Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Real_Sorceror 01-24-08, 02:07 AM	Within my gaming group we have been discussing the fact that an entire combat line has been destroyed by one spell, freedom of movement. In response we have been discussing this possible feat. Supreme Grappling: Prerequisites: BAB +21, Improved Unarmed Strike, Improved Trip, Improved Grapple Benefit: If the target of a grapple has a spell, spell-like, supernatural, or extraordinary effect rendering him immune to grapple, the target is instead granted a bonus of 10+ target's Caster Level/2 (If spell or spell like ability ) or HD/2 (if supernatural or extraordinary ) to their resist grapple and/or escape artist check, but is able to be grappled. This feat does not allow you to grapple ethereal or incorporeal targets unless you have a class feature, spell or ability to strike them. Thoughts opinions?
thorofasgard13 01-24-08, 03:59 AM	Within my gaming group we have been discussing the fact that an entire combat line has been destroyed by one spell, freedom of movement. In response we have been discussing this possible feat. Supreme Grappling: Prerequisites: BAB +21, Improved Unarmed Strike, Improved Trip, Improved Grapple Benefit: If the target of a grapple has a spell, spell-like, supernatural, or extraordinary effect rendering him immune to grapple, the target is instead granted a bonus of 10+ target's Caster Level/2 (If spell or spell like ability ) or HD/2 (if supernatural or extraordinary ) to their resist grapple and/or escape artist check, but is able to be grappled. This feat does not allow you to grapple ethereal or incorporeal targets unless you have a class feature, spell or ability to strike them. Thoughts opinions? I like it. I think fredom of movement covers too broad an area.
Tequila_Sunrise 01-24-08, 04:45 PM	I don't think there's anything wrong with just altering the spells to provide a similar bonus if it's a problem in your game. TS
BigGus 01-24-08, 05:14 PM	I don't think there's anything wrong with just altering the spells to provide a similar bonus if it's a problem in your game. TS I second this. There are far too many absolutes around, especially in epic games where all spells/ items etc are available. In fact, I'm going to adopt something similar to this for FoM in my own games. Thanks!
rob_douglas 01-25-08, 12:01 AM	I have often thought that making Freedom of Movement grant a +20 bonus to Escape Artist checks would be better. Maybe +30 to make it really awesome, but not completely negate all grappling. There are however some epic creatures that could then grapple and completely negate a PC - they have amazing grapple checks. Of course a grappled Epic PC has options, not the least of which is a good use for Silent Dimension Door. Freedom, the 9th level spell, should probably still grant absolute Freedom - it is instantaneous after all. ROB
Wellspring 01-26-08, 07:04 PM	I kind of understand the love of absolutes. Sure you can't grapple someone with FoM-- but you can Greater Dispel them, and then grapple them. My fighter has a huge grapple, so I love grapple-prone monsters; I find there are still plenty of them out there. My beef is with the huge variance of grapple bonuses among characters/monsters of roughly similar CR. FoM helps even the playing field a bit; the fact that it's dispellable means that if you really want to grapple you have that option.
Thorsbjorn 01-27-08, 03:28 AM	I have often thought that making Freedom of Movement grant a +20 bonus to Escape Artist checks would be better. Maybe +30 to make it really awesome, but not completely negate all grappling. There are however some epic creatures that could then grapple and completely negate a PC - they have amazing grapple checks. Of course a grappled Epic PC has options, not the least of which is a good use for Silent Dimension Door. Freedom, the 9th level spell, should probably still grant absolute Freedom - it is instantaneous after all. ROB Hey Rob! I had a recent situation where some dire sharks attacked one of the party members as he was underwater trying to untangle the barbed, poisoned kelp mass that the sahuagin had put there to stop the ship from steering. He happens to have freedom of movement on his armor, and he'd activated it in order to fly (he's a half-celestial) underwater. The dire sharks would have posed a significantly greater threat if they'd actually had a shot at grappling him (with improved grab when they bite) and simply taking him down to depths where he would suffer pressure damage. It would have been more exiting if freedom of movement had given him a +20 or even +30 bonus on his grapple checks rather than just allowing him to automatically escape, so I'm considering your suggestion. Have you made such a change yourself? If so, how has it worked out? Thanks. :)
rob_douglas 01-28-08, 09:23 AM	NO, I haven't implemented it, but I keep thinking about it when I have to remove grappling creatures, or otherwise ignore them because of this problem. Don't forget, Freedom of Movement also overcomes pressure damage from the ocean depths (per Dungeon #92 adventure Razing of Redshore, which is tecnically official). So even if the sharks had got him, that would be less an issue. Of course that is another absolute you might change - granting a bonus 100, or 1000 feet of pressure resistance, but not absolute protection. ROB
Real_Sorceror 01-28-08, 08:24 PM	I kind of understand the love of absolutes. Sure you can't grapple someone with FoM-- but you can Greater Dispel them, and then grapple them. My fighter has a huge grapple, so I love grapple-prone monsters; I find there are still plenty of them out there. My beef is with the huge variance of grapple bonuses among characters/monsters of roughly similar CR. FoM helps even the playing field a bit; the fact that it's dispellable means that if you really want to grapple you have that option. /sigh... If only it was that easy, not all FoM are dispellable, you are forgetting items, and creatures/classes with FoM as an extraordinary ability. Examples are I believe the Master Scout prestige class and the Master of the Hunt from MM5. Oh on a side note you are also forgetting intelligent magical items that can cast FoM as an immediate action.
Thorsbjorn 01-28-08, 11:17 PM	/sigh... If only it was that easy, not all FoM are dispellable, you are forgetting items, and creatures/classes with FoM as an extraordinary ability. Examples are I believe the Master Scout prestige class and the Master of the Hunt from MM5. Oh on a side note you are also forgetting intelligent magical items that can cast FoM as an immediate action. If an item casts or allows you to cast freedom of movement, someone can still dispel it with the dispel magic tree of spells. I suppose if some item radiated freedom of movement rather than cast it or allowed you to cast it, but then you could use dispel magic to suppress the item. Suppressing an item doesn't last very long, but it still allows someone to get rid of freedom of movement for a brief time. Don't forget, Freedom of Movement also overcomes pressure damage from the ocean depths (per Dungeon #92 adventure Razing of Redshore, which is tecnically official). So even if the sharks had got him, that would be less an issue. Of course that is another absolute you might change - granting a bonus 100, or 1000 feet of pressure resistance, but not absolute protection. ROB I missed this before because I'm rushing through so many things at once. (The semester is well under way, so I'm teaching again.) I find it hard to remember things I've never heard of before :p but given how powerful freedom of movement seems already, I'm not going to add the ability to avoid damage from pressure to it. (Even if I were going to add the ability, I wouldn't have known about it when I ran the combat with the dire sharks, so if they'd successfully grappled him and pulled him down he would have taken the damage. For that matter I forgot that the half-celestial character doing the underwater fighting has DR 10/+2, so in retrospect I'm raising their CR by 1 to reflect their ability to overcome his DR 10/+2 [they still couldn't overcome his DR 2/-]). By the way, is there any precedent for freedom of movement allowing the recipient to avoid damage? I don't see anything in the spell description that allows avoiding damage. It seems to me that the author of the article feel prey to a little wishful thinking that the editors didn't catch before it went to print. :D