What's the best way to nerf Hampering Sweeps?
Squared in reach are greater difficult terrain for you enemies?
Reach weapons you wield gain the hampering trait. If the weapon already has the hampering trait, you can instead target all of the squares in a 5-foot burst originating within your reach.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My take would be to give foes a 1 turn immunity after suffering the effect.
That way you still have the "you're going nowhere!" ability in your pocket that is 100% reliable, but you now you need to be thoughtful in its use.
The next turn after their movement is stopped, you loose the option to affect them with it. In theory it could allow for looping combos of CC across turn, such as with allies imposing other immobilize effects (and the Guardian potentially just Grappling them) while they wait on the CD, but I really like encouraging such multi-PC emergent tactics.
- - - - - - - - - - -
I really, really do not think any form of fail chance is a good idea. Grapple is already right there as a better* form of movement prevention when it succeeds.
I think the absolute certainty of effect is the main appeal of Hampering Sweeps, and that should be preserved.
Even something as "harsh" as:
"The aggressive swipes sacrifice your defense, and when you perform Hampering Sweeps, you are off-guard until the start of your next turn."
Would be better balance knob than fail chance.
Guardian is perhaps the only class that is "okay" with lowering their own defenses, as it makes them more appealing to hit than their allies, and I'm rather disappointed that Taunt is the only place in the kit where that's a thing.
Guardian could be the perfect class to exploit the max stacking of defense down effects. (and if Taunt were made a circ penalty Guardian-side then it would not stack with off-guard, which IMO is superior to the foe-side +2).
Areas within your reach are difficult terrain for your enemies.
Stance would make sense. I don't think there is a reason the overcomplicate this feat.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Are difficult terrain for your enemies" is something that already exists elsewhere. Worse, it's not actually useful in any way for preventing people from walking away from you.
Add to that the fact that this is one of the few solid CC effects the Guardian has, and...
The way I'd do it is make it a roll, but swap the roll around. You engage the effect. That's a thing that happens. then, if the enemy wants to leave the area, they get to roll against your class DC. If they succeed, no problems. If they fail, they lose the movement action. If they want to try again, they can spend another action trying again. Still potent, but not quite as impregnable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I forgot they don't get reactive strike. Yeah, without it, difficult terrain is not great.
I like the idea of rolling against your class DC.
So either..
1 action, stance
Enmies must spend 10' extra feat of movement to move out of your reach. This stance ends if you move.
Or
1 actions, stance
Enemies who try to move out of your reach must make a Reflex saving throw against your class DC.
Crucial Success: they move unimpeded and this stance ends.
Success: they lose their movement and this stance ends.
Failure: they lose their movement.
Crucial Failure: they lose their movement and fall prone.
I'm kind of leaning towards the second.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Make it Hampstering Sweeps and you stuff hampsters in people's pockets.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let the opponent attempt an escape check against your class DC to move out of your reach. That would either pin them down or eat an action, and both are worthwhile.
You know, it wouldn't be a bad idea to swap them: a non-broken version of Hampering Strikes as a class feature, and Taunt as a level 1 feat.
Taunt is generic enough that other classes taking Guardian dedication for that feat looks ok. Meanwhile, the Guardian gets a nice, unique ability.
Why does this need to be nerfed? As the guardian stands at the moment. This is the only and I mean only reason to play this class over a champion or fighter.What's the best way to nerf Hampering Sweeps?
Squared in reach are greater difficult terrain for you enemies?
so make Hampering Sweeps a base feature? And make Taunt a feat?
Could work.
No Control option should have no way to be broken/avoided.
FWIW, Hampering Sweeps does have a way to break it. The feat says "until you move" which includes, from my opinion, forced movement like Shove.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
See it from the other side: would you say that it's a "fun" option if the GM had a no save, no check, thing that completely removed several/most of your character's abilities and did that in every fight?
Funnily enough, Paizo publishes a lot of monsters with this type of gimmick and likes throwing them in APs, so it's kind of already a thing.
So like IDK maybe it's not the end of the world for a player to have an ability the GM just has to deal with.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, as a gm, I know enemies are usually 1-3 lvls above the pc's for the most part.
Uhhh... what?
Since when?
Ok, as a gm, I know enemies are usually 1-3 lvls above the pc's for the most part.Uhhh... what?
Since when?
That has been pretty standard in the games I play in.
Nerf it to be a stance it's now becomes probably less useful then shielded taunt. You probably would want to make it roll against the Guardian's DC because do you really want enemies to treat you as difficult terrain? I have yet to see difficult terrain being that hampering. If you make it a roll it's less useful against higher level enemies which I see is common in a lot of games or Adventure Paths.
Make it automatic like it currently is on the first round an enemy is effected by it. On consecutive rounds the same enemy instead treats spaces in your reach as difficult terrain.
Any non consecutive replication starts over.
Make it so it doesnt matter who is applying it so theres not two people hampering to lock someone down.
Speaking as both a GM and a player, I kinda want to see it stay as is. (tho unlikely I know) It’s a powerful ability that gives the Guardian shine and plays up the whole “Hit Me” vibe. Because if the enemy is prevented from moving away from a certain character, you know they’ll be focus firing on them. Plus it forces me as a GM to think outside the box as to how to deal with that. Shove, Reposition, burn a teleport, etc. The only problems I find is that it gums up combat on one small location, and it’s kind of a no brainer combat tactic.
But let me tell you, it was a game changer for an Extreme Lvl 5 encounter with a team of Kyra, Valeros, a Champion, and a Guardian vs a Lvl 9 Blue Dragon. I made the Dragon a spellcaster to play against such a heavy martial team. (Most were Sword & Board) It was toying with the group and slowly tearing them apart with its spells until it finally landed to attack with its high attack and damage output. Once the Guardian had it with his Hampering Sweeps, the Dragon went “oh crap” and focused fired on the Guardian. Which was exactly what the Guardian wanted, (provoking Retributive Strikes from the Champion, and Reactive Strikes when it cast an spell) and the rest of the team ganged up on the Dragon and whittled down its health. It was a cool moment for me. (Tho looking back, I probably should have had the Dragon try to shove the Guardian away or something like that to escape. Oh, well)
Is it overpowered? Perhaps. But I’m sure I couldn’t make a cool moment like that with just Taunt and Intercept Strike. But I’m going to continue playtesting the class…
... Once the Guardian had it with his Hampering Sweeps, the Dragon went “oh crap” and focused fired on the Guardian. Which was exactly what the Guardian wanted, (provoking Retributive Strikes from the Champion, and Reactive Strikes when it cast an spell) and the rest of the team ganged up on the Dragon and whittled down its health....
Honest question, why did the dragon attack the Guardian? Why not fighter or champion first? Was the threat from the guardian greater than the champion or the fighter?
... Once the Guardian had it with his Hampering Sweeps, the Dragon went “oh crap” and focused fired on the Guardian. Which was exactly what the Guardian wanted, (provoking Retributive Strikes from the Champion, and Reactive Strikes when it cast an spell) and the rest of the team ganged up on the Dragon and whittled down its health....Honest question, why did the dragon attack the Guardian? Why not fighter or champion first? Was the threat from the guardian greater than the champion or the fighter?
If I remember, the Dragon flew down and attacked the Cleric with his juicy bite attack. The other three had not been much of a threat up til then. (They were Hypnotized for a few rounds) By then they had shaken it off, and went after the Dragon. The Dragon expected to buffet their attacks with its Reaction and fly off and attack using its Reach/Spell advantage. Once he realized he was pinned to the ground, he went crazy and tried to free himself by attacking the one pinning him. At least that’s how I imagined it went…
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
See it from the other side: would you say that it's a "fun" option if the GM had a no save, no check, thing that completely removed several/most of your character's abilities and did that in every fight?Funnily enough, Paizo publishes a lot of monsters with this type of gimmick and likes throwing them in APs, so it's kind of already a thing.
So like IDK maybe it's not the end of the world for a player to have an ability the GM just has to deal with.
Hard disagree. Having a monster once in a while doing something very strong that players have, as you say, to deal with, is ok beacuse it breaks the mold.
Having a PC do the same means it's a constant in most fights, and absolutely boring.
That has been pretty standard in the games I play in.Ok, as a gm, I know enemies are usually 1-3 lvls above the pc's for the most part.Uhhh... what?
Since when?
Really interesting. The encounter design guidelines suggest the vast majority of enemies you should be facing should be lower level than you.
...
If I remember, the Dragon flew down and attacked the Cleric with his juicy bite attack. The other three had not been much of a threat up til then. (They were Hypnotized for a few rounds) By then they had shaken it off, and went after the Dragon. The Dragon expected to buffet their attacks with its Reaction and fly off and attack using its Reach/Spell advantage. Once he realized he was pinned to the ground, he went crazy and tried to free himself by attacking the one pinning him. At least that’s how I imagined it went…
I see, so less calculating tactician and more of panicking because things didn't go as planned. Not sure I would have done that for a dragon, but that's a fair way to play it. Thanks.
...
Really interesting. The encounter design guidelines suggest the vast majority of enemies you should be facing should be lower level than you.
We usually only use lower level enemies as fodder along some higher level enemies. Lower level only fights we find boring as they are rarely a threat to our group. With limited time to play, we just prefer more engaging fights.