So, Rob, you are suggestion, in short:
TWF: Lots of damage.
THF: Some 'Fuck you' status effects.
S&S: Defensive armor guy, of course
Tome Fighter - Problem Solver
Moderator: Moderators
-
God_of_Awesome
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 7:19 am
Frank on the Fighter (Abridged)
FrankTrollman wrote:...God_of_Awesome wrote: Could I inquire on the motive behind the design decisions on the Fighter class?
The Fighter is intended to be, like the Wizard, a character who can and does adapt their tactics to the opposition and draws upon player experience to deliver tactical victories. And to do it without "feeling" like it was using Magic.
...
So honestly, when someone tells me "I know the game backwards and forwards, and when I pull out all the stops with the Fighter I totally win!" And my response is "OK, good." Because that's exactly what people report with the Wizard too.
-Username17
-
Judging__Eagle
- Prince
- Posts: 4671
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada
Actually.... Red Rob, if you spend a level on Wizard, do you expect to be more of a Wizard? If you get a flying item, do you expect to fly more? What if you get a second, different type, of Flying Item? Should you fly in either method without problem?
Seriously, the PC with a dagger and a light mace should deal more damage, because they are carrying more weapons. I don't even see how there is any other balanced choice.
The character that picks up a feat that does "something", should be doing that "something" more, than if they didn't have the feat.
If you grab Wings of Evil [Fiend]; and have an item that casts Fly or Haste; and Boots of Wind Walk... don't you expect to be able to fly better or faster than anyone else? You can fly quickly, you can stand still, you can walk and turn on a dime; and you're faster than your normal speed would indicate.
Same thing if you burn items slots on weapons, and feats on damage abilities. If you picked up a feat that is all about you dealing more damage, then fuck, you'd hope that picking up that feat give you more damage. If not, you're seriously better off not burning an item slot on a second weapon, or a feat slot getting more attacks.
Zwiehander
"Lawls, you think this is an offensive weapon?"
You use a weapon that allows you to use full horizontal torque of your shoulders and hips, you do this by holding a weapon with two or more hands. Funny enough, while it's a big weapon, the main benefit is tooling down people who try to attack you, not when you attack others.
BaB: Benefit
+0: You count as having reach whenever using a 2-handed weapon and not flat-footed. If the weapon already grants you reach, you get an increase in reach equal to your space (a medium creature has +5', a large creature has +10') with small creatures gaining a +5' bonus; and smaller creatures not provoking attacks of opportunity when entering enemy squares to attack with 2 or more handed weapons.
+1 Moving into your threatened squares provokes an attack of opportunity from your two-handed weapons.
+6 If you have not moved in your round, you may make a 5' step after you attack a creature that entered a square you threaten. You may not make more than your alloted number of 5' steps per round.
+11 Creatures you strike with your two-handed weapon attacks must make a Concentration Check based on the damage you dealt to continue their action; if your attack was interrupting their action.
+16 You may make melee attack actions on anyone within your reach if they perform any action that would provoke an attack of opportunity. Instead of dealing damage, your damage rolls may be totaled up to give you a Bullrush check, applied on the target of the attack.
Note: Weapons that use more than 2 hands may also use this feat. A Four-armed halberd is just built for a bigger person, with more arms.
Nothing very fancy, it's a denial of movement zone, centered on the character. Later on they can knock enemies sideways; and people trying to enter their zone are in danger.
Seriously, the PC with a dagger and a light mace should deal more damage, because they are carrying more weapons. I don't even see how there is any other balanced choice.
The character that picks up a feat that does "something", should be doing that "something" more, than if they didn't have the feat.
If you grab Wings of Evil [Fiend]; and have an item that casts Fly or Haste; and Boots of Wind Walk... don't you expect to be able to fly better or faster than anyone else? You can fly quickly, you can stand still, you can walk and turn on a dime; and you're faster than your normal speed would indicate.
Same thing if you burn items slots on weapons, and feats on damage abilities. If you picked up a feat that is all about you dealing more damage, then fuck, you'd hope that picking up that feat give you more damage. If not, you're seriously better off not burning an item slot on a second weapon, or a feat slot getting more attacks.
Zwiehander
"Lawls, you think this is an offensive weapon?"
You use a weapon that allows you to use full horizontal torque of your shoulders and hips, you do this by holding a weapon with two or more hands. Funny enough, while it's a big weapon, the main benefit is tooling down people who try to attack you, not when you attack others.
BaB: Benefit
+0: You count as having reach whenever using a 2-handed weapon and not flat-footed. If the weapon already grants you reach, you get an increase in reach equal to your space (a medium creature has +5', a large creature has +10') with small creatures gaining a +5' bonus; and smaller creatures not provoking attacks of opportunity when entering enemy squares to attack with 2 or more handed weapons.
+1 Moving into your threatened squares provokes an attack of opportunity from your two-handed weapons.
+6 If you have not moved in your round, you may make a 5' step after you attack a creature that entered a square you threaten. You may not make more than your alloted number of 5' steps per round.
+11 Creatures you strike with your two-handed weapon attacks must make a Concentration Check based on the damage you dealt to continue their action; if your attack was interrupting their action.
+16 You may make melee attack actions on anyone within your reach if they perform any action that would provoke an attack of opportunity. Instead of dealing damage, your damage rolls may be totaled up to give you a Bullrush check, applied on the target of the attack.
Note: Weapons that use more than 2 hands may also use this feat. A Four-armed halberd is just built for a bigger person, with more arms.
Nothing very fancy, it's a denial of movement zone, centered on the character. Later on they can knock enemies sideways; and people trying to enter their zone are in danger.
Last edited by Judging__Eagle on Wed Jan 27, 2010 2:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.
While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
-
CatharzGodfoot
- King
- Posts: 5668
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: North Carolina
Nobody uses a four-armed halberd with this feat. If they have four arms, they take TWFing and use two halberds.Judging__Eagle wrote: Note: Weapons that use more than 2 hands may also use this feat. A Four-armed halberd is just built for a bigger person, with more arms.
I don't have a problem with THF dealing more damage, under certain circumstances, than TWFing. Blitz adds more with two weapons. Sneak attack adds more damage with two weapons. Counter to what Frank in indicating, using two weapons lets you land more nasty effects, even if it's from having one wounding dagger and one vorpal dagger. If characters can take a THFing feat and get as much or more benefit from a huge strength score than they would have with TWFing, I don't see that as a problem.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
Well, ultimately what I really want is there to be a fighting style other than TWF you can invest feats into, otherwise you end up with a tiered system where anyone willing to invest a feat in being a bad-ass has to choose TWF and anyone using anything else is just admitting they aren't as good.God_of_Awesome wrote:So, Rob, you are suggestion, in short:
TWF: Lots of damage.
THF: Some 'Fuck you' status effects.
S&S: Defensive armor guy, of course
But yeah, that looks like a fine paradigm. Could be tricky making defense matter but thats always an issue with defensive builds. The only problem with THF is anything that gives a "save or suck on hit" will actually be more effective with two weapons because you get more hits. As THF deals more damage per hit but gets less hits, maybe something triggered off damage dealt per hit? What if the save DC is 10 + 1/5 damage, as this should scale with level anyway?
I was a little unclear earlier, throwing around terms like damage when that wasn't what i meant. After some thinking, I'm fine with the TWF guy being the damage dealer. The guy dancing around slashing his foe to ribbons with attacks so fast it doesn't matter that each hit is individually pretty small is fine for a DPS specialist. Here's what I dont like, though:Judging_Eagle wrote:Seriously, the PC with a dagger and a light mace should deal more damage, because they are carrying more weapons. I don't even see how there is any other balanced choice.
Currently, Two handed weapons without reach just do some extra damage. By making TWF the damaging style and not giving anything to THF you make THF a useless style. Anyone willing to invest in dealing damage will ignore THF in favour of TWF, and THF has nothing else to offer. THF needs some hook so it is an actual alternative to TWF if you are willing to invest the same amount of money/feats.
I don't like this ability. I'm trying to reduce reach effects due to the interaction with Whirlwind and Combat School. Catharz and Kaelik already showed that if you can increase your reach enough you can daze every enemy on the map in the first turn.Judging_Eagle wrote:BaB: Benefit
+0: You count as having reach whenever using a 2-handed weapon and not flat-footed. If the weapon already grants you reach, you get an increase in reach equal to your space (a medium creature has +5', a large creature has +10') with small creatures gaining a +5' bonus; and smaller creatures not provoking attacks of opportunity when entering enemy squares to attack with 2 or more handed weapons.
This just provides extra attacks - without a rider on those attacks this will probably just give you less damage per round than choosing TWF.Judging_Eagle wrote:+1 Moving into your threatened squares provokes an attack of opportunity from your two-handed weapons.
Again, this seems like a way to get more attacks. I'm trying to differentiate this style from TWF.Judging_Eagle wrote:+6 If you have not moved in your round, you may make a 5' step after you attack a creature that entered a square you threaten. You may not make more than your alloted number of 5' steps per round.
This sounds more like it, particularly in combination with the other two effects, but waiting till level 11 to get your schtick will give characters blue-balls. TWF gives its main feature - doubled attacks - at level 0. Up until this point THF has just been a poorer TWF thats marginally more useful against lots of enemies. However, we already have Horde Breaker and Whirlwind for dealing with lots of enemies.Judging_Eagle wrote:+11 Creatures you strike with your two-handed weapon attacks must make a Concentration Check based on the damage you dealt to continue their action; if your attack was interrupting their action.
I like the idea that a hit from a Two Handed Weapon smacks you so hard that it really hurts, therefore whilst TWF deals more damage per round, THF disables the guy you are smacking around. Maybe move the +11 effect to +0? Would that be too powerful? I like the save being damage based, but damage is so variable it may be better to derive it from the damage rather than just use it straight.
-
God_of_Awesome
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 7:19 am
Well, I've got idea broilin', I'll avoid the 'add more damage die' trap Kaelik says I fall in.
A Two-Handed Fighting Feat would include daze and stun effects, as well as simply crippling effects. I would also suggest a different effect for slashing, piercing and bludgeoning for the final effect. Cleave for slash, blown away for bludgeoning and something-something stabby for piercing.
A Two-Handed Fighting Feat would include daze and stun effects, as well as simply crippling effects. I would also suggest a different effect for slashing, piercing and bludgeoning for the final effect. Cleave for slash, blown away for bludgeoning and something-something stabby for piercing.
Frank on the Fighter (Abridged)
FrankTrollman wrote:...God_of_Awesome wrote: Could I inquire on the motive behind the design decisions on the Fighter class?
The Fighter is intended to be, like the Wizard, a character who can and does adapt their tactics to the opposition and draws upon player experience to deliver tactical victories. And to do it without "feeling" like it was using Magic.
...
So honestly, when someone tells me "I know the game backwards and forwards, and when I pull out all the stops with the Fighter I totally win!" And my response is "OK, good." Because that's exactly what people report with the Wizard too.
-Username17
-
Username17
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Jesus fuck guys. Two Handed Fighting is the best style because you use it when you are a fucking spellcaster. At high levels it does more damage than any other style because it is the only one compatible with casting this, and it is the best juggling technique because it's compatible with bladeweave, and it hits more than any other fighting school because it's the only fighting style you can cast wraithstrike out of.
THF is the fighting style of spellcasters and they don't need a fucking powerup.
-Username17
THF is the fighting style of spellcasters and they don't need a fucking powerup.
-Username17
-
NineInchNall
- Duke
- Posts: 1222
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
True enough. Although it would be amusing to give them one anyway.THF is the fighting style of spellcasters and they don't need a fucking powerup.
Current pet peeves:
Misuse of "per se". It means "[in] itself", not "precisely". Learn English.
Malformed singular possessives. It's almost always supposed to be 's.
Misuse of "per se". It means "[in] itself", not "precisely". Learn English.
Malformed singular possessives. It's almost always supposed to be 's.
-
Judging__Eagle
- Prince
- Posts: 4671
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada
Red Rob, the feat is meant to attack people who get close to you, and keep them from attacking you. It's a defensive feat, not an offensive one.
At +0, you get a free AoO on people moving to melee you, due to more reach.
At +1, you get an extra AoO, since entering your increased reach provokes an AoO.
+6, you can 5' step backwards, and get an additional AoO, if you haven't made a 5' step yet.
+11 You can stop enemies from charging you, or through your squares, or you can stop people from doing things, like attacking you.
+16 Bullrush instead of damage, should be more effective than just stopping enemies.
It's about some more options, not powering up the style.
Frank, you're mostly right on how THF is 'the best' for spell casters.... except for one thing, you've probably never seen someone use the "templar tuck" in real life.
It's pretty simple, you basically tuck your weapon under your sheild arm, or 'other' weapon arm; and bang, free hand to start casting spells. It's also something that while I've seen in real life, I have never seen used in a tabletop game.
Once the players know or figure out the templar tuck, shield users and TWF users have a hand free for spelllcasting, alchemy lobbing, rock throwing, or other one-handed ranged attacks.
Shifting both weapons to one hand isn't a big deal in real life either, I mean, I've seen it done tons of times, and done it myself several times. Sometimes you want to be able to run, climb, jump, etc., and tucking your weapon under your arm isn't enough.
When you're shifting your weapons to one hand, you really aren't going to be using those weapons, so holding them 'poorly' isn't a big deal; you just wanted a hand free so you could move along the terrain easier, over waist-high logs, up low embankments, dig out a grenade, bomb, knife, dart, or have a hand free to 'cast'.
Now, from a balance point of view, using the Templar Tuck should be highly limited in D&D; since spells in D&D are actually powerful. Probably limited to the point of "you have to perform the sheathe/unsheathe action". However, people need to realize that it exists, and its use is pretty widespread among people who use melee weapons, sheilds, and have to perform actions that require a free hand; all with the same character.
At +0, you get a free AoO on people moving to melee you, due to more reach.
At +1, you get an extra AoO, since entering your increased reach provokes an AoO.
+6, you can 5' step backwards, and get an additional AoO, if you haven't made a 5' step yet.
+11 You can stop enemies from charging you, or through your squares, or you can stop people from doing things, like attacking you.
+16 Bullrush instead of damage, should be more effective than just stopping enemies.
It's about some more options, not powering up the style.
Frank, you're mostly right on how THF is 'the best' for spell casters.... except for one thing, you've probably never seen someone use the "templar tuck" in real life.
It's pretty simple, you basically tuck your weapon under your sheild arm, or 'other' weapon arm; and bang, free hand to start casting spells. It's also something that while I've seen in real life, I have never seen used in a tabletop game.
Once the players know or figure out the templar tuck, shield users and TWF users have a hand free for spelllcasting, alchemy lobbing, rock throwing, or other one-handed ranged attacks.
Shifting both weapons to one hand isn't a big deal in real life either, I mean, I've seen it done tons of times, and done it myself several times. Sometimes you want to be able to run, climb, jump, etc., and tucking your weapon under your arm isn't enough.
When you're shifting your weapons to one hand, you really aren't going to be using those weapons, so holding them 'poorly' isn't a big deal; you just wanted a hand free so you could move along the terrain easier, over waist-high logs, up low embankments, dig out a grenade, bomb, knife, dart, or have a hand free to 'cast'.
Now, from a balance point of view, using the Templar Tuck should be highly limited in D&D; since spells in D&D are actually powerful. Probably limited to the point of "you have to perform the sheathe/unsheathe action". However, people need to realize that it exists, and its use is pretty widespread among people who use melee weapons, sheilds, and have to perform actions that require a free hand; all with the same character.
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.
While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
-
CatharzGodfoot
- King
- Posts: 5668
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: North Carolina
Remember, JE, that you can only take one AoO provoked by the moving of a single target per round.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
Win.TOZ wrote:You could write for Pathfinder NIN!
Draco_Argentum wrote:Can someone tell it to stop using its teeth please?Mister_Sinister wrote:Clearly, your cock is part of the big barrel the server's busy sucking on.
Juton wrote:Damn, I thought [Pathfailure] accidentally created a feat worth taking, my mistake.
Koumei wrote:Shad, please just punch yourself in the face until you are too dizzy to type. I would greatly appreciate that.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type I - doing exactly the opposite of what they said they would do.Kaelik wrote:No, bad liar. Stop lying.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type II - change for the sake of change.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type III - the illusion of change.
1) JE, stop being so fucking retarded. If the rules don't say you can do that, you can't fucking do that.
2) Lots of spellcasters can in fact fight with two weapons, because most such casters fighting with a sword persist a bunch of buffs.
2) Lots of spellcasters can in fact fight with two weapons, because most such casters fighting with a sword persist a bunch of buffs.
Unrestricted Diplomat 5314 wrote:Accept this truth, as the wisdom of the Crafted: when the oppressors and abusers have won, when the boot of the callous has already trampled you flat, you should always, always take your swing."
-
God_of_Awesome
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 7:19 am
Well, I see what Frank is saying, I still feel like making this:
Buster [Combat]
Who would've though swing a giant sword would be helping in knocking people on their ass?
Prerequisite: Wielding a single weapon with two-hands.
This is a [Combat] feat and scales with your BAB.
+0: You do not provoke an AoO when trying to disarm, bull rush or over run you opponent.
+1: If you fail in trying to disarm or over run an opponent, they cannot immediatley try to do the same to you. If you fail a bull rush attempt, you will not fall prone no matter what.
+6: Improved Sunder
+11: If you succeed in attempt to bull rush or over run an opponent, you also succesfully disarm them.
+16: If you succeed in an attempt to bull rush or over run an opponent, you disarm them AND you do sundering damage to their weapons. You also do sundering damage if you suceed a disarm attempt.
If this is weaksauce, I was gonna go with having bull rushed and over ran opponent get blown away and any sundering damage auto-destroy weapons, shields and armor.
Buster [Combat]
Who would've though swing a giant sword would be helping in knocking people on their ass?
Prerequisite: Wielding a single weapon with two-hands.
This is a [Combat] feat and scales with your BAB.
+0: You do not provoke an AoO when trying to disarm, bull rush or over run you opponent.
+1: If you fail in trying to disarm or over run an opponent, they cannot immediatley try to do the same to you. If you fail a bull rush attempt, you will not fall prone no matter what.
+6: Improved Sunder
+11: If you succeed in attempt to bull rush or over run an opponent, you also succesfully disarm them.
+16: If you succeed in an attempt to bull rush or over run an opponent, you disarm them AND you do sundering damage to their weapons. You also do sundering damage if you suceed a disarm attempt.
If this is weaksauce, I was gonna go with having bull rushed and over ran opponent get blown away and any sundering damage auto-destroy weapons, shields and armor.
Last edited by God_of_Awesome on Wed Jan 27, 2010 8:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Frank on the Fighter (Abridged)
FrankTrollman wrote:...God_of_Awesome wrote: Could I inquire on the motive behind the design decisions on the Fighter class?
The Fighter is intended to be, like the Wizard, a character who can and does adapt their tactics to the opposition and draws upon player experience to deliver tactical victories. And to do it without "feeling" like it was using Magic.
...
So honestly, when someone tells me "I know the game backwards and forwards, and when I pull out all the stops with the Fighter I totally win!" And my response is "OK, good." Because that's exactly what people report with the Wizard too.
-Username17
-
God_of_Awesome
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 7:19 am
So, can you offer some advice?Kaelik wrote:Hey look guys, Goa made a crappy feat. That's new.
Frank on the Fighter (Abridged)
FrankTrollman wrote:...God_of_Awesome wrote: Could I inquire on the motive behind the design decisions on the Fighter class?
The Fighter is intended to be, like the Wizard, a character who can and does adapt their tactics to the opposition and draws upon player experience to deliver tactical victories. And to do it without "feeling" like it was using Magic.
...
So honestly, when someone tells me "I know the game backwards and forwards, and when I pull out all the stops with the Fighter I totally win!" And my response is "OK, good." Because that's exactly what people report with the Wizard too.
-Username17
Don't be a Sundertard. Don't encourage the same.
How's that?
How's that?
Draco_Argentum wrote:Can someone tell it to stop using its teeth please?Mister_Sinister wrote:Clearly, your cock is part of the big barrel the server's busy sucking on.
Juton wrote:Damn, I thought [Pathfailure] accidentally created a feat worth taking, my mistake.
Koumei wrote:Shad, please just punch yourself in the face until you are too dizzy to type. I would greatly appreciate that.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type I - doing exactly the opposite of what they said they would do.Kaelik wrote:No, bad liar. Stop lying.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type II - change for the sake of change.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type III - the illusion of change.
-
CatharzGodfoot
- King
- Posts: 5668
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: North Carolina
Well, it does look an awful lot like Juggernaut.God_of_Awesome wrote:So, can you offer some advice?Kaelik wrote:Hey look guys, Goa made a crappy feat. That's new.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
Lots of feats say something like "if you do X, you have the edge." The edge is better than this ability, and most characters are already going to have the edge, and this character is still going to want the edge as much as those other characters.God_of_Awesome wrote:+0: You do not provoke an AoO when trying to disarm, bull rush or over run you opponent.
Fail.
Again, Edge already gives this. You are wasting time.God_of_Awesome wrote:+1: If you fail in trying to disarm or over run an opponent, they cannot immediatley try to do the same to you. If you fail a bull rush attempt, you will not fall prone no matter what.
Breaking your own loot is dumb. Not as dumb as Roy thinks it is, but in general, it's more niche than ghost touch.God_of_Awesome wrote:+6: Improved Sunder
Furthermore, this is something else that edge already gives you, except the bonus, but honestly, who fucking cares, anything you want to sunder is easy as crap to sunder other than weapons anyway, and this is a TH fighter.
Wow, who fucking cares. disarm is situational and having to already successfully do something else situational is bad. This is a +11 ability. This has to compare with automatically giving you wounding on every attack.God_of_Awesome wrote:+11: If you succeed in attempt to bull rush or over run an opponent, you also succesfully disarm them.
1) If I had a 100% chance to disarm sunder bullrush and overrun in a single attack, that would still not be as good as any +16 ability. This is even worse than that.God_of_Awesome wrote:+16: If you succeed in an attempt to bull rush or over run an opponent, you disarm them AND you do sundering damage to their weapons. You also do sundering damage if you suceed a disarm attempt.
2) The part where when you successfully knock the weapon out of their hand so that they are no longer able to use it, and then, when they are crippled, and might be defeated, you have a chance of destroying the loot they may not even be able to use again, that's fucking double shitty, and actually a negative.
Last edited by Kaelik on Wed Jan 27, 2010 11:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Unrestricted Diplomat 5314 wrote:Accept this truth, as the wisdom of the Crafted: when the oppressors and abusers have won, when the boot of the callous has already trampled you flat, you should always, always take your swing."
This, pretty much. Your +0 and +1 are half of Improved Bullrush and Improved Disarm, and those feats are already pretty ass. With the RoW rules, the +0 is only useful with Disarm, because for Bullrush Juggernaut does that much more broadly at +0. The +1 doesn't actually do anything either. Improved Sunder at (at best!) level 6 is insulting in a Tome feat even if you were using it to get Shock Trooper somehow. The other two just consolidate abilities that are given as universal class actions and don't really synergize well. This is basically Juggernaut with a bad version of Combat Looting's +1. And not even half as good.ubernoob wrote:Don't make crappy feats.God_of_Awesome wrote:So, can you offer some advice?Kaelik wrote:Hey look guys, Goa made a crappy feat. That's new.
Again, this doesn't do what you think it does. At all. Use other Tome feats as a benchmark so at the very least you don't cover ground that's already been covered. Before you post a [Combat] feat, read through the feats in Races of War. Figure out what works thematically for the feat, then convert it into specialty actions that are not as easily replicated by just looking at the RoW special attack actions.
Last edited by Mask_De_H on Wed Jan 27, 2010 8:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
FrankTrollman wrote: Halfling women, as I'm sure you are aware, combine all the "fun" parts of pedophilia without any of the disturbing, illegal, or immoral parts.
K wrote:That being said, the usefulness of airships for society is still transporting cargo because it's an option that doesn't require a powerful wizard to show up for work on time instead of blowing the day in his harem of extraplanar sex demons/angels.
Chamomile wrote: See, it's because K's belief in leaving generation of individual monsters to GMs makes him Chaotic, whereas Frank's belief in the easier usability of monsters pre-generated by game designers makes him Lawful, and clearly these philosophies are so irreconcilable as to be best represented as fundamentally opposed metaphysical forces.
Whipstitch wrote:You're on a mad quest, dude. I'd sooner bet on Zeus getting bored and letting Sisyphus put down the fucking rock.
-
Judging__Eagle
- Prince
- Posts: 4671
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada
The rules actually say that? You can AoO only once on a moving target?
I feel highly insulted if that's what's written.
I mean, I've seriously hit people more than once when they came at me, because they were still coming at me, or moving past me, and I got in a bunch of easy hits.
Never mind though, that's not how it works anyway. d20srd.org.
You provoke when leaving a square. Each time you provoke an AoO, you provoke an AoO.
There's nothing about how a creature suddenly gets immunity to hits once you got attacked once. Every square a creatures travels through that is threatened is an other chance for that creature to get hit.
Only withdrawing, and 5 foot steps are immune to AoOs. The creature with a 30' reach seriously gets the potential for a bunch of AoOs on an incoming enemy
I feel highly insulted if that's what's written.
I mean, I've seriously hit people more than once when they came at me, because they were still coming at me, or moving past me, and I got in a bunch of easy hits.
Never mind though, that's not how it works anyway. d20srd.org.
You provoke when leaving a square. Each time you provoke an AoO, you provoke an AoO.
There's nothing about how a creature suddenly gets immunity to hits once you got attacked once. Every square a creatures travels through that is threatened is an other chance for that creature to get hit.
Only withdrawing, and 5 foot steps are immune to AoOs. The creature with a 30' reach seriously gets the potential for a bunch of AoOs on an incoming enemy
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.
While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
-
PhaedrusXY
- Journeyman
- Posts: 130
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
You only provoke once per movement per enemy, no matter how far you go, or how many threatened squares you leave within that enemy's reach. It's at the bottom of the page that you just linked to...
Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn’t count as more than one opportunity for that opponent.
-
God_of_Awesome
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 7:19 am
So what does having the edge do anyway?
Frank on the Fighter (Abridged)
FrankTrollman wrote:...God_of_Awesome wrote: Could I inquire on the motive behind the design decisions on the Fighter class?
The Fighter is intended to be, like the Wizard, a character who can and does adapt their tactics to the opposition and draws upon player experience to deliver tactical victories. And to do it without "feeling" like it was using Magic.
...
So honestly, when someone tells me "I know the game backwards and forwards, and when I pull out all the stops with the Fighter I totally win!" And my response is "OK, good." Because that's exactly what people report with the Wizard too.
-Username17
-
Cielingcat
- Duke
- Posts: 1453
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
You can read the rules. It says what it does in Races of War, the document which you probably should have read if you are writing combat feats.
CHICKENS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO DO COCAINE, SILKY HEN
Josh_Kablack wrote:You are not a unique and precious snowflake, you are just one more fucking asshole on the internet who presumes themselves to be better than the unwashed masses.
-
God_of_Awesome
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 7:19 am
I was reading it. Where can I find it?
Frank on the Fighter (Abridged)
FrankTrollman wrote:...God_of_Awesome wrote: Could I inquire on the motive behind the design decisions on the Fighter class?
The Fighter is intended to be, like the Wizard, a character who can and does adapt their tactics to the opposition and draws upon player experience to deliver tactical victories. And to do it without "feeling" like it was using Magic.
...
So honestly, when someone tells me "I know the game backwards and forwards, and when I pull out all the stops with the Fighter I totally win!" And my response is "OK, good." Because that's exactly what people report with the Wizard too.
-Username17