Author Topic: What would make Combat Techniques viable?  (Read 8609 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Agita

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5465
  • SFT is mai waifu.
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #40 on: June 23, 2011, 12:45:02 PM »
Quote
You're describing a sufficiently absurd amount of work and restriction that as a DM I'd really rather just ban martial characters than do it that way.

Yes, the DM has to work.  You do have to make sure the low tiered characters get to have fun.  That's exactly why the higher tiered classes are so dominant at all times; lazy DMs. That's another reason why these combat techniques have such low viability; lazy DMs.
Bullshit. DMs are only human. Have you ever ran a game? I haven't, and yet I can see clearly as day (by watching my own DM and conversing with him while he's doing session prep, if you're wondering) that a DM can't be expected to do all his prep, design challenging, fun encounters, run those encounters, and keep their mind on all of that bullshit and adjudicate it in real time with no rules or guidelines to fall back on in case of doubt in a way that is balanced. The DM is a player too, not the group's personal real-time combat simulation supercomputer.
Combat maneuvers are shitty because they were designed shittily, not because they're used shittily.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2011, 12:48:20 PM by Agita »
It's all about vision and making reality conform to your vision. By dropping a fucking house on it.

Agita's Awesome Poster Compilation
Lycanthromancer's Awesome Poster Compilation

Sinfire Titan

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5697
  • You've got one round to give a rat's ass.
    • Email
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #41 on: June 23, 2011, 01:36:39 PM »
Yes, the DM has to work.  You do have to make sure the low tiered characters get to have fun.  That's exactly why the higher tiered classes are so dominant at all times; lazy DMs. That's another reason why these combat techniques have such low viability; lazy DMs.

Gee, thanks for that. It sounds like you've never DMed for an optimized party.


I still remember DMing Skies of Arcadia back at Gleemax and watching as ArcherPWR's Warblade//EGOIST got outclassed by a Druid's animal companion that had the Elite Array (sans Int).


[spoiler][/spoiler]

Unbeliever

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 766
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #42 on: June 23, 2011, 02:34:36 PM »
I don't want to rely on my DM to specially engineer situations where my tactics are useful.  It'd be nice if he or she did do so every so often, like a cliff for someone w/ Bull Rushing skills, but I don't want to rely on it.  As a player, I want to decide when and how to use these abilities creatively, and I want them to be viable options.

@Veekie
I think you overstate the problems w/ these maneuvers a bit.  The size problem is granted, although having the relevant feat already mitigates 1 size category.  Jotunbrud, et al. can help a lot, too, though you may rightly complain that's a feat tax.  Furthermore, things like Knockback, which is really the only way to do Bull Rushing consistently in my humble opinion, can get you up to quite significant distances.

There are similar "fixes" to some of the other maneuvers as well.  For example, tripping does work on flying (and I think swimming?) targets already, and teleportation, while increasingly common as fiends get involved, typically takes an action.  If the fiend wants to waste his turn, or even just one of his quickened teleports to get away from my trip, I'm pretty ok w/ that. 

Now, if the goal is to make it so that anybody can drop these maneuvers, or anyone w/ a sufficiently high base attack or what have you, then maybe the mechanics need to be changed so that everyone gets the benefits of those feats. 

Lycanthromancer

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4003
    • Email
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #43 on: June 23, 2011, 03:15:12 PM »
Another problem with Bull Rush is that it requires a full-round action to pull off, but a move action on the enemy's part negates everything you just did (and possibly then some).

Seriously, other than Improved Tripping, the action economy on these things sucks.
[spoiler]Masculine men like masculine things. Masculine men are masculine. Therefore, liking masculine men is masculine.

I dare anyone to find a hole in that logic.
______________________________________
[/spoiler]I'm a writer. These are my stories. Some are even SFW! (Warning: Mostly Gay.)
My awesome poster collection. (Warning, some are NSFW.)
Agita's awesome poster collection.
[spoiler]
+1 Lycanthromancer
Which book is Lycanthromancer in?
Lyca ... is in the book. Yes he is.
 :D
shit.. concerning psionics optimization, lycan IS the book
[/spoiler]

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #44 on: June 23, 2011, 04:00:15 PM »
I don't want to rely on my DM to specially engineer situations where my tactics are useful.  It'd be nice if he or she did do so every so often, like a cliff for someone w/ Bull Rushing skills, but I don't want to rely on it.  As a player, I want to decide when and how to use these abilities creatively, and I want them to be viable options.

@Veekie
I think you overstate the problems w/ these maneuvers a bit.  The size problem is granted, although having the relevant feat already mitigates 1 size category.  Jotunbrud, et al. can help a lot, too, though you may rightly complain that's a feat tax.  Furthermore, things like Knockback, which is really the only way to do Bull Rushing consistently in my humble opinion, can get you up to quite significant distances.

There are similar "fixes" to some of the other maneuvers as well.  For example, tripping does work on flying (and I think swimming?) targets already, and teleportation, while increasingly common as fiends get involved, typically takes an action.  If the fiend wants to waste his turn, or even just one of his quickened teleports to get away from my trip, I'm pretty ok w/ that. 

Now, if the goal is to make it so that anybody can drop these maneuvers, or anyone w/ a sufficiently high base attack or what have you, then maybe the mechanics need to be changed so that everyone gets the benefits of those feats. 
Thats sorta the goal yes. Currently, unless you sink some 2-3 feats PER maneuver you plan to use, its basically useless. The idea is to pull the baseline up that it can at least compete with power attacking with the same attack, and as Lycan mentioned, at least take the same level of effort to overcome as it does to perform.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

Unbeliever

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 766
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #45 on: June 23, 2011, 04:18:44 PM »
Another problem with Bull Rush is that it requires a full-round action to pull off, but a move action on the enemy's part negates everything you just did (and possibly then some).

Seriously, other than Improved Tripping, the action economy on these things sucks.
Umm ... again, the feat Knockback.  Is there a reason people keep on ignoring that feat?  It's the solution to this problem w/ Bull Rushing as it makes it just an extra rider on your attacks and w/ Power Attack you can even Bull Rush quite large targets.  Also, isn't Disarm already just an attack, or am I confusing my house rules for RAW again.

Although Veekie's point about feat taxes is well-taken.  As the house rules we're experimenting w/ indicate, I'm totally behind making these maneuvers generally useful, not just to builds that hinge around them.

From a design perspective, I think nearly all of these maneuvers (exception, Overrun since it's part of movement, for example) should come as part of an attack.  That means that it taking a move action to overcome being Bull Rushed is fine, since it took at most a standard action to inflict it along w/ damage.  It might also involve some table rules as to how to adjudicate it if you hit someone 4 times and then use Knockback/Bull Rush on them each time, but that's already the case. 

Lycanthromancer

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4003
    • Email
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #46 on: June 23, 2011, 04:29:36 PM »
Umm ... again, the feat Knockback.  Is there a reason people keep on ignoring that feat?  
Because it's not a feat that's allowed very often (in my limited experience, anyway), and certainly isn't standard issue, since it requires a feat to use.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2011, 04:32:37 PM by Lycanthromancer »
[spoiler]Masculine men like masculine things. Masculine men are masculine. Therefore, liking masculine men is masculine.

I dare anyone to find a hole in that logic.
______________________________________
[/spoiler]I'm a writer. These are my stories. Some are even SFW! (Warning: Mostly Gay.)
My awesome poster collection. (Warning, some are NSFW.)
Agita's awesome poster collection.
[spoiler]
+1 Lycanthromancer
Which book is Lycanthromancer in?
Lyca ... is in the book. Yes he is.
 :D
shit.. concerning psionics optimization, lycan IS the book
[/spoiler]

Nachofan99

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #47 on: June 23, 2011, 06:22:50 PM »
Another problem with Bull Rush is that it requires a full-round action to pull off, but a move action on the enemy's part negates everything you just did (and possibly then some).

Seriously, other than Improved Tripping, the action economy on these things sucks.

Bull-Rush is a standard action.  PHB pg. 154.  You merely gain a bonus of +2 for charging.


I have DM'd plenty of games and my players greatly enjoy my games because I can pull off having different tiers, different levels of PC optimization and different levels of player skill all in the same campaign in a very close to RAW almost 0 house-rule environment and still make it fun for everyone.

Mostly I accomplish that through variety.  I use everything, absolutely everything.  And that includes these combat techniques that are much maligned - some for good reason, others simply because of DM laziness.  I have a hard time with Overrun useage, but every other combat technique I have successfully incorporated into using for my NPCs and getting my PCs to use and make them fun.  And again, I admit that it's hard to make these attack forms useable while it's easy to sit back and let spellcasters dominate the game and have their way; however, with time and effort I have made lots of encounters and situations which included these combat techniques.  That's not to say Bull-Rushing will be great every single time; neither will Glitterdust.  Variety.

Also, where in Sunder does it say "Permanently adjust the PC's WBL"?    WBL explicitly says to make sure players stick close to WBL and if something makes them not close to WBL, make sure you somehow get them to the correct level.  In other words, if somehow the party does not get "5,000gp" in treasure because of Sundering or NPC item consumption, well they are supposed to get that "5,000gp" in treasure from another source - perhaps as a bonus reward for doing so well during a quest.  Seriously, if a DM can't come up with an easy explanation like that, lazy.  This is a false argument against Sunder having an, albeit minor, use in the game and it's boring to see it being brought up.

@ Agita: Yes, a DM does more work than everyone else.  That's a given. If you don't want to put a lot of time and effort into DMing, then I would suggest that person *PROBABLY* should not DM.   This is obviously a generalization.  For your information, I spend upwards of 3-4 hours each week preparing when I DM a session.  We have another DM as well and we alternate every so often so it's not that bad.  Also, when I GM for our Shadowrun campaign, I spend roughly 10 minutes "preparing" because I can handle that system WAY BETTER on the fly.  D&D 3.5 takes a lot longer for me and I have accepted that as a part of the game system.

@ Sinfire: To quote Agita "Bullshit".  I've DM'd for an optimized party and guess what; I optimized my encounters as well! If I did not optimize the game would be boring for the strong PCs 1 shotting all the encounters.  Planning for an entire party of fully optimized characters obviously takes an even more prepared DM; what's your excuse for the Skies of Arcadia event?  You weren't aware of how good animal companions are?  Why were you passively "watching" that happen instead of doing something about it either proactively at character creation or reactively during encounters?  Seriously, no disrespect.

@ Unbeliever:  I understand the sentiment but you have to read what you wrote.  If the DM *Never* makes a situation where Bull-Rush is useful, it *Never* will be useful.   You are already "relying" on your DM to make *Any* class ability useful; a DM can do *Exactly* the same thing for any spell or ability in the game, it's just that it's easier (Read: Lazy DM Syndrome) for them to just never adjust situations to ever make spell use cumbersome.

I hate how there is no "tone" online.  I really have never had the same kinds of problems with balance that I read about all the time because of my DMing style.  I wish it was simpler to explain.

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #48 on: June 24, 2011, 04:17:54 AM »
False sentiment there. The majority of combat maneuvers compare unfavorably to using the same action to do nothing but straight out attack.
It doesn't have to be 'great', just compare the opportunity costs:

Bull Rush - Standard action or Charge. So at a minimum it needs to compare with a full attack or a move + attack. The furthest you're going to get this without hyperspecializing is 10ft. A free action counters the effect. A full attack, or a charge easily deals more than 10d6(a 100ft cliff) or even 20d6(total immersion in lava), so the only way you're going to get your action's worth is if you bull rushed them into a Sphere of Annihilation. In all cases, using it with the DM's help basically involves increasing the distance they're going by using falling. Specializing in it is a waste of feats, since even with an accommodating DM, the number of times you're going to find this relevant is likely 1/5 encounters. Not specializing means you even bite an AoO right back for even daring to try.

Disarm - Attack action, you can do it with an AoO, or your later iteratives. It needs to be as valuable as the damage and to hit of one of these. This is attainable, but situational. If the enemy requires a weapon, disarming them castrates their combat ability and they'd need a fallback via quick draw etc. The limiting factor here is the investment. You need Int 13(not hard, but counter to a fighter's main strength) and two feats to avoid the AoO, which renders the strategy useless. If you didn't need two feats just to use it, then it could do some good, due to being situationally effective. It is indeed comparable to a straight out attack, but not applicable to enough enemies unless its a city campaign or something.

Feint - Standard or Move action, so with the feat, you can use it with an attack. Success rate is generally high, few monsters have any Sense Motive to speak of(even after adding BAB), and skills are easy to raise. The cost is your further iteratives and extra attacks. For a rogue, this is reasonably effective, if you can't get a flank, just feint and attack to get your sneak attack in. For anyone else, its not really that useful. To expand the usebility you can allow this to make the enemy flatfooted for real(which has perks in avoiding AoOs), perhaps with a feat investment.

Grapple - An attack action, which is cool, but the cost is YOU are grappled as well, losing a lot of your stuff. In fact, Grapple is the only combat maneuver to put you in a worse situation than when you started if you succeed. This added to the multitude to steps, rather limits its effectiveness. Added to that, given it's benefits, you'd want to grapple spellcasters(but have to contend with freedom of movement or no somatic component teleports, which is ok, this is a spells being too strong issue) and powerful solo threats. Powerful solo threats are going to totally punk your grapple checks to start with, and for large ones you can't even start to grapple them back. If you use the example of grappling the frenzied berserker until they calm down. Do you even realize how high the difficulty of grappling a strength focused character, with massive AoO damage and accuracy is?
So to sum it up, Grapple is a clusterfuck. It can be useful, except it screws you exactly as hard as it screws the other guy.

Overrun - Standard action as part of a movement. This puts it in the same ranks as a full attack. Needless to say, moving, provoking AoOs multiple times(for leaving a threatened square and for performing the move to begin with) and then MAYBE knocking over one opponent would find it hard to compare with even a single attack, if that attack was your last iterative you had a maybe a 30% chance to hit on.

Sunder - Largely the same as Disarm, except disarm does it in one hit, so its already behind schedule. Next you're destroying equipment, which reduces your encounter loot. Most commonly destroyed equipment is weapon(since you can't break anything else for the most part) which is also the single most valuable piece of equipment. Yes, sure the DM can make up the lost value later, but tracking party WBL is hideously time consuming to begin with. The most common methods I find are to simply deliver average encounter wealth, or to just tally wealth expected and deduct random loot off it. You can't use total party wealth, because the random loot tables give you more money than the WBL table for a reason, expendables. Thats ok, except again, you're destroying the weapon, you know, the loot aimed at you, the weapon using guy. In either case, it does the same thing as disarm, except it requires more hits to break a given item, and when it breaks its less favorable than simply disarming.

Trip - Attack action, you can do it with an AoO, or your later iteratives. So at a minimum it needs to be as valuable as the damage and to hit of one of these. This is attainable, as long as the enemy can be tripped at all, as the resulting speed decrease is still good, and they set themselves up to provoke more attacks. With investment, you even get your sacrificed attack back, so you can use it as a major part of your day. There is a risk of counter tripping, but using a weapon to trip(theres several fine reach trippers) and picking your targets will reduce the danger.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #49 on: June 24, 2011, 04:21:51 AM »
TLDR:
Bull Rush - Useless
Disarm - Situational, very useful in a situation where you're facing lots of armed-type opponents
Feint - character dependent usefulness(That means it be cool)
Grapple - Worse than useless, it screws you right back.
Overrun - Useless
Sunder - Situational, in any situation where it might be useful, Disarm trumps.
Trip - Useful, but requires investment. Size bad.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

Unbeliever

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 766
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #50 on: June 24, 2011, 11:32:20 AM »
Unless you put some investment into these maneuvers, they mostly suck.  That seems obvious to me.  The AoO alone kind of ensures that.  Can we take that as a starting point and move on?  I'm willing to take NachoFan on faith that it works out fine for his group.  It doesn't for mine and I imagine for the rest of us.  Maybe that means my DMs are "lazy," just don't say it around us unless you want to get punched b/c my DMs are ... frankly, awesome (myself excepted). 

The question, I think, is what they should look like either at a baseline, I got rid of the AoOs for example, or after some smaller investment like a feat or two.  Which one you prefer depends, I think, on the extent you want to encourage people to use them. 

I posted some of my ideas to that effect earlier (if people have comments that'd be nice, btw).  My general feeling is that if you put a feat into it, it should be a rider on an attack, so you get your normal attack as well.  If you don't put a feat into it, a lot of them should still be attacks anyway (disarm, etc.), but the effects may be less.  Perhaps halving size modifiers would help as well, though I haven't noticed much of a difference:  anyone who is really really big is already going to be beat anything but the most specialized characters in these maneuvers b/c they are crazy strong (and if you use Pathfinder's approach, which I don't like for this reason, have a really really high BAB, too). 

Finally, odds are these combat maneuvers are going to be situational.  And, that's fine.  You don't always want to disarm the bastard.  Likewise, you might not always want to grapple him, unless your build centers around it. 

Take Grapple, where I think Veekie overstates things.  Sure, I don't threaten and am just as vulnerable as my target.  So ... I'd probably only use it when it's to my advantage.  I'd want to Grapple the opponent who has a ton of reach, for instance, allowing my friends to get in close or get by or what have you.  Or, maybe to nullify the target's Dex bonus or set up the Rogue for a sneak attack.  Or, I'll Grapple the opponent w/ a lot of mobility.  I'm fine w/ there being costs associated to the actions, so long as they have a purpose and a use. 

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #51 on: June 24, 2011, 12:21:09 PM »
Yes, the costs and situation is perfectly acceptable, but that the costs and situation apply after you sink several feats into it, is much less so. Hence disarm being perfectly fine....if not for the minimum investment you need to do it at all. Heck, look at any really martial inclined martial art, close combat training or even old school knight training. These aren't esoteric techniques requiring much dedication to master, they are part of basic combat training. Personally I'd do away with the AoO as long as you're doing it with a weapon you're proficient with and you have at least a +1 BAB.

If you removed the AoO, then you'd see Trip being a fairly common attack opener, Disarm being a fairly standard tactic against any armed opponent. Grapple is...problematic, if you grapple an opponent while there are other enemies around, you're a sitting duck for them, while if you try to grapple a powerful individual....well, they tend to be the best at resisting those! You'd see a lot more grapples of opportunity though, no harm in trying to grab a spellcaster who managed to get in reach(done it myself). Sunder remains flawed in the same way, its like Disarm, only less effective, and it damages your loot. Bull Rush and Overrun remains not worth the action you spent.

The Pathfinder solution is a lot less lopsided than it seems. Melee brutes have great CMBs from size, strength and BAB, but so do melee party members(especially when you apply weapon enhancement to it) and you don't contest CMB against CMB. PCs tend to be MUCH better at CMD, even for the non melee-specs, due to adding most bonuses that would have gone on your touch AC.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

Unbeliever

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 766
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #52 on: June 24, 2011, 12:44:27 PM »
...
The Pathfinder solution is a lot less lopsided than it seems. Melee brutes have great CMBs from size, strength and BAB, but so do melee party members(especially when you apply weapon enhancement to it) and you don't contest CMB against CMB. PCs tend to be MUCH better at CMD, even for the non melee-specs, due to adding most bonuses that would have gone on your touch AC.
I'm confused, and this is something I actually did pay attention to.  I haven't cracked my PF book in a while, but CMB is essentially your attack bonus, right?  It's going to be base attack + strength + a small benefit for size, most of the time.  Bruiser monsters, at least in D&D's Monster Manuals (and I doubt this has changed much w/ Pathfinder), tend to have great BABs, Hit Dice, and Strengths.  I was under the impression they still outpaced PCs by a damn sight, especially since the feats in PF do less. 

Am I totally mistaken?  I was thinking about something like a Fire Giant (CR 10) against say a 10th or 11th level fighter type.  This is more of a side issue, though, since my gaming groups are sufficiently used to D&D that I don't see us changing things.  Although I'm happy to revise my beliefs if I'm off. 

Like I said earlier, I did away w/ AoOs and I also trimmed away a lot of the pre-reqs on the relevant feats as well as increasing their effectiveness a little bit.  We've only played that game a couple of times, we're trying out a bunch of different things in it, so it hasn't come up very often.  But, I expect that the effect will be that people will use the maneuvers when they are situationally useful, and if it's something they want to use more than once in a blue moon they will sink the 1 feat it takes into it.  I wanted my character to be good at Sundering, so I tossed 1 feat at the problem, on the off chance it ever comes up. 

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #53 on: June 24, 2011, 01:41:28 PM »
« Last Edit: June 24, 2011, 01:44:58 PM by veekie »
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

Nachofan99

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #54 on: June 24, 2011, 01:54:26 PM »
Bull Rush - Perfectly acceptable.  Your DM has to support its use or it will never get used...just like spells.  Again note Bull-Rush versus Concealment.  No one else sees that?
Disarm - Situational.  In those situations it's good to have the option.  Make sure the DM actually supports it.
Feint - DM Situationally powerful.  Does not work against mindless opponents and huge penalties to certain types of creatures.  Does no one else see that?  Feint is only good if your DM makes it good - just like everything else on this list (minus Overrun).
Sunder - Situational.  Hope the DM makes it an option at some point in the campaign.
Trip - Never had problems with trip.  Investment sure, but decent return at least.  However, the DM can make it worthless when you're fighting multi-limbed huge creatures or more useful when you're fighting small or smaller creatures.  Again, situationally powerful.
Grapple - Irritating and bogs the game down.  By the way, also situationally powerful.

Overrun - Completely fucking useless (unless mounted, then it can be made at least decent).  Overrun requires so many rolls and actions and AoO possibilities and even if you make all the rolls required doesn't really do anything. I can't find any situation where it's the right action because it is so incredibly weak.  I have found plenty of uses for Mounted Overrun (Trample) though.


If your DMs have never allowed any of these techniques to be effective, then I'm sorry for you because you have missed out. Bull-Rushing someone into a Sphere of Annihilation is badass.

I'm not saying that every single session I play in or DM in has piles of Bull-Rushes and Disarms.  What I'm saying is, in every campaign, there have been situations where those combat techniques were *effective* because the DM allowed them to be so.  Encounters were created with the knowledge that these techniques exist, and circumstances were created to at least offer the players the chance to realize upon an effective strategy.  

Just because you offer the players the opportunity does not mean anything either.

A) They might not recognize it
B) See it but maybe they don't want to go for it
C) Go for it but fail

For my group, everything is about payout.  If I take Improved Bull-Rush, there had damn well better be a time in the campaign where it's useful - that IS what the DM is for.  However, we understand that just because I take Improved Bull-Rush, all of a sudden Bull-Rush will be a viable tactic in every single encounter.  We have the same attitude with spells and spellcasting.  Your shit will work great sometimes, alright other times, and just not at all still other times.  It does not sound like anyone plays like that, at all.

It's no different than having a big group of low hp enemies within the radius of a fireball spell which you know the party caster has prepared.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2011, 02:05:37 PM by Nachofan99 »

Lycanthromancer

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4003
    • Email
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #55 on: June 24, 2011, 02:07:10 PM »
The problem is that spending a feat for one or two combat situations in an entire campaign means you completely wasted a feat.

Those situations had better come up in all but a few situations, or I'd be upset.

Feats are valuable, and wasting them is...a waste.
[spoiler]Masculine men like masculine things. Masculine men are masculine. Therefore, liking masculine men is masculine.

I dare anyone to find a hole in that logic.
______________________________________
[/spoiler]I'm a writer. These are my stories. Some are even SFW! (Warning: Mostly Gay.)
My awesome poster collection. (Warning, some are NSFW.)
Agita's awesome poster collection.
[spoiler]
+1 Lycanthromancer
Which book is Lycanthromancer in?
Lyca ... is in the book. Yes he is.
 :D
shit.. concerning psionics optimization, lycan IS the book
[/spoiler]

Unbeliever

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 766
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #56 on: June 24, 2011, 02:10:13 PM »
...
Your shit will work great sometimes, alright other times, and just not at all still other times.  It does not sound like anyone plays like that, at all.
Naaah, I think everyone plays like that.  Or, at least everyone I know.  Which is, granted, only like 20 some-odd people, but still.  

My take is the following, which may have been opaque from earlier posts.  Say there's a particular situation where using a tactic, and let's use Bull Rush b/c I think it's a good archetypal case, is really apt and useful.  Like your Sphere of Annihilation example or a pool of lava or whatever (certain spellcasters in the party can make these significantly more common).  In that case, anyone should be able to make the reasonable attempt.  You haven't built your character around Bull Rushing, but the opportunity has arisen, and you should be allowed, nay encouraged to creatively do so.  Why the hell have a battlemap if not for that sort of thing?  

That's my first contention.  Along w/ that, I'd say that the baseline rules, mostly b/c of the AoO don't really encourage that.  Sure, you might fail, especially if you're a swashbuckler trying to Bull Rush a giant, but w/out the requisite feats in the current system it kind of feels like you're an idiot and punished (not just wasting your whole round, but getting punched in the face) for trying.

Then, there's the other situation, which is a character built around using the combat maneuver.  This is a character w/ feats like Knockback or Knockdown or Improved Trip or Improved Disarm.  These characters put a commitment, often significant, into using the tactic.  And, they should be expected to use it all the time.  

Call me a communist, but I think the situational stuff you describe should be open to everyone.

And, further, a lot of the other stuff that you (NachoFan) are talking about isn't so much "creating an opportunity" so much as "not being a dick."  Take Feint.  The amount of DM effort it takes to make Feint useful, assuming the character's build has the commitments to make it a viable tactic, is essentially 0.  Sure, not every monster will be feintable, but most are.  And, further, if you plan on running an all-mindless undead Zombie Island campaign you should probably mention that to the player once you see Improved Feint on their sheet.  I would put that under just not being a dick.  It takes a lot more effort to make it not useful.  I don't count a DM picking thematically appropriate monsters out of the books as the DM customizing their campaign around my character.  

But, listen, dude, you're in the minority here.  So, please ... let it go.  We get it, you think these powers are fine the way they are.  You've said your piece at some length.  The rest of us want to tweak them to make them more attractive.  Right now the question isn't so much "do they need to be tweaked?" we've got several posts on that already, but "how to go about doing so."  

P.S.:  thanks Veekie, I appreciate you breaking it down.  It's been awhile since I looked at it.  I'll have to think about it some more and talk it over w/ my peeps to see what, if anything, they want to adopt any of that system.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2011, 02:12:16 PM by Unbeliever »

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #57 on: June 24, 2011, 02:59:02 PM »
Bull Rush - Perfectly acceptable.  Your DM has to support its use or it will never get used...just like spells.  Again note Bull-Rush versus Concealment.  No one else sees that?
vs Concealment,still no use. Bull rushing does not magically reveal the creature you tackled, moving it 5ft isn't going to do anything, nor is the part where you get punched in the face.
Sphere of Annihilation, Walls of Fire, Cliff Edges, etc, are false scenarios. How many creatures intentionally stand within 5ft of such a hazard? If they start combat within 5ft of such a hazard, why don't they take a free action to get out of effective bull rush range(even if you're optimized you're getting 10ft distance on this shit, MAYBE 15), or a move action to get far far away from it?

Frankly the only way a serious investment in Bull Rush is going to pay off is if everyone in the setting builds like Star Wars structures, lots of gantries with no safety railings hanging over bottomless pits and crackling energy fields.
Quote
Disarm - Situational.  In those situations it's good to have the option.  Make sure the DM actually supports it.
Its only situational if you don't get punched in the face whenever you do it. If you do its not situational at all, its outright a worse move than punching the guy in the face. Unarmed. Without Improved Unarmed Strike, because at least even if they hit you back you still land a hit.

Without the AoO, its a fair go, provided you're adventuring in civilization of some sort
Quote
Feint - DM Situationally powerful.  Does not work against mindless opponents and huge penalties to certain types of creatures.  Does no one else see that?  Feint is only good if your DM makes it good - just like everything else on this list (minus Overrun).
Feint is the only one that anyone with the Bluff can use and effectively. Mindless creatures are a small fraction of the list, and well, the benefit of Feint is that you can sneak attack, and the mindless creatures are usually immune to that to start with
Quote
Sunder - Situational.  Hope the DM makes it an option at some point in the campaign.
If theres a situation you can use Sunder for that Disarm can't I'd like to see it.
Quote
Trip - Never had problems with trip.  Investment sure, but decent return at least.  However, the DM can make it worthless when you're fighting multi-limbed huge creatures or more useful when you're fighting small or smaller creatures.  Again, situationally powerful.
Trip is one of the better ones, it only fails when you don't invest(but not such a problem, because the investment pays), and is otherwise only subject to the universal problems of Punch In Face and Kaijiu Superiority.
Quote
Grapple - Irritating and bogs the game down.  By the way, also situationally powerful.
No doubt, on both counts. But focusing on it does not pay. All those feats you sink into it? The template and bloodlines? So much dead weight.

So the problem  is threefold
1) You cannot 'take' an opportunity, because you get punched in the face and the maneuver cancels out. If you didn't get punched in the face, see 3)
2) Except for Trip, you cannot invest in them, because they don't do anything relevant relative to the feat slot. Secondary Exceptions are Grapple and Disarm, in a campaign dealing mainly with humanoid opponents. Bull Rush and Sunder are never a good investment, the former is so niche you might as well just ask the wizard to disintegrate the floor, the latter does nothing you can't do with disarm.
3) For all your investment, any naturally large monster has a strength mod nearly twice yours and a size modifier of > you. Oh and they just plain stop working when its big enough.
P.S.:  thanks Veekie, I appreciate you breaking it down.  It's been awhile since I looked at it.  I'll have to think about it some more and talk it over w/ my peeps to see what, if anything, they want to adopt any of that system.
No problem, it wasn't that obvious, their stated formula misses out on the bit where everything that modifies your attack roll modifies CMB and everything that modifies touch AC modifies CMD. Its real easy to miss. I had 2 fairly good optimizers in my game and we missed THAT for five months of gaming every weekend.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

Nachofan99

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #58 on: June 24, 2011, 03:16:35 PM »
Quote
And, further, a lot of the other stuff that you (NachoFan) are talking about isn't so much "creating an opportunity" so much as "not being a dick."

I agree.  It's Dickish of the DM to constantly hose PCs and not ever allow them to do anything creative or fun.  Disallowing said Combat Techniques constantly is dickish.  That's all I'm saying.

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: What would make Combat Techniques viable?
« Reply #59 on: June 24, 2011, 03:22:30 PM »
Yeah well, the whole idea the thread is getting at is to make it EASIER not to be a dick. If you were a dick every time a monster wasn't within 5ft of a convenient hazard, you'd be spending a lot of time as a genital.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."