Post/Author/DateTime	Post
kenicolo 03-14-07, 11:18 AM	Here is an idea i'd like to use in my games and i'd like to share it with you and hear some comments or feedback. I know that it can be compared to fighting defensively but this is more an ACTIVE defense. Parry (New action) req shield You can ready a standard action to parry a melee attack with a shield You only need to ready a parry " I ready my shield to parry" and when an opponent attack you, you can choose to take the redied action or to wait for another attack. If you choose to parry, make a melee attack roll modified by you shield AC bonus opposed by the attack roll of the opponent. If you are successful your shield has taken a full hit as if targetted by a sunder attempt and you don’t take the hit. If you fail the opposed check then the attack pass trought and STILL must hityour AC. You can parry only 1 attack per round. You can also ready against an area attack such as color spray, fireball or sinking cloud. The procedure is the same but instead of making an opposed check, you add your shield bonus to AC to the saving throw. This can only be used aganst attack thant you can "see comming" and so it cant be use against Mass hold person or any spell that don't have a visual (subjent to dm approval) Weapon Parry (feat) req: Bab+1 You can use the parry action with a normal weapon instead of a shield but doing so is mor difficult. Follow the normal steps but you take a penality of -4 with light weapons. Imrove parry (feat) req: Bab +1, Int 13 You can substitute one of your attack in a full round attack to parry using the same atack modifier. ex. Bob the fighter has a BAB of 12 ( +12/+7/+2), Bob makes a full round attack on a mean Ogre but decide to retain the second attack to parry so he strike at +12 and +2. On the Ogre's turn the Ogre decide to attack Bob with his great club and roll a total of 16, Bob use his prepared parry at a bonus of +9 (+7 bab and +2 heavy shield) rolls a 12 for a total of 21 and succesfuly parry the ogre's attack. You can only substitute 1 attack in a fullround attack. Greater Parry (feat) req: Improved parry, Int 13, Bab +6 You can now substitute any number of attack of your full round attack to parry but stil can use only 1 parry at a time if you are using only one weapon. If you use a secondary weapon, then you cans use 1 additional parry against a single attack and you still need the Weapon parry feat. So now you can parry many different ennemy at a time. You also always add you shield Bonus to any saving throws made against area attack
tarkin 03-14-07, 11:36 AM	I dislike what you have proposed. 1. An Active defenses already exists. It is called Combat Expertise. While they don't actively use the word "parry", the mechanics described are an effective form of Parry. You lower your Attack bonus in order to increase your AC. I.E. You are using your weapon to defend instead of attack, in an active manner. 2. Improved Parry and Great Parry have serious flaws. Improved Parry really deserves to have a BAB of 6+ (It needs two attacks per round to do anything) You have set up a system where a high level parryer is entirely safe in combat from someone with only one attack per round. This was conciously avoided by the game designers. Great Parry makes it worse, and may in fact be reasonable as an Epic feat. 3. Your system does not reasonable account for the difference between a Buckler shield, light shield, heavy Shield, and Tower Shield. 4. Your system is ridiculsoulsy for use against area attack spells. It would actually make some sense if you let it work against touch attack spells, as those at least have an attack roll. (Note, a feat/magical power actually already exists for converting a shield bonus to a Deflection bonus, allowing it to help in that case). But claiming to parry an explosion, such as Fireball, that is just nonsensical.
Aggrenox 03-14-07, 12:33 PM	There is a amazing thread about this in the repository. http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=774084
kenicolo 03-14-07, 10:35 PM	The basic idea of Parry is to give to shields the value they have. Many of my firend wished to play a sword and shield and found themselve felling downgraded in comparison of the avantages of other style like two handed weapons. Cause right now shield doesn't attrack anyone because its to passive. ((1. An Active defenses already exists. It is called CombatExpertise. While they don't actively use the word "parry", themechanics described are an effective form of Parry. You lower your Attack bonus in order to increase your AC. I.E. You are using your weapon to defend instead of attack, in an active manner.) I belive that reducing your bab is not as ACTIVE as making an opposed chek and hoping " DUDE LET IT BE A 17 SO I AVOID THIS ATTACK!! !" 2. Improved Parry and Great Parry have serious flaws. Improved Parry really deserves to have a BAB of 6+ (It needs two attacks per round to do anything) You have set up a system where a high level parryer is entirely safe in combat from someone with only one attack per round. This was conciously avoided by the game designers. Great Parry makes it worse, and may in fact be reasonable as an Epic feat. The main importance of improved parry is that you dont need a ready action you only need to sacrifice 1 attack even if its the only one you have so there is no need for a BAB +6 req. Also even a hight level paryer is not entirely safe because if he keeps parrying then eventualy his shield will break and on top of loosing his shield and its AC bonus he cant parry anymore. 3. Your system does not reasonable account for the difference between a Buckler shield, light shield, heavy Shield, and Tower Shield. You apply the shield bonus on the opposed check...so it takes into account the difference between shields 4. Your system is ridiculsoulsy for use against area attack spells. A shield puts a physical barrier between the character and others. If i woul have a shield at hang even the smalest one and a grenade would blow by my side i would use the shield to help me defend myself. Of course there are different degree of protection but even the smalest sould be considered. But i agree that it may be not well worded the way it is. Ah pi t un cave