Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Soceus 05-15-07, 06:45 PM	Well, get this, I had a conversation with my DM, and this LOGICALLY doesn't make sense... My rogue I have would have an ac of 21, due to combination of 6 dex, and 1 for size for being a halfling, and the last 4 from armor, and a magic item. Now in MELEE combat, if I Expertised 5, and fought defensively, my ac would be a whopping 30. Yet on the other hand, if I was out of melee combat, and I took total defense, my ac could only reach a max of 27 (due to having +6 ac for tumble ranks). So I lose ac for not being in combat effectively? In my oppinion logically speaking I should have a higher ac than just 27 if I stay out of combat attempting to defend myself, while getting no attack rolls... Yet if I stayed in Combat, my ac would be 30, and I would still get attacks... any comments on this?
starfire311 05-15-07, 06:59 PM	Well, get this, I had a conversation with my DM, and this LOGICALLY doesn't make sense... My rogue I have would have an ac of 21, due to combination of 6 dex, and 1 for size for being a halfling, and the last 4 from armor, and a magic item. Now in MELEE combat, if I Expertised 5, and fought defensively, my ac would be a whopping 30. Yet on the other hand, if I was out of melee combat, and I took total defense, my ac could only reach a max of 27 (due to having +6 ac for tumble ranks). So I lose ac for not being in combat effectively? In my oppinion logically speaking I should have a higher ac than just 27 if I stay out of combat attempting to defend myself, while getting no attack rolls... Yet if I stayed in Combat, my ac would be 30, and I would still get attacks... any comments on this? yep, this is how it works... although I am not sure how you are getting it to 30... it should be 29(+3 for fighting defensivly and +5 for CE)
Soceus 05-15-07, 07:01 PM	I believe it's +4, tumble ranks.
starfire311 05-15-07, 07:07 PM	I believe it's +4, tumble ranks. SRD says differently. Special If you have 5 or more ranks in Tumble, you gain a +3 dodge bonus to AC when fighting defensively instead of the usual +2 dodge bonus to AC.
Soceus 05-15-07, 07:11 PM	ahh, was reading out of phb, lol.. sneaky sneaky srd... but logically speaking dont you think you should have higher ac out of melee combat attempting to defend yourself, than you do while attacking? lol..
starfire311 05-15-07, 07:15 PM	ahh, was reading out of phb, lol.. sneaky sneaky srd... but logically speaking dont you think you should have higher ac out of melee combat attempting to defend yourself, than you do while attacking? lol.. Maybe, depends on the flavor for CE, I think it is more of a balancing factor than anything though... otherwise every spellcaster CE if it didnt require an attack to activate it. heck yeah I would take a feat that let me get upto +5 to my AC without any disadvantage... since I am gonna cast fireball.
braethias 05-15-07, 07:19 PM	Fireball? I'm a lightning bolt man m'self.
Naderion 05-15-07, 07:25 PM	Now in MELEE combat, if I Expertised 5, and fought defensively, my ac would be a whopping 30. Yet on the other hand, if I was out of melee combat, and I took total defense, my ac could only reach a max of 27 (due to having +6 ac for tumble ranks). There you have it. Will it be more difficult for your opponent to strike at you while you 'stand still' or while you are slashing with your own blade in his direction. If you really want to have it accurate, Expertise doesn't give you an AC Bonus, but lowers the attack bonus of the attackers. Using expertise, you don't really care if your attacks actually hit your enemy, but your main concern is, that you keep him occupied, so he doesn't get a good chance to strike at you. Sure, that's quite difficult to do, but that's why it's a feat and requires Int 13.
Inigo Carmine 05-15-07, 08:01 PM	1) Your post could have been much simpler to read if you had just expressed your concern that Combat Expertise gave you higher AC than total defense, instead of explaining all of your other AC bonuses. 2) Keep in mind the difference between those two things. Combat expertise is not 100% better than total defense. Using Combat Expertise + fighting defensive causes a large penalty to your attack roll. If someone decides to try and disarm you or sunder your weapon, you're easy pickings with such a heft penalty. Total defense, on the other hand, applies no attack penalty. 3) There's no reason you can't use combat expertise instead of total defense when you want. "In Melee" isn't a defined term in D&D meaning you have to be adjacent to an enemy. The only requirement that most people attach to it is you must be making a melee attack, or otherwise use up an action for one. If your Dm wants to get real fussy with it, tell him you're in melee with the ground, or you are potentially in melee with any invisible attacks next to you; the important thing is that you spend the required standard or fullround action making a melee attacks(s).
Dheran 05-15-07, 08:20 PM	Yet on the other hand, if I was out of melee combat, and I took total defense, my ac could only reach a max of 27 (due to having +6 ac for tumble ranks). You can't take "total defense" outside of combat, because that requires a combat action (either a standard action or a full-round action). Check your Player's Handbook, and you'll see that "total defense" is only in the "Actions In Combat" section. You can't use this, or anything else (like Combat Expertise) that requires combat actions if the DM isn't running things in 6-second rounds. Realistically, there are a bunch of things you can do to guard yourself better when you're not trying to do much besides fight. If you're walking all day to get from A to B, your paranoia level is going to be lower than if somebody tried to kill you in the last 6 seconds. You're not actively trying to defend yourself all day long. If your character has trap sense, that bonus to AC vs. traps applies both in and out of combat, which can be especially helpful when you're not in battle mode.
Soceus 05-15-07, 08:37 PM	Well, here's the problem. For fun, me and another player Dueld Out of Character. He dropped his weapon, and would walk away 10 feet, and I would generally miss my attack of opportunity, he's a fighter, and i'm a rogue, all my damage is based of sneak attacks the way I built my character. When he's walked away, I would attack the weapon, with expertise, and fighting defensively, and get a total ac of 30 (3.5 phb rules). But the DM ruled that I cannot attack the weapon to gain more ac for expertising, and I actually had to attempt to hit a living target, or something like that. So I started doing Total Defense, which is a standard action and I lost ALL my attack rolls, and would have less ac from this (about 27 to be exact). So when he would come back in to attack me, he would be more likely to hit me, just from walking away form combat, and walking back in... the downside is if I attempted to chase him, I would have to choose either 1. Fient, and hope for a sneak attack next round, or 2. Just make an attack and do pathetic damage. The other downside of me chasing him down is he would get both his swings on me, and pretty much kill me. Is it just me, or is DnD Rules logically flawed that if you stand there and ignore all your attacks, you are easier to hit than if you attempted to chase someone down, and fight them.
Soceus 05-15-07, 08:38 PM	You can't take "total defense" outside of combat, because that requires a combat action (either a standard action or a full-round action). Check your Player's Handbook, and you'll see that "total defense" is only in the "Actions In Combat" section. You can't use this, or anything else (like Combat Expertise) that requires combat actions if the DM isn't running things in 6-second rounds. Realistically, there are a bunch of things you can do to guard yourself better when you're not trying to do much besides fight. If you're walking all day to get from A to B, your paranoia level is going to be lower than if somebody tried to kill you in the last 6 seconds. You're not actively trying to defend yourself all day long. If your character has trap sense, that bonus to AC vs. traps applies both in and out of combat, which can be especially helpful when you're not in battle mode. This is an all in combat scenario btw. I said "Out of Melee combat" Which means I'm atleast 5 feet away.
jaelis 05-15-07, 09:19 PM	3) There's no reason you can't use combat expertise instead of total defense when you want. "In Melee" isn't a defined term in D&D meaning you have to be adjacent to an enemy. In fact, Two characters are engaged in melee if they are enemies of each other and either threatens the other.
BW0222 05-16-07, 01:48 AM	Soceus Yet if I stayed in Combat, my ac would be 30, and I would still get attacks... any comments on this? If you need to make real world comparisons... The main reason you are harder to hit in melee is because you aren't just moving around -- you spending part of your six seconds feinting attacks, threatening attacks, parrying blows aimed at you, etc. Basically, you aren't looking for at landing a killing blow as trying to disrupt his attack. Now, imagine that you go into a kendo match and you are given the instructions "Don't worry too much about hitting him, just keep knocking his blade aside, feinting attacks, and backing up." Next imagine that instead of being next to you with a sword, his is 20' away with a bow. Suddenly the same tactics do not work. You can't feint, jab, or otherwise take any offensive action to make him shooting at you any more difficult.
Soceus 05-16-07, 02:01 AM	Well, the thing your missing BWO222, is this whole fight was done with only melee weapons, he would step away, I take total defense, and he would walk up, and it would be easier for him to hit me, than if I chased him down. There were no bows in this whole fight, just melee weaponry.
Critalondel 05-16-07, 02:22 AM	OH NOES, a tabletop role playing game full of wizards, dragons, magic weapons, and hit points doesn't accurately reflect the subtle intricacies and realistic nuances of true medieval combat!
Captain_Kobold 05-16-07, 06:14 AM	Well, the thing your missing BWO222, is this whole fight was done with only melee weapons, he would step away, I take total defense, and he would walk up, and it would be easier for him to hit me, than if I chased him down. There were no bows in this whole fight, just melee weaponry. So take a ready action to engage him in melee with combat expertise at +5 as soon as he comes within range. It could be argued that combat expertise should only provide the dodge bonus to AC to opponents that either you threaten, or who threaten you. That interpretation, whilst it might be more 'realistic' is not supported in the rules however. It would also make combat expertise a little too weak as well I think.
starfire311 05-16-07, 09:25 AM	Well, the thing your missing BWO222, is this whole fight was done with only melee weapons, he would step away, I take total defense, and he would walk up, and it would be easier for him to hit me, than if I chased him down. There were no bows in this whole fight, just melee weaponry. I am guessing the problem is tha this character was faster than yours. Let me see if I get this correct. F=fighter R=halfling rogue round 1 F: attack R and move back 30ft R: charge or total defense Round 2 F: charge or attack and move back provoking an AoO R: Attack with CE/fighting defensivly or charge/total defense I think the problem is that you should be readying an action, if he more than 20ft away, to attack him when he comes to you, then you can use both CE and fighting defensivly if you wish on the readied action. If he is next to you you should move action fient him (because I hope you have improved fient) and teh standard action attack him with CE/fighting defensivly if you need that much AC.
BW0222 05-16-07, 09:39 AM	Soceus, Well, the thing your missing BWO222, is this whole fight was done with only melee weapons, he would step away, I take total defense, and he would walk up, and it would be easier for him to hit me, than if I chased him down. There were no bows in this whole fight, just melee weaponry. Ok, you said out of melee combat. The only attacks, out of melee are ranged. You never said, someone re-entered melee and then attacks. However, that one is extremely easy. With total defense, you are planning to avoid all attacks simply by moving. If an arrow is shot, you move aside. If a sword is swung you move aside. You aren't planning on doing any parrying, feinting attacks, you likely don't have your weapon moving around ready to face attacks, etc. Now, if someone then walks up to you, you have committed yourself to just avoiding attacks - at least for a few seconds. It is far easier for them to hit you since you aren't prepared to wave your weapon at them, parry, feint attacks as they raise their sword, etc. which you are better trained (i.e. combat expertise) in doing. Now, if you readied an action for when someone got close, and then using partial defense and expertise) you would be essentially 'switching' defensive stances (and beginning to feint, parry, etc.) before he got his good attack in. However, in the end, this isn't a question of justifying or explaining things to you logically. D&D is a simulation. Like any simulation, it isn't real. The question is can your imagination accept that it is 'close enough' to believe. If not, no one can convince you that it accurately represents reality (because it doesn't). If you want 100% real, go to a kendo class or something. If you want D&D, try 10% real + 90% imagination. In the end, suspension of disbelief is part of the game which you either buy or don't buy. If you can't buy a justification for 'combat expertise' then you'll need to seriously reconsider playing D&D. As others have pointed out there are far greater things you need to just accept (elves, magic, dragons flying, etc.) than the fact that someone has a 'style' of melee fighting (combat expertise) which provides better defense when you are using it than not.
Vegepygmy 05-16-07, 11:34 AM	But the DM ruled that I cannot attack the weapon to gain more ac for expertising, and I actually had to attempt to hit a living target, or something like that.That's where your DM erred. From the 3.0 FAQ: Do I have to make an attack to use the Expertise feat to improve my Armor Class? No, you don’t have to attack, but you do have to choose the attack or full attack action. That is, you can declare an attack or full attack, claim the Armor Class bonus, and then not make the attacks to which you are entitled. You cannot use Expertise with the total defense action or any other action except attack or full attack.
Rakor 05-16-07, 01:53 PM	If you are desperate to get your expertise bonus when there is no one around tell your DM that you suspect there is an invisible opponent in an adjacent space and attack it with full expertise. -Nick
Flan 05-16-07, 02:12 PM	ahh, was reading out of phb, lol.. sneaky sneaky srd... It's +3 in the PHB as well.