Another thing to consider is there are different levels of cartoon physics.
I guess I mean the game in my head doesnt resemble wiley coyote and roadrunner where without explanation you just accept wiley can keep walking off a cliff and not fall until he realizes hes not standing on ground.
I know no writer or director would make trip this common and easy to do. It would look terrible in a story or movie.
It's not tripping or grappling a dragon or some huge creature that is a problem, it is the frequency with which it is done and the extreme effectiveness of the tactic to make it so ubiquitous.
I find it odd that so many seem to enjoy this in their mind's eye. Tripping nearly every fight setting off reaction attacks as the target stands up or it gets destroyed laying their on the ground.
I can't recall any edition of the game encouraging this much us of a single combat maneuver.
This level of repetition of the same combat tactic seems not so cool in the mind's eye. I guess I should chalk it up to playing a game. It is true that casters often use the same spells over and over again to great effect. I guess trip should be seen the same.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
one funny thing i noticed is that between all the talk about imaginary weapon and fire ray starlit span, i'm almost sure that Winter bolt does even more damage than Amped Imaginary Weapon or Fire ray, and has AOE potential (granted, fire-friendly potential as well because of that), or a bit less damage than them but giving a slow 1/2 to the enemy.
really good spell, weird that i have never seem people mentioning as a option atleast.
I know no writer or director would make trip this common and easy to do. It would look terrible in a story or movie.People get tripped or knocked down in action movies all the time. And they all seem to have kip up.
But IMO movies are a very poor point of comparison, because nobody wants to watch the same repeated maneuver over and over again. In contrast in a game, people want consistent regular predictable rules that they *can* apply over and over again. You would have to create artificial barriers to use for every maneuver, like "only once per scene", to get a movie-like sequence where the heroes are constantly doing different crazy things. As you yourself say: This level of repetition of the same combat tactic seems not so cool in the mind's eye. I guess I should chalk it up to playing a game.
Now, there is another option, which is to go abstract on mechanics and allow a great deal of reskinning. You have the mechanic, it creates mechanical effect X, and you let the player describe it as doing something cinematically different every time. "I jump over the table and crash the vase over their head, disorienting them" has the same effect as "I sweep their leg and send them tumbling." Same -2, same need to spend the action, etc. But let it be different in terms of description. Not everyone likes that though. I fear we are demanding to have our cake and eat it too: people are asking for maneuvers, that have a predictable effect, with no action tax, that are valuable and worth doing in a wide variety of circumstances (otherwise, it's that evil "conditional")...but which aren't used by PCs repetitiously? That's kind of a paradoxical ask.
I like this actually, the story is in how you narrate.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
one funny thing i noticed is that between all the talk about imaginary weapon and fire ray starlit span, i'm almost sure that Winter bolt does even more damage than Amped Imaginary Weapon or Fire ray, and has AOE potential (granted, fire-friendly potential as well because of that), or a bit less damage than them but giving a slow 1/2 to the enemy.
really good spell, weird that i have never seem people mentioning as a option atleast.
It does less damage, but has action denial which is very useful. You have to hit with both the d8 main damage and the d12 to do more damage and that can be circumvented with one interact action by the enemy. I would assume realistically this ends up being a sort of action denial more than bonus damage. If the damage goes off, you're right and in some circumstances it may do just that but I don't see it happening all that frequently
I did a nice 112 damage amped imaginary weapon regular hit yesterday. The monster didn't even make it to my character to get a hit in. I'm waiting for another crit to hit that 200 plus crit. That would be nice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
one funny thing i noticed is that between all the talk about imaginary weapon and fire ray starlit span, i'm almost sure that Winter bolt does even more damage than Amped Imaginary Weapon or Fire ray, and has AOE potential (granted, fire-friendly potential as well because of that), or a bit less damage than them but giving a slow 1/2 to the enemy.
really good spell, weird that i have never seem people mentioning as a option atleast.
It has its place. As a player I'm not too fond of it as the side effect can cause you problems. Some of my fellow players really like it for the same reason. I don't typically bring it up in power discussions as it is not a simple comparison.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can't recall any edition of the game encouraging this much us of a single combat maneuver.
Was it 3.5 or pf1 (or both) that had the ultra tripper with spiked chain builds? Ironically, trip always felt like the big maneuver even if maneuvers weren't actually necessary with all the other things martials could get up to.
one funny thing i noticed is that between all the talk about imaginary weapon and fire ray starlit span, i'm almost sure that Winter bolt does even more damage than Amped Imaginary Weapon or Fire ray, and has AOE potential (granted, fire-friendly potential as well because of that), or a bit less damage than them but giving a slow 1/2 to the enemy.
really good spell, weird that i have never seem people mentioning as a option atleast.
Even on a critical success, the initial bolt does regular damage. The only advantage from a crit hit for winter's bolt is an extra interact action to remove it and the explosion does double damage at the end of the creature's next turn. It could already be dead by then.
Imaginary weaopon and fire ray can crit immediately and no action to eliminate the secondary damage or waiting period.
Imaginary weapon has the force trait. Very few things are immune or resistant to it.
I can't recall any edition of the game encouraging this much us of a single combat maneuver.Was it 3.5 or pf1 (or both) that had the ultra tripper with spiked chain builds? Ironically, trip always felt like the big maneuver even if maneuvers weren't actually necessary with all the other things martials could get up to.
It did have reach trip builds and improved trip. But none of those mattered because critting hard was the way to go. Power attack or similar feat, max stat, wide crit range, hasted, buffed with attack roll, smash the thing. Not much of a chance to live to stand up.
It was already probably rendered useless with a save or suck spell.
3.5 and PF1 had other issues far worse than anything in PF2.
Grapple in PF1 could be really brutal because you could up it to full restrain. Casters were particularly vulnerable to grapple until obtaining the nearly required ring of freedom of movement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can't recall any edition of the game encouraging this much us of a single combat maneuver.Was it 3.5 or pf1 (or both) that had the ultra tripper with spiked chain builds? Ironically, trip always felt like the big maneuver even if maneuvers weren't actually necessary with all the other things martials could get up to.
I believe it was 3.0/3.5.
Paizo removed the "reach, but can also attack/threaten adjacent" for spiked chain in PF1.
Tripping was still a very good maneuver in PF1, but players migrated to trip weapons with better criticals (hooked lance, scythe, gnome hooked hammer) for the DPR. Or possibly whip for tripping with 15 ft reach.
I can't recall any edition of the game encouraging this much us of a single combat maneuver.Was it 3.5 or pf1 (or both) that had the ultra tripper with spiked chain builds? Ironically, trip always felt like the big maneuver even if maneuvers weren't actually necessary with all the other things martials could get up to.
In 3.X trip was far worse. Trip=dead vs. a trip-build/Combat Reflexes, often without teamwork, but ridiculous with even a few generic martial allies alongside (since everybody had AoOs, plus many martials had Combat Reflexes). Strike them when you trip them, strike them again when they stand, add more strikes if it had been a full attack, and that feat that let you strike enemies when they hit the ground too (which many assumed didn't stack, yet nope, WoC said it did). So imbalanced, and far too large a penalty if you stayed prone as opposed to now when the penalty doesn't stack w/ similar conditions, multiple Reactions are rare, etc.
Had two mid-high level trip PCs fight together for the first time much to their delight as they kept triggering more attacks for each other. They killed multiple at-level enemies per round (if available). Three ninjas in module? Hah, tossed three ninjas per PC and a horde more off-camera shooting flights of arrows at anyone in the open courtyard (which was simple enough to avoid). Easy-peasy for the party (albeit fun due to the sheer spectacle).
Trip's viable, and as many have suggested, its power comes mainly from its synergy with teamwork. Teamwork's king, though yes, trip is probably the simplest form right after flanking.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, trip was an order of magnitude more powerful in 3.X, I think the only reason why it doesn't stick at the front of mind for some was due to the fact that Caster superiority and the shenanigans that came from that reigned so supreme that it made anything a martial could do look like horseplay.
Yeah, trip was an order of magnitude more powerful in 3.X, I think the only reason why it doesn't stick at the front of mind for some was due to the fact that Caster superiority and the shenanigans that came from that reigned so supreme that it made anything a martial could do look like horseplay.
I found that martials killed everything without trip. You didn't need reaction attacks to absolutely massacre everything.
A trip was a maneuver that did no damage. Why not just smash it full on rather than spend time tripping.
My buddy tried an Improved Trip monk a few times. It was a waste of time in PF1. The amount of damage martials did in that game was nutty. Pounce Barbarians, Spellstrike Magus, 2-hand fighters, monk archers. Trip was superfluous in PF1 and 3E.
|
|
I'm not sure we were playing the same type of game, but then again, a decade back my group was neither capable of nor permitted to do overt and silly munchkin stuff - couple that with my knowledge that the CR system was just not functional and absolutely EVERYTHING that was thrown at the party had to either have a massive tactical leg up while being higher level, outnumber the party massively, or simply just have a much higher CR than the core rules or AP stats suggested was reasonable.
The reason tripping was so big was because the creatures that stuck around and were more than mooks had to absolute HP sponges if they were going to actually threaten the party in any meaningful way for more than two rounds given how insanely potent certain spells (save or suck spells in particular) and SLAs were. If a Martial could create a trip opportunity and land it they'd then start a domino stand up interrupt auto trip lockdown that kept them from doing much more than using an unarmed attack/light weapon plink on their own turn.
Martials in PF1 were okay, if built well quite competent but none of them held a candle to what spellcasters did. Also, lumping a NOVA magus into "martial" is completely out of pocket on the order of classifying a clementine as an apple instead of an orange. Just about anything a martial could hope to achieve at their highest highs could be emulated or surpassed either by one or more spell effects, magic items, or in many cases simply choosing the correct polymorph effect that gave better stats than your funny barbarian friend had to grind for.
In PF1 for our groups, tripping was superfluous as was grappling.
Our group had full access to the books minus third party material.
So we had plenty of scimitar magus, beast totem barbs with superstition, paladin/monk multiclass combos that never missed their saves, monk zen archers, and every other great martial combo with spell perfection wizards, orc cross-blooded sorcs, clerics, master summoners, and the like.
The martials were already brutally powerful, then toss in the easy to use group haste, lots of buffs, stacked ability enhancing items, and things didn't live that long.
I was giving monsters 4000 or so hit points for higher level creatures just so the fights would last a while.
Yes. Casters were obscenely overpowered at high level.
Martials were only grossly overpowered.
The only reason anyone considers there to be a huge caster versus martial disparity is because of how powerful casters were. In PF1/3E there was also a monster vs player disparity even for martials.
In that world, Trip or Improved Trip was just a barely noticeable additional maneuver. A greater beast totem barbarian with a reach weapon with superstition beefed up stats with stat items with combat reflexes and come and get me didn't have many things given them a problem. Hasted they had something like 8 or 10 attacks per round. They crit on a 17 to 20.
I also made a falcata two-weapon warrior. That was pretty fun and completely brutal.
Your Gm must have really throttled down martial combinations not to allow them to rip the game apart and finding trip all that useful. Martials had way more stuff they could do that didn't much require trip or care about it.
The PF1 swashbuckler...what a nasty class. PF2 swashbuckler is a hollow shell of that class in PF1.
Trip people, attacking their legs or using some kind of martial art is pretty easily even in reality. For example Jiu Jitsu or Judo fighter can easily Trip most untrained/low-trained people even the most heaviest ones. Even trained ones have difficulties to not be knocked down against well trained adversaries.
So I don't see a big contextual problem with martial frequently tripping opponents and see in gameplay side its just a good debuff that str athletic trained martials can do at cost of make their nexts attacks more difficult to hit usually making it good for teamwork than for yourself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's also the fact that what we call the Trip Maneuver is describing any action that knocks an enemy prone. The Knockdown feat is clearly just hitting your opponent in the chest hard enough they tumble over.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It does less damage, but has action denial which is very useful. You have to hit with both the d8 main damage and the d12 to do more damage and that can be circumvented with one interact action by the enemy. I would assume realistically this ends up being a sort of action denial more than bonus damage. If the damage goes off, you're right and in some circumstances it may do just that but I don't see it happening all that frequentlyone funny thing i noticed is that between all the talk about imaginary weapon and fire ray starlit span, i'm almost sure that Winter bolt does even more damage than Amped Imaginary Weapon or Fire ray, and has AOE potential (granted, fire-friendly potential as well because of that), or a bit less damage than them but giving a slow 1/2 to the enemy.
really good spell, weird that i have never seem people mentioning as a option atleast.
It becomes quite a bit more likely when you remember that interact has the manipulate trait (which I don't seem to recall changing in the remaster?) and so they'd be losing an action to potentially trigger reactive strikes from martials, who tend to take it wherever possible.
It becomes quite a bit more likely when you remember that interact has the manipulate trait (which I don't seem to recall changing in the remaster?) and so they'd be losing an action to potentially trigger reactive strikes from martials, who tend to take it wherever possible.It does less damage, but has action denial which is very useful. You have to hit with both the d8 main damage and the d12 to do more damage and that can be circumvented with one interact action by the enemy. I would assume realistically this ends up being a sort of action denial more than bonus damage. If the damage goes off, you're right and in some circumstances it may do just that but I don't see it happening all that frequentlyone funny thing i noticed is that between all the talk about imaginary weapon and fire ray starlit span, i'm almost sure that Winter bolt does even more damage than Amped Imaginary Weapon or Fire ray, and has AOE potential (granted, fire-friendly potential as well because of that), or a bit less damage than them but giving a slow 1/2 to the enemy.
really good spell, weird that i have never seem people mentioning as a option atleast.
If your martials are in range to hammer it with reactive strikes, they are likely in range to get hit by the explosion. If the target even lives long enough that a bunch of martials and a starlit span archer hitting it.
|
|
Deer Instinct is absolutely overpowered, not compared to other martials or other barbarian instincts, but compared to all other animal options. Getting free reach on your main attack is so good, andother animal instincts just get nothing even remotely comparable. I hope remaster will give you a mechanical reason to choose shark over deer outside of the incredible rare campaign in the oceans.
Frog's Tongue attack also gets reach. But with lower damage and no Grapple, it's far less popular.
Interestingly, the usual ways to increase reach for a martial (reach weapon and Giant Barbarian MC) are NOT available to the Animal Barbarian.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Deer Instinct is absolutely overpowered, not compared to other martials or other barbarian instincts, but compared to all other animal options. Getting free reach on your main attack is so good, andother animal instincts just get nothing even remotely comparable. I hope remaster will give you a mechanical reason to choose shark over deer outside of the incredible rare campaign in the oceans.
I feel like this is an issue with a lot of subclass material. Paizo does a decent-ish job at overall class balance, but they seem to get really lazy with competing options inside a class.
Like the deer, shark, snake, and ape attacks are identical in every way except the deer gains reach at level 7. That is the only difference.
Clearly like, zero attempt at any kind of balance here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know no writer or director would make trip this common and easy to do. It would look terrible in a story or movie.
It's not tripping or grappling a dragon or some huge creature that is a problem, it is the frequency with which it is done and the extreme effectiveness of the tactic to make it so ubiquitous.
I find it odd that so many seem to enjoy this in their mind's eye. Tripping nearly every fight setting off reaction attacks as the target stands up or it gets destroyed laying their on the ground.
I can't recall any edition of the game encouraging this much us of a single combat maneuver.
This level of repetition of the same combat tactic seems not so cool in the mind's eye. I guess I should chalk it up to playing a game. It is true that casters often use the same spells over and over again to great effect. I guess trip should be seen the same.
You have made your point like ten times already? We disagree.
So do you find strike repetitive? Its the same problem it is up to you the player and the gm to describe your action. It doesn't have to be the same. You can describe it as prone or off balance or just badly aligned or out of position. You don't have to be the same all the time.
Trip is the wrong tactic in some situations. If you are doing it all the time you are doing it wrong.
Take some other maneuvers and use them sometimes. Have some other tactics.
Stop building or playing one dimensionally. It is on you as much as it is on the system.
Every now and then a GM should be putting you up against monsters and situations that your plan A will not work against.
Build mechanically different PCs.
Like the big difference between a game like Pathfinder and actual action cinema is that fights in Pathfinder are generally about the same length, whereas in action movies you have enemies who are easily dispatched in one exchange but the kitchen fight in the Raid 2 is 7 excruciating minutes with just two combatants.
You could see the ubiquity of trip in PF2 as mimicking how often people get knocked down in action movies. Like watch the Club Fight scene on Ong-Bak and count how many times people get knocked down. Where Pathfinder breaks from action cinema is, rather, the ubiquity of reactive strike in Pathfinder. You never see an action hero (or villain) attempting to hit their opponent when they get up, instead in the language of action cinema "one person is knocked prone" simply means the other person is the victor of the latest exchange, and their opponent is almost always allowed to get up to reset to neutral for the next exchange.
So if we wanted to nerf trip, you would give more people the option to stand up from prone without provoking a reactive strike. It's still a potentially valuable tactic (since they waste actions getting up that they aren't using to hurt the party) but it's less of a "kick them when they're down" strategy. Or like, give more antagonists the "Kip Up" feat or just a weaker ability that lets them, for one action, recover from prone without provoking.
I know no writer or director would make trip this common and easy to do. It would look terrible in a story or movie.
It's not tripping or grappling a dragon or some huge creature that is a problem, it is the frequency with which it is done and the extreme effectiveness of the tactic to make it so ubiquitous.
I find it odd that so many seem to enjoy this in their mind's eye. Tripping nearly every fight setting off reaction attacks as the target stands up or it gets destroyed laying their on the ground.
I can't recall any edition of the game encouraging this much us of a single combat maneuver.
This level of repetition of the same combat tactic seems not so cool in the mind's eye. I guess I should chalk it up to playing a game. It is true that casters often use the same spells over and over again to great effect. I guess trip should be seen the same.
You have made your point like ten times already? We disagree.
So do you find strike repetitive? Its the same problem it is up to you the player and the gm to describe your action. It doesn't have to be the same. You can describe it as prone or off balance or just badly aligned or out of position. You don't have to be the same all the time.
Trip is the wrong tactic in some situations. If you are doing it all the time you are doing it wrong.
Take some other maneuvers and use them sometimes. Have some other tactics.
Stop building or playing one dimensionally. It is on you as much as it is on the system.
Every now and then a GM should be putting you up against monsters and situations that your plan A will not work against.
Build mechanically different PCs.
When a single build or ability is the best option 90 percent plus of the time, it is on the system.
Trip with reaction attacks is a god maneuver ability that trivializes encounters.
Strike and Trip are not even in the same ballpark. The comparison is inappropriate. Knocking something over again and again and again looks ridiculous, but that's a purely subjective point of view on my part.
What is not subjective is that trip trivializes encounters and provides far too much of a benefit for the investment against far too many enemies. I believe the game would be greatly improved by weakening trip.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When a single build or ability is the best option 90 percent plus of the time, it is on the system.
Then it is still on you and your GM to make adjustments to your game to fix this. You know Paizo isn't going to change to match your opinions. Given that there is moderate disagreement, you should be looking at what other options are out there.
Trip with reaction attacks is a god maneuver ability that trivializes encounters.
It is not. It is merely one strong combination out of several. The GM does not have to trigger those reaction attacks or engage in bad tactics.
Think that usually only martials have AoO so for a mostly full martial party is a nice way to use reactions, but in a mixed party let’s say of 5, with 2 casters, 2 martials, and maybe the last one a mixed one or a Rogue without AoO is not so clear.
Oh yeah. I remembered one of the most overpowered things to date because of the remaster
New strength apex item that if you crit succeed in a grapple. The enemy instantly suffocates, is so overpowered that i'm almost sure that was intended to "need to hold your breath" or something like that.
Basically if you crit a grapple. Any enemy that needs to breath just.. dies
Why do they die? Dont they just start losing air each round?
Why do they die? Dont they just start losing air each round?
The book uses 'suffocate' to describe what happens after you run out of air.
So critting on that grapple check would cause the target to instantly fall unconscious and be subject to ramping fortitude saves to avoid damage or death.
Why do they die? Dont they just start losing air each round?The book uses 'suffocate' to describe what happens after you run out of air.
The book and the rules do, the writers of abilities that cite "suffocate" often seem confused on the matter, though. (This may be fairer PF1 and SF concern than PF2. Or maybe it's just that all system players/GMs struggle to accept that the rules/intent really mean what they say.)
|
|
Oh yeah. I remembered one of the most overpowered things to date because of the remaster
New strength apex item that if you crit succeed in a grapple. The enemy instantly suffocates, is so overpowered that i'm almost sure that was intended to "need to hold your breath" or something like that.
Basically if you crit a grapple. Any enemy that needs to breath just.. dies
Well, it's not quite that cut and dry as the target does get automatic fort saves to prevent death but that really doesn't matter much so long as the PC just continues holding onto the unconscious opponent to keep air cut off as eventually, the DC will be impossible to make. Suffocation is a specific PROCESS not the way in which you describe the "act" of being killed by a lack of air and it involves checks and timing.
When you run out of air, you fall unconscious and start suffocating. You can’t recover from being unconscious and must attempt a DC 20 Fortitude save at the end of each of your turns. On a failure, you take 1d10 damage, and on a critical failure, you die. On each check after the first, the DC increases by 5 and the damage by 1d10; these increases are cumulative. Once your access to air is restored, you
stop suffocating and are no longer unconscious (unless you’re at 0 Hit Points).
So yeah, you get them with the Bear Hug Apex item special Action (OF SPECIAL NOTE this is a unique Action and contains a Grapple and cannot be used in PLACE OF a Grapple for other Abilities which is an important distinction), you crit on them and that opponent is just full on out of the combat or if you maintain the hold for at least a few rounds they just straight up die, no Death Effect Trait, no mitigating anything and really only chip damage takes place so it's not like healing conditional effects would help either. Pret-tty nasty.
Ah I see if something is bear hugged it needs to save on those suffocation checks long enough for someone else to save them cause they are out cold.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How can something be fantastic if it is commonplace and easy to accomplish to the point it's probably as commonly taught a maneuver in every fighting school as holding a sword and parrying?
Bit late to the party, but I hope you do realise that wrestling is a legitimate martial art that was taught in medieval fighting schools? And that throws and grappling moves totally are part of fighting, even if both combatants have weapons?
See https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Fechtbuch_(Talhoffer)/Kapitel_8
and https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Fechtbuch_(Talhoffer)/Kapitel_3
It would be more fantastic if people would not be using grabs and trips when fighting. If anything, NPCs enemies are not using them enough usually.
Sure, pulling these moves off against mythical creatures many times your size and weight is the fantastical part, but if our heroes can not defeat these critters, how is not every fight against those ends in a TPK? You don't have a problem with the party defeating that six-limbed, fire-breathing lizard, but you balk at them using all the tricks they learned, including unbalancing (don't need to flip the thing on its back to represent a 'trip'!) and hindering it?
How can something be fantastic if it is commonplace and easy to accomplish to the point it's probably as commonly taught a maneuver in every fighting school as holding a sword and parrying?Bit late to the party, but I hope you do realise that wrestling is a legitimate martial art that was taught in medieval fighting schools? And that throws and grappling moves totally are part of fighting, even if both combatants have weapons?
See https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Fechtbuch_(Talhoffer)/Kapitel_8
and https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Fechtbuch_(Talhoffer)/Kapitel_3
It would be more fantastic if people would not be using grabs and trips when fighting. If anything, NPCs enemies are not using them enough usually.
Sure, pulling these moves off against mythical creatures many times your size and weight is the fantastical part, but if our heroes can not defeat these critters, how is not every fight against those ends in a TPK? You don't have a problem with the party defeating that six-limbed, fire-breathing lizard, but you balk at them using all the tricks they learned, including unbalancing (don't need to flip the thing on its back to represent a 'trip'!) and hindering it?
How hard is this to understand? I do not balk at them using these maneuvers, I balk at their ease of use and commonality that trivializes fights against powerful opponents.
I have Gortle telling me not to use the best maneuver in the game just to break up the monotony. It is clearly the best maneuver in the game and trivializes fights so often as to reach a point of absurdism.
It would be like watching Star Wars with Darth Vader giving one o his deep voice speeches, then getting tripped by Luke while Han waits to hit him as he stands up over and over again. I could make a comedy video of that.
Or The Witch King of Angmar being Mr. Scary until Aragorn runs up and trips him while Gimli smashes him when he stands up three or four times.
A fantasy movie consisting of the PF2 Trip God maneuver would be goofy. The only real reason not to use it would be voluntary non-use as Gortle recommends.
Otherwise, cue video of Smaug getting tripped by Gloin while the other dwarfs AoO him as he stands up.
Cue the movie about Sir Tripsalot, the greatest warrior in all the land, far superior to that dolt Lancelot or his son Gawain. He trippeth and killeth many giants and dragons with his superior trip technique.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
not to use the best maneuver in the game just to break up the monotony.
Just because you have found one effective tactic doesn't mean it is the only tactic.
I think suffocation works just like underwater, so it would start counting from that moment like if you were underwater and not directly fall unconscious.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, but it is one of the most effective ones, especially if more than one party member has reactive strikes. A key component for winning the action economy game.
It is also very easy to stack. A current favourite of our current low-level party in Kingmaker for example is fighter trips, barbarian grapples, druid casts something like briny bolt. The last player is a resentment witch. Soon slow will be added to the mix, the barbarian will get reactive strike, etc.
The same could be said if a party have 2 or 3 rogues and Gang Up or a Bard with a Dirge of Doom and the rogues with Dread Striker or with a Water Kineticist with Winter Sleet + Safe Elements. This rogue party will be pretty brutal.
PF2 teamplay tactics are fantastically efficient but its not like you have only one and the same tactic not works so well for all party formations. A party with 3 casters and 1 fighter probably won't being so benefit from Trip tactics once that the only Fighter will have it and will have to deal with Trip alone (Trip will give it an AoO RS vs an off-guard target at cost of your MAP but at same time you will sacrifice a reaction that could be used to "protect" the party backline).
Trip and Reaction is a very good and pretty easy teamplay tactic but teamplay tactics depends from all party members their abilities and their teamwork. It's not because they are pretty good that they are broken. Unless you want to say that PF2 teamwork is too OP.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think suffocation works just like underwater, so it would start counting from that moment like if you were underwater and not directly fall unconscious.
It bothers me a great deal that the only two interpretations are "completely useless" to "way overpowered."