Post/Author/DateTime	Post
awroe 02-19-07, 07:10 PM	Some new feat combinations using PHBII that might be useful. EWP(Spiked Chain) and Adaptable Flanker (requires Combat Reflexes, Vexing Flanker and BAB+4) Allows you to choose any square you threaten as a flanked square, in addition to the square you are in - guaranteed flanking against a medium or smaller creature. Staggering Strike and Melee Evasion Staggering Strike restricts the opponent to a single action if they fail a save. Melee Evasion gives you (normal and touch) AC equal to BAB + 1d20 against a single attack. Fight defensively, make a full attack which staggers, then 'evade' the one remaining blow. Anyone have any more? AW.
Jay_Ibero_911 02-19-07, 07:21 PM	Some new feat combinations using PHBII that might be useful. EWP(Spiked Chain) and Adaptable Flanker (requires Combat Reflexes, Vexing Flanker and BAB+4) Allows you to choose any square you threaten as a flanked square, in addition to the square you are in - guaranteed flanking against a medium or smaller creature. Staggering Strike and Melee Evasion Staggering Strike restricts the opponent to a single action if they fail a save. Melee Evasion gives you (normal and touch) AC equal to BAB + 1d20 against a single attack. Fight defensively, make a full attack which staggers, then 'evade' the one remaining blow. Anyone have any more? AW. Well first of all I'm almost certain it's been determined you can't flank with yourself with the first combination. Second, Melee Evasion is only useful for builds whose potential AC is much higher with the feat than it is normally, such as full BAB reckless raging barbarians...
jstorrie 02-19-07, 07:54 PM	You definitely can't flank for yourself. Melee Evasion + Staggering Strike is nice but not great. Too random to count on, and AC (APL+20) is easily attainable anyway.
awroe 02-20-07, 04:08 AM	You definitely can't flank for yourself. Can you point me at the reasoning for this? It'd be useful if only to warn off other people. The only thing I can think of off hand is that your opponent gives you cover which stops you threatening directly behind you, but there is an EWM ability that should remove that issue. Melee Evasion + Staggering Strike is nice but not great. Too random to count on, and AC (APL+20) is easily attainable anyway. I was thinking it might be useful in combination with Shock Trooper - negative AC not quite so frightening anymore.
Arvagor 02-20-07, 07:33 AM	Can you point me at the reasoning for this? It'd be useful if only to warn off other people. The only thing I can think of off hand is that your opponent gives you cover which stops you threatening directly behind you, but there is an EWM ability that should remove that issue.1) Common sense, since it says "you and your allies", implying another person must be involved; 2) since you're using a reach weapon, the square on the opposite side of your opponent has cover, therefore you don't threaten the square, and 3) a recent Sage Advice (which we can use for guidance), says as much. If you're thinking of the "Exotic Reach" ability of EWM, it says, "When wielding an exotic weapon with reach, the character may make an attack of opportunity against a foe that provokes such an attack even if the foe has cover (but not total cover)." Regardless of whether the opponent provokes such an attack, the square opposite your opponent would still have cover
Gwumph 02-21-07, 07:25 AM	My Personal Favorite cheese combo Thief-acrobat - fast movement ability (enables tumble at full speed without -10 ) Dervish - movement mastery (allows to take 10 on all tumble checks) Dervish Dance - allows full attack in conjuction with a single move moving 5ft between each attack. Acrobatic attack(feat) - +4 to next attack after succeeding in tumble check for an AoO At Lv10 PC Tumble +20 minimum so DC 30 for every tumble check feats: weapon focus, TWF, Improved TWF Attack bonus (roughly using TWF) +13 +13 +8 +8 so you move up to a large creature, tumble past reach first attack +17 (acro att) tumble into next square second attack +17 (acro att) tumble into next square third attack +12 (acro att) tumble into next square fourth attack +12 (acro att) tumble next square tumble out of reach total movement 35ft so you still at least 5ft of movement left.
Jay_Ibero_911 02-21-07, 01:14 PM	My Personal Favorite cheese combo Thief-acrobat - fast movement ability (enables tumble at full speed without -10 ) Dervish - movement mastery (allows to take 10 on all tumble checks) Dervish Dance - allows full attack in conjuction with a single move moving 5ft between each attack. Acrobatic attack(feat) - +4 to next attack after succeeding in tumble check for an AoO At Lv10 PC Tumble +20 minimum so DC 30 for every tumble check feats: weapon focus, TWF, Improved TWF Attack bonus (roughly using TWF) +13 +13 +8 +8 so you move up to a large creature, tumble past reach first attack +17 (acro att) tumble into next square second attack +17 (acro att) tumble into next square third attack +12 (acro att) tumble into next square fourth attack +12 (acro att) tumble next square tumble out of reach total movement 35ft so you still at least 5ft of movement left. Sorry, you can only get the +4 bonus from acrobatic strike once per opponent per round, because you make your tumble check for movement against a specific opponent, not specific squares....
Vanadium 02-21-07, 01:37 PM	Sorry, you can only get the +4 bonus from acrobatic strike once per opponent per round, because you make your tumble check for movement against a specific opponent, not specific squares.... The most current rules FAQ seems to counter this. It basically says that tumble is made against certain squares. That, and the movement penalty is only applied to those squares you are tumbling through. FAQ here: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20030221a
Jay_Ibero_911 02-21-07, 02:07 PM	The most current rules FAQ seems to counter this. It basically says that tumble is made against certain squares. That, and the movement penalty is only applied to those squares you are tumbling through. FAQ here: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20030221a Ok, let me repharse that, it is against a specific set of squares, but it is still by opponent. 1 successful tumble check allows you to tumble through all of a specific creature's threatened squares without provoking AOO's. Therefore as a dervish with acrobatic strike, you either make the single tumble check and get +4 to your first attack, or you don't. The only reason 2 checks were called for in the example was because there were 2 different uses of tumble used, one to move through threatened squares, and one to move through a square occupied by an opponent.
Mommy was an Orc 02-21-07, 02:28 PM	Deadly Defense from CS seems fun for Monks and other 'I attack a lot of times with a finessable weapon' builds. Combine with Improved Natural Attack and a 6th level Monk can easily be doing 3d6+4 damage/+3 AC by taking a -4 to hit. Throw Fiery Fist into there, and that jumps to 4d6+4. i.e. we're talking about a Monk doing real damage :)
jstorrie 02-21-07, 04:22 PM	Deadly Defense is great with Combat Expertise. -2 to attack for +1d6 damage resembles Power Attack, and you get an AC bonus too? Sweet.
Jay_Ibero_911 02-21-07, 04:28 PM	Deadly Defense is great with Combat Expertise. -2 to attack for +1d6 damage resembles Power Attack, and you get an AC bonus too? Sweet. How about Combat Expertise, Power Attack, Deadly Defense, and Armbands of Might? Assuming a 2 handed finesseable weapon (Spiked Chain and Elven Courtblade come to mind), you take -4 to hit, get +2 AC and 1d6+6 damage....
trollbill 02-21-07, 04:36 PM	2) since you're using a reach weapon, the square on the opposite side of your opponent has cover, therefore you don't threaten the square FYI, cover (except total cover) does not prevent you from being threatened. Cover allows you to move, cast spells and make ranged attacks without provoking AoOs while threatened. But that's not the same thing as not being threatened. And unless I missed something in the flanking rules, cover doesn't prevent you from being flanked.
Arvagor 02-21-07, 10:05 PM	FYI, cover (except total cover) does not prevent you from being threatened. Cover allows you to move, cast spells and make ranged attacks without provoking AoOs while threatened. But that's not the same thing as not being threatened. And unless I missed something in the flanking rules, cover doesn't prevent you from being flanked. Sorry, you are correct, Trollbill... This may be someone's house-rule intruding on my thought processes, i.e. if you don't threaten a square, you can't execute an AoO against an opponent in that square, but it is an open question as to, if you are not permitted to take an AoO, do you still threaten? The rules are silent on the latter, and we have played it as "no, you do not threaten". I don't think I said anything about cover preventing flanking... Nonetheless, it remains that the aforementioned Adaptable Flanker feat only works in conjunction with allies, not yourself. Sage Advice has ruled it that way, and since the feat itself is otherwise silent on the issue, that is how I will always rule as well.
Gwumph 02-21-07, 10:47 PM	Jay Let's look at the feat more closely "If you succeed in using Tumble to avoid an oppenents attack of opportunity you gain a +4 on the next attack that you make against that foe as long as the attack occurs before the end of your current turn." So I tumble up avoid an AoO and get a +4 to that attack. I move 5ft to the left for another attack. Since the AoO didn't go off from my first tumble, then I have to tumble again to avoid an AoO. So I tumble into that square, now I have just used tumble "To avoid an AoO" so my next attack will be +4. So If you keep making your tumble checks then your oppenents AoO never goes off so you are still being threatened, you have to keep making tumble checks for movement. Now if a tumbled in and did all my attacks in the same 5ft square then only my first attack would get a +4. But as long as I keep moving to next squares and tumbling to avoid AoO then the feat applies.
GorTeX 02-21-07, 11:18 PM	Sorry, you are correct, Trollbill... This may be someone's house-rule intruding on my thought processes, i.e. if you don't threaten a square, you can't execute an AoO against an opponent in that square, but it is an open question as to, if you are not permitted to take an AoO, do you still threaten? The rules are silent on the latter, and we have played it as "no, you do not threaten". From the SRD: Threatened Squares You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your action. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you’re unarmed, you don’t normally threaten any squares and thus can’t make attacks of opportunity. Reach Weapons Most creatures of Medium or smaller size have a reach of only 5 feet. This means that they can make melee attacks only against creatures up to 5 feet (1 square) away. However, Small and Medium creatures wielding reach weapons threaten more squares than a typical creature. In addition, most creatures larger than Medium have a natural reach of 10 feet or more. Less than total Cover does not prevent you from making a melee attack against someone. All cover does is to prevent the normal AoO when someone leaves a square you threaten. that being said, Adaptable flanker does not allow you to flank with yourself.
Jay_Ibero_911 02-21-07, 11:26 PM	Jay Let's look at the feat more closely "If you succeed in using Tumble to avoid an oppenents attack of opportunity you gain a +4 on the next attack that you make against that foe as long as the attack occurs before the end of your current turn." So I tumble up avoid an AoO and get a +4 to that attack. I move 5ft to the left for another attack. Since the AoO didn't go off from my first tumble, then I have to tumble again to avoid an AoO. So I tumble into that square, now I have just used tumble "To avoid an AoO" so my next attack will be +4. So If you keep making your tumble checks then your oppenents AoO never goes off so you are still being threatened, you have to keep making tumble checks for movement. Now if a tumbled in and did all my attacks in the same 5ft square then only my first attack would get a +4. But as long as I keep moving to next squares and tumbling to avoid AoO then the feat applies. The problem there is after the first tumble check, there are no AOO's to prevent with further tumble checks regardless of how many threatened squares you move through around the same creature. So you attack, move, make tumble check, attack with +4 bonus, move, attack, move, attack and so on. There's only 1 tumble check to make if you are only moving through 1 creature's threatened squares.
Gwumph 02-21-07, 11:45 PM	Jay Are you saying that if I succeed in a single tumble check, then I walk around the enemy as much as I want with out an AoO, because if I succeed at my first tumble the bad guy gets to keep his AoO (it never went off), but can't ever use it against me for movement AoO for that entire round?? Where are the rules to support your this?
Jay_Ibero_911 02-21-07, 11:59 PM	Jay Are you saying that if I succeed in a single tumble check, then I walk around the enemy as much as I want with out an AoO, because if I succeed at my first tumble the bad guy gets to keep his AoO (it never went off), but can't ever use it against me for movement AoO for that entire round?? Where are the rules to support your this? Sure he still has an AOO available, but he has no opportunity to make it. The rules to support that are the tumble rules themselves. You make a check against an OPPONENT, not against specific squares. So if you make your initial tumble check against a given OPPONENT, you can tumble through his threatened squares as much as you want for that turn. Make 1 tumble check, go full circle around a guy. The only time more than one tumble check is involved is if there is more than one opponent, so if 2 orcs are adjacent to each other, you tumble through one's threatened area with 1 tumble check, and get 1 attack at +4, then you make the slightly higher tumble check against the other opponent and get +4 on one attack against him.
Arvagor 02-22-07, 12:01 AM	Less than total Cover does not prevent you from making a melee attack against someone. All cover does is to prevent the normal AoO when someone leaves a square you threaten.No; any type of cover (total or otherwise) prevents all AoOs, not just those provoked by moving out of the threatened square. From the SRD: ;) Cover and Attacks of Opportunity You can’t execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with cover relative to you.
Ramacass 02-22-07, 01:08 AM	Gortex never said cover does not prevent AoO he said cover does not prevent Melee Attacks, unless it is total cover of course:D And by the rules you threaten any square you can make an attack into. Cover just prevents you from making AoO against opponets with cover relative to you, but doesn't change that fact that you threaten them Even by the logic of the argument, how could cover prevent an AoO if you didn't threaten that opponent in the first place. If cover just stopped you from threatening then the whole "prevents AoO" would be pointless because you wouldn't threaten and then there would be no AoO to prevent. The feat says, now this is only from memory so someone please correct me if I'm wrong, that you can effectivly count any one square you threaten as being occupied for purposes of flanking for YOU and your allies in addition to the square you are in. By that even though it doesn't make real world sence the feat combination as presented by the rules works and you could flank someone by yourself.
Gwumph 02-22-07, 03:14 AM	Jay have you read the new FAQ?? Is say explicitly that you have to make multiple tumble checks.
Jay_Ibero_911 02-22-07, 03:22 AM	Jay have you read the new FAQ?? Is say explicitly that you have to make multiple tumble checks. I have, and no it doesn't. When a character tumbles (at half speed) during a move action, does that mean he is moving at half speed for the whole move, or just in the squares where tumbling? Although it’s easiest to apply the half-speed penalty to the entire move action, it’s not strictly necessary to do so. If the player and DM can handle this additional level of complexity, it’s perfectly okay to rule that you pay an extra movement cost only for each square that you use Tumble to exit without provoking an attack of opportunity (as well as for each square of an enemy’s space that you enter using Tumble). For example, imagine Ember begins her turn 10 feet from an orc and wants to use Tumble to move through its space and end up 15 feet away on the opposite side. • Her first square of movement wouldn’t provoke attacks of opportunity (since she’s not leaving a threatened square), so she doesn’t use Tumble or move at half speed. • Her second and third squares of movement take her through the orc’s space, so these effectively cost twice normal (that is, they each cost 1 extra square of movement), and this movement requires a DC 25 Tumble check. (If you’re using this system, it’s much easier to think of tumbling as costing extra squares of movement rather than actually changing your speed.) Ember has now paid a total of 5 squares of movement (out of the 8 allotted to her for her speed of 40 feet). • Assuming that check succeeds, Ember now moves from a threatened square (adjacent to the orc), which requires a DC 15 Tumble check and costs twice normal (or 1 extra square of movement). She’s now paid a total of 7 squares of movement. • Finally, Ember moves one last square, ending up 15 feet from the orc on the opposite side from where she began. She’s not leaving a threatened square, so she doesn’t use Tumble or pay any extra movement. Ember has paid for 8 squares (40 feet) of movement, and has covered a linear distance of 5 squares (25 feet). There are only 2 checks there, because 2 different uses of tumble are being used. One for moving through an occupied square, and one for moving though threatened squares. So you can only benefit from tumbling feint once per opponent per round. So you make 1 tumble check against one opponent, if you fail it he gets one AOO, if you make it he gets no AOO. Regardless of the outcome of the single check, you are free to move through all his threatened squares afterward without any further risk of AOO...
jstorrie 02-22-07, 03:47 AM	The feat says, now this is only from memory so someone please correct me if I'm wrong, that you can effectivly count any one square you threaten as being occupied for purposes of flanking for YOU and your allies in addition to the square you are in. Yes, that is what the feat says. That portion is there so that you as well can gain a flanking bonus if your ally isn't directly across from you, and not just provide one. But you still can't be your own flanking buddy.
Ramacass 02-22-07, 03:57 AM	Yes, that is what the feat says. That portion is there so that you as well can gain a flanking bonus if your ally isn't directly across from you, and not just provide one. But you still can't be your own flanking buddy. Yeah, that makes sence :weep: fun while it lasted
awroe 02-22-07, 05:12 PM	Yes, that is what the feat says. That portion is there so that you as well can gain a flanking bonus if your ally isn't directly across from you, and not just provide one. But you still can't be your own flanking buddy. If you were riding a mount, that'd count - in fact someone with a reach weapon standing directly behind you would also count, letting you get sneak attacks in without putting anyone else in hitting range.
Arvagor 02-22-07, 08:52 PM	But you still can't be your own flanking buddy.And just confirmed by the newest FAQ: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/Main35FAQv01262007.zip
ShinAkuma2 02-22-07, 09:07 PM	Hey, how about this: Can a character with Acrobatic Strike (Player’s Handbook II, 71) claim the +4 bonus against multiple targets in the same round if she uses Tumble to avoid attacks of opportunity from more than one enemy? Yes, as long as the attack roll takes place before the end of your current turn. For example, a dervish (Complete Warrior, 26) could gain the +4 bonus on attack rolls against each enemy that she attacked during a dervish dance, as long as she had successfully used Tumble to avoid attacks of opportunity from that enemy during that turn. So, as Jay said, you can Acrobatic Strike multiple enemies. However, since you make a single DC 15 check to move through an enemy's threatened squares without provoking, you don't have multiple opportunities to Acrobatic Strike.
bitznarf 02-22-07, 09:16 PM	So, as Jay said, you can Acrobatic Strike multiple enemies. However, since you make a single DC 15 check to move through an enemy's threatened squares without provoking, you don't have multiple opportunities to Acrobatic Strike. Right, its only usable once per opponent per round.
Gwumph 02-22-07, 11:42 PM	Shin Not to be reaching, but that doesn't really answer what we were talking about. That was about multiple opponents. What we were talking about were multiple tumble checks with a single opponent. i.e Tumble through a threaten square, feats works yes. Then tumble into an occupied square (new tumble check), feat works ???? It said in the old FAQ that movement requiring different DC's for tumble have to be rerolled. Feat says any successfully tumble check for an AoO give a +4 to next attack. So the question is : Is it possible under ANY circumstances to make more than 1 tumble check against a single opponent in a single round, and if yes what are those circumstances.
Japangirl 02-22-07, 11:45 PM	One tumble check per opponent to move all the space you want around them up to your movement. I really can't think of a way to require more than one tumble check per opponent. I suppose you might be able to tumble through them (DC 25) and then around (DC 15), but I'm pretty sure that once you're through that tumble check also counts for going around as well.
copper_wyrmling 02-23-07, 12:05 AM	One tumble check per opponent to move all the space you want around them up to your movement. I really can't think of a way to require more than one tumble check per opponent. I suppose you might be able to tumble through them (DC 25) and then around (DC 15), but I'm pretty sure that once you're through that tumble check also counts for going around as well. If you resolve tumbling square by square, as the FAQ suggests, then say you tumble the first square at half speed, then decide you want to go at full speed for the rest of your move (perhaps you got hit by a nasty spell that reduced your move speed). Presumably you need a new tumble check, this time with a -10 penalty - the fact that you've already passed the basic DC 15 check doesn't let you walk past them at full speed without provoking. I'd probably rule similarly for entering tricky terrain (which increases the DC of the check, rather than giving a penalty). I would also think that if you want to go through an enemy's square twice in the same round, you need two checks. I could be wrong on that, though.
Gwumph 02-23-07, 12:07 AM	Right, I can see that. I am not trying to be dense here people, just exploring the limitations of the feat. Question: What happens if you move out of threat range and then move back in. Does the orginal tumble check stand? i.e tumble in attack, move away 15ft, move back in.
Gwumph 02-23-07, 12:14 AM	LOL me and Copper posted at the same time. I was agreeing with Japan (as I read the FAQ), problem is the FAQ raises more questions then it answers. Also the is seems to me the the rules imply that if you made a single tumble check to pass through a number of squares threaten by the enemy, that you would do so continuesly. But if you tumble 2 squares, stop cast a spell and then moved again, it seems to me that would require a second tumble check since you broke up the movement and have to start backflipping all over again.
Japangirl 02-23-07, 12:28 AM	Hmm, I can see that. You would need a feat to move-cast-move, but that feat does exist. I don't really like the FAQ on this, it's still really vague and doesn't actually answer things, it just confuses them more.
Jay_Ibero_911 02-23-07, 01:37 PM	Hmm, I can see that. You would need a feat to move-cast-move, but that feat does exist. I don't really like the FAQ on this, it's still really vague and doesn't actually answer things, it just confuses them more. I think the easiest way to rule it would be to only require/allow additional tumble checks in a situation where tumbling through a certain square would require a different DC than the initial tumble check. For instance, tumbling around a guy, into rough terrain on his other side would require an initial tumble check at the standard DC 15, then DC 17 tumble check when entering the rough terrain. I think it makes sense, because you suddenly find yourself having to try a little harder to avoid that potential AOO, whereas normally the difficulty does not change so the single DC 15 tumble check represents your whole movement through threatened squares...
bitznarf 02-23-07, 01:42 PM	Bah, I thought I was already at the end of the thread. Japangirl had already responded with the same answer.
Alpha_Nerd 02-23-07, 01:43 PM	I would say you could stop tumbling and tumble again all you wanted. I mean, normally people wouldn't do it as it makes them have to make more and more checks, but I'm sure you could if you wanted. Ok I tumble 5 feet, stop tumbling, tumble 5 feet again, stop tumbling rinse repeat. Especially if you go full speed one square then half-speed the next.
Gwumph 02-23-07, 02:19 PM	No-one is saying you can't Alpha. The question is, would that incurr another tumble check, or do you keep the orginal. Especially if you enter a threatened area, leave a threatened area Tumble move then re-enter attack, leave again. For the underlined move, you are not being threatened so you move normally no tumble, you enter threateren area again move normally, attack and then leave. For that last leave does the orginal tumble check still count after moving 2 squares normally and attacking. Whats everyone's opinion?? Cheers Gwumph
Alpha_Nerd 02-23-07, 02:24 PM	I'm saying if you stop tumbling, restarting is another check. If you don't stop tumbling, you only make one check. Unless multiple opponents are involved of course.
Gwumph 02-23-07, 02:44 PM	Right, I know this is only your opinion. but what happens if you stay in the threaten area but cast a spell or make an attack and then move again. Old tumble check stands or make a new tumble check? Reasons why?
Jay_Ibero_911 02-23-07, 03:12 PM	Right, I know this is only your opinion. but what happens if you stay in the threaten area but cast a spell or make an attack and then move again. Old tumble check stands or make a new tumble check? Reasons why? It doesn't say anywhere that you have to stop tumbling to attack or cast a spell. That's a faulty assumption.