Starfinder versus Pathfinder vote: Combat maneuvers.


General Discussion


Alright My last two seemed to be in favor of the changes I think this one will be a bit more divisive. I think most maybe just some of us are familiar with how CMB and CMD work. I think it was easier then the 3.5 combat maneuvers. However the 3 feats to make it work well was a bit of a turn off. Plus how often could you use some of them unless your fighting against mostly not monstrous enemies. For starfinder we no longer provoke from combat maneuvers anyways. However to suceed on a combat maneuver requires some serious rolling or out bonusing of your enemy at KAC+8. If you need a 10 to hit you need an 18! to succeed on a combat maneuver. With the feat (at least it only takes the one per combat maneuver) you merely need a 14. More hp does mean that combat maneuvers may be more likely to be useful since you probably won't be just as likely to drop an enemy as disarm them. I think it could be improved more but at least KAC+8 its simplier however I wish they would of kept its own name cause typing KAC+8 every time seems silly.

What do you guys think favorite to vote your preference below. I will be making a third option for could be improved more for this one but still vote for the preference of the two and then throw an extra favorite into the third option if that is how you feel.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Pathfinder CMB and CMD vote here.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Starfinder KAC+8 Vote here.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

Both are flawed and need improvement vote here!


Also if anyone wants to post some ideas on how to improve it I would like to hear the suggestions.

Grand Lodge

I sorta dislike the whole "x system vs y system" threads tbh. Also, you're not gonna get any sort of significant data from these as forum goers only make up an incredibly small fraction of players, and those who reply are an even smaller fraction of forum goers. Response bias and all that jazz.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jurassic Pratt wrote:
I sorta dislike the whole "x system vs y system" threads tbh. Also, you're not gonna get any sort of significant data from these as forum goers only make up an incredibly small fraction of players, and those who reply are an even smaller fraction of forum goers. Response bias and all that jazz.

I'm sorry you dislike it. I would suggest you avoid them in that case. I'm just seeing what people think of the changes. have a nice day.

Grand Lodge

Oh, I wasn't suggesting you stop. Was just voicing an opinion and making sure it was understood that polling of this type can't be taken as an accurate indicator of the overall opinion of a given populace.


Jurassic Pratt wrote:
Oh, I wasn't suggesting you stop. Was just voicing an opinion and making sure it was understood that polling of this type can't be taken as an accurate indicator of the overall opinion of a given populace.

Yes I am aware.


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So I think that Starfinder did a better job of combat maneuvers better. I think that they AUTOMATICALLY is absurd.

I think that they shouldn't provoke. But if someone does have a improved feat than it should provoke if they don't have the improved than provokes.

So if Soldier A doesn't have an improved disarm, but Soldier B does. Now if Soldier A tries to perform a disarm on Soldier B than Soldier B get an AoO. Now if neither or both have an improved disarm than it doesn't provoke.

Not to keen on the 8 + KAC. I think it should be against the KAC. Basically if I hit I instead get to replace a combat maneuver in place of an attack. I can see the +8 being a bit more challenging as you really aren't hitting the actual person.

Now I like the rework of disarm, and reposition. Reposition now moves adjacent instead of the opposite side. Increases by 5 ft for every 5 I think you beat it by. I like when you disarm and free hand you can take the item,. Then grapple with taking something off of them.

Jurassic Pratt, really if you don't like the polling than don't comment. We really don't care about you opinion about how accurate something is. I never understand why people post nonsense like that. Who cares on what fraction of people comment. That is irrelevant.What is relevant are the people who do.

Vidmaster7 I actually quite enjoy these polls as I get to hear other peoples opinion and get different takes and ultimately get something out of them, maybe see something new to try or maybe I missed something.


Thank you for the input Micheal.
I agree the +8 does seem like they made it to hard. I also feel its weird that your BAB isn't taken into consideration versus being disarmed. I think its for simplicity sake. Maybe there will be a feat later on that lets you factor in skill to avoid being disarmed somehow. Same for trip and acrobatics, strength and reposition etc. I feel we are losing something for the simplicity of it. I don't mind the AOO thing so much.

As for the polling part I have taken several statistics classes so I am aware on the limitation of the polling I'm doing however I do not plan to run any analyses of the date I'm "collecting" I'm just using it to stir people into conversations about the differences. I'm mostly interested in their personal opinions of the changes.

I appreciate you trying to make sure I'm using proper method but it is unnecessary and we can let it go there.

Lets stay on topic from here on.


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I do like the fact that they bundled 2 feats from PF into one and now Improved Combat Maneuver now gives a +4 to the check. I'm not saying to avoid a combat maneuver, that would really require skill. Maybe have a feat later on that states you immense training doesn't allow you to be disarmed. I would think this would be a super higher level feat.

I really like the new system on paper. Can't wait to see it in action. I know in pathfinder, where I play if you don't have an improved version, we generally don't take the time to do a COMbat Maneuver. Just easier to beat them down quicker. I have a Core Dwarf Barbarian(PFS) that loves to bull rush but I can't spare the feat. So he provokes, but he can be a bit psychotic.

Liberty's Edge

Bear in mind that NPC/Monster AC in Starfinder is intentionally notably lower than PCs of the same level, while their attacks are higher, making combat maneuvers much more likely than if you just stole the +8 thing for Pathfinder.

The CR 1 Space Pirate only has a KAC of 13, for example. Meaning that a combat focused 1st level character probably has close to a 50% chance of succeeding on a combat maneuver against her if they have the Improved Combat Maneuver Feat (+8 to +11 vs. AC 21).

Likewise, she has a +8 on her best attack, which is ranged and not suitable for melee, but a CR 1 creature focusing on melee and with an Improved Combat Maneuver Feat has a +12 to go up against the maximum 24-25 KAC+8 Pcs have at that level.

If translating directly to Pathfinder and the ACs of creatures in that, dropping the bonus from +8 to +4 is strongly recommended.


Yeah That is one thing I've been noticing strongly. NPC's are made intentionally weaker then PC's and the abilities spells etc. are aware of this and take advantage while if you had the pc's fight Other pc's a lot of the mechanics would not work as well.

Liberty's Edge

Vidmaster7 wrote:
Yeah That is one thing I've been noticing strongly. NPC's are made intentionally weaker then PC's and the abilities spells etc. are aware of this and take advantage while if you had the pc's fight Other pc's a lot of the mechanics would not work as well.

They're not weaker per se. They're different.

They've got lower AC but commensurately higher attack bonuses (rarely will a PC ever have as much attack as a monster of equivalent CR). Their skills are also on par with highly optimized PCs of their level, and their saves actually look pretty similar to a PCs. Even HP doesn't look that different than a PC's HP+Stm.

It's mostly lower AC (sometimes much lower) and higher attack.


Interesting.


I had an interesting experience with grapple in one of my test games. I had converted a fire crab (a little partial CR beast) who was eating the electricity out of a console. Now as per PF rules if it hit with an attack, it got the chance to grapple. The PC being grabbed had a manuvere defence of 21 or so.

The crab rolled a nat 20.

So of course they want this thing off. It's dealing automatic damage every round. Except now it's KAC + 8. The number the to counter grapple was 22. This would require a 19+. Suddenly a little crab with 5 HP was an immortal leech of stamina and hit points with a vice like grip.

So, KAC + 8 is probably not balanced for grab attacks. Perhaps a house rule is needed.


Tie Len wrote:

I had an interesting experience with grapple in one of my test games. I had converted a fire crab (a little partial CR beast) who was eating the electricity out of a console. Now as per PF rules if it hit with an attack, it got the chance to grapple. The PC being grabbed had a manuvere defence of 21 or so.

The crab rolled a nat 20.

So of course they want this thing off. It's dealing automatic damage every round. Except now it's KAC + 8. The number the to counter grapple was 22. This would require a 19+. Suddenly a little crab with 5 HP was an immortal leech of stamina and hit points with a vice like grip.

So, KAC + 8 is probably not balanced for grab attacks. Perhaps a house rule is needed.

That is very interesting. I don't have the book in front of me and they may have changed this since your test game but If I remember correctly I think they have to keep making a grapple check per round to maintain the grapple. Ill have read over it again later.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Tie Len wrote:

I had an interesting experience with grapple in one of my test games. I had converted a fire crab (a little partial CR beast) who was eating the electricity out of a console. Now as per PF rules if it hit with an attack, it got the chance to grapple. The PC being grabbed had a manuvere defence of 21 or so.

The crab rolled a nat 20.

So of course they want this thing off. It's dealing automatic damage every round. Except now it's KAC + 8. The number the to counter grapple was 22. This would require a 19+. Suddenly a little crab with 5 HP was an immortal leech of stamina and hit points with a vice like grip.

So, KAC + 8 is probably not balanced for grab attacks. Perhaps a house rule is needed.

That is very interesting. I don't have the book in front of me and they may have changed this since your test game but If I remember correctly I think they have to keep making a grapple check per round to maintain the grapple. Ill have read over it again later.

Yep, just checked, they have to keep making the grapple check to maintain.

Also noticed some new things.

Grappling wrote:
You hold the target in place. You must have at least one hand free to perform a grapple combat maneuver. Your target has the grappled condition, meaning she can’t move from her current space and takes further penalties until she either uses a standard action to attempt a grapple combat maneuver to grapple you (giving you the grappled condition) or uses the escape task of the Acrobatics skill to break free. If the result of your attack roll equals or exceeds the target’s KAC + 13, the target is instead pinned for the same duration, and she can’t take any actions that involve moving her limbs other than to attempt to escape. The grappled or pinned condition lasts until the end of your next turn, unless you renew it on your next turn with another grapple combat maneuver. The condition ends immediately if you move away. As long as you have one target grappled or pinned, you cannot attempt to grapple another. The grappled and pinned conditions are further detailed in Conditions on pages 276–277. When you renew a grapple, you can remove one item from the target’s body that can be easily accessed, including most weapons and equipment (but not worn armor). Doing so immediately ends the grapple.
Grappled wrote:
You are restrained by a creature, effect, or trap. You can’t move, and you take a –2 penalty to your Armor Class, attack rolls, Reflex saving throws, initiative checks, and Dexterity-based skill and ability checks, except those made to grapple your opponent in turn or to escape a grapple (see Grapple on page 246). In addition, you can’t take actions that require two hands (or other limbs) to perform. You can’t make attacks of opportunity. You can’t use Stealth to hide from the creature grappling you, even if a special ability allows you to hide when you normally couldn’t. If you become invisible, through a spell or other ability, you gain a +2 circumstance bonus to your check to escape being grappled, but you receive no other benefit.
Pinned wrote:
You are tightly bound and can take few actions. While you are pinned, you can’t move and are flat-footed. You also take an additional –4 penalty to your Armor Class, attack rolls, Reflex saving throws, initiative checks, and Dexterity-based skill and ability checks (these penalties replace those from the grappled condition and also apply to attempts to grapple your opponent or free yourself; see Grapple on page 246). You are limited in the actions that you can take. You cannot take any action that requires the use of any of your limbs, but you can always attempt to free yourself, usually through an attack roll or Acrobatics check. You can’t make attacks of opportunity while you are pinned, but you can still take verbal and mental actions, such as spellcasting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So helpful^


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I try ^w^


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ahh so it's the crabs job to hang on. My poor player...

Community / Forums / Starfinder / Starfinder General Discussion / Starfinder versus Pathfinder vote: Combat maneuvers. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Starfinder General Discussion