Provoking an enemy to attack you.

[Eroz]

A player ask me if there is a way (skill check for example) to try to make an enemy focus on attacking you instead of your allies. I think there isnt really a mechanic like that, except maybe the "Come and Get Me" rage power for the barbarian. But I wanted to try to make a mechanic for this. I was thinking of him using a Bluff skill check vs a Sense Motive check (or Will save if they dont have a bonus for Sense Motive) from the opponent.
What do you guys think? Would it be too op? Should the Bluff check be a free action or a standard action?

Thanks in advance.

[Falcar]

There is the antagonize feat, though I know that feat is not often well liked for some strange interactions.

[LordKailas]

The feat Antagonize lets you use diplomacy and intimidate in ways to encourage the enemy to target you. Since both applications require a standard action and there's a chance it will fail I don't think its OP.

There is also the feat Call Out which IMO shouldn't be a feat because it's something that IMO any character should be able to do. As it depends heavily on the situation if it even makes sense for the creature to enter a duel with you.

Between the two I think Antagonize is probably closer to what you're looking for.

[Cavall]

There is also the spell compel hostility which makes someone waste an attack on you.

Its personal but I was using it for my hunter and his much more heavily armoured pet through share spells. The pet had few reasons to use a swift action otherwise.

[Eroz]

LordKailas wrote:

The feat Antagonize lets you use diplomacy and intimidate in ways to encourage the enemy to target you. Since both applications require a standard action and there's a chance it will fail I don't think its OP.

There is also the feat Call Out which IMO shouldn't be a feat because it's something that IMO any character should be able to do. As it depends heavily on the situation if it even makes sense for the creature to enter a duel with you.

Between the two I think Antagonize is probably closer to what you're looking for.

Thanks a lot!

[Eroz]

Falcar wrote:

There is the antagonize feat, though I know that feat is not often well liked for some strange interactions.

Thanks a lot!

[Cavall]

Also there is broken wing gambit feat which makes you a more tempting target.

The bodyguard feat which allows a boost on ac for your allies being attacked. If built properly you could make allies all but unhittable and making attacking you the only real option.

[Quixote]

A feat should certainly make you better at it, but it seems like something everyone can do.

I have let players attempt similar things as alternate uses for the feint and demoralize actions--either you shake them up so badly they lash out due to fear or you dupe them into thinking they have an opening when they do not.

[Scott Wilhelm]

Archon Style draws attacks toward you.

[Slim Jim]

Falcar wrote:

There is the antagonize feat, though I know that feat is not often well liked for some strange interactions.

The main problem with Antagonize is that the thing is written with enough arbitrary opt-out clauses that any GM who doesn't want it to work at that moment will have it not work at that moment.

[LordKailas]

Slim Jim wrote:

Falcar wrote:

There is the antagonize feat, though I know that feat is not often well liked for some strange interactions.

The main problem with Antagonize is that the thing is written with enough arbitrary opt-out clauses that any GM who doesn't want it to work at that moment will have it not work at that moment.

This is true. I played a character that combined antagonize with in harm's way with the goal of getting enemies to attack her instead of her allies. My ace in the hole though was the eldritch heritage{serpentine} It's real easy to convince the enemy that you're the biggest threat when you start hitting them with a high dc poison that does con damage every round. Sure, it's only so many times per day, but the enemy doesn't know that....

She was a fun character to play.