 to hit if they invoke a feat that isn't on their character sheet? Barring some infinite power combo I don't think it would really be too crazy.
Most of the rules were copied and pasted from D&D 3.5, but PF made some adjustments. So basically anything you could do without a feat in 3.5 you can do in Pathfinder, and anything you need a feat or class ability to do in 3.5 also requires a feat or class ability in Pathfinder.
Part of their marketing was to support the 3.5 players who were upset that 4th edition was created.
I have one curiosity.
A list of things one cannot do without a talent/feat in Pathfinder.
Not official, but I think feats are supposed to be inherently more powerful than any base mechanic. For instance, fighting defensively is a base option but has a horrible cost, but combat expertise is a feat which gives better results because of specific training. Then Crane Style yeilds even better results but is an entire feat chain.
Now the rules fall apart where most feats wouldn't be broken as core mechanics unless they are hidden behind high level prerequisites. GTWF is a good show of this, because a -10 for a new attack is just checking for crits by the time you qualify. Improved Combat Maneuver feats also show this, because most of them don't have severe effects if they succeed (dirty trick might, trip might, grapple does, others usually don't), and many become immune to your feats.
I have one curiosity.
A list of things one cannot do without a talent/feat in Pathfinder.A few things off-hand:
Deflect attacks. (Deflect arrows) Hitting and missing are different from this.
Actually keep moving after hitting someone on a charging mount rather than just 'seemingly' coming to a halt. (Ride-by Attack)
Fire while moving. (Shot on the Run)
'Cleave' through a foe and hit another one. (Cleave, though it seems to work different mechanically now.)
Swing your weapon wildly around in a circle becoming a danger to everyone. (Whirlwind Attack)
Stun somebody with a punch. (Stunning Fist)
Be harder to hit when you're 'moving'. (Mobility, Windstance.) Also included, is running which makes you easier to hit (no Dex) when you're moving faster (unless you have Run)
Ready an action to attack the appendage of an enemy attacking from Reach (Strike Back).
Lunge (Lunge)
Slice an arrow out of the air (Cut From the Air)
Be mobile (Spring Attack, Outslug Style, etc)
Reliably apply status effects besides Shaken (Dazing Assault and its ilk)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A big one for me is the prehensile whip trait:
Benefit: You can use a whip as if it were a rope with a grappling hook at the end. Attaching your whip is a standard action, but detaching it is a full-round action.
This is stupid and should be something every table allows by default. I don't think anyone takes a whip and doesn't expect to be able to swing across a pit like Indiana Jones.
It also shouldn't take as long as it does.
|
It's actually harder then you might think to do the whole "Indiana Jones" swing. It's not just cracking the whip (which it's self is harder then you might think). It's knowing exactly how much force to swing the whip with, knowing how to pull it back, being able to aim well enough to secure your 'grapple', knowing how to flick the whip so it comes loose from the projection... There's more involved then just knowing how to swing a whip without hurting yourself.
Also, go back and watch those movies again. He does spend about six seconds using his whip as a grapple, then retrieving it afterwords. Actually, think he spends a little longer then that in the movies releasing his whip and then re-coiling it. And as I recall, he doesn't just flick out the whip, he has to stop and figure out where to secure the whip to first.
Remember folks, bullwhips were never designed to be used for swinging across pits.
And human fists were never designed to bludgeon through six inches of steel, yet any character with Improved Unarmed Strike can do it.
Applying realism to this game is a fool's errand, particularly when it's for selective nonsense like this.
"I can't flick my mouse into my hand, therefore weapon cords need nerfing!"