"Indeed, sir. Have a care...you may be a fine swordsman, but he's the fastest sword in the duchy!"
"Bah." Kothos sauntered forward, his greatsword slung casually over one massively-muscled shoulder. He eyed his opponent scornfully. The man didn't look like much. Average height, not particularly muscular, armed with a plain longsword and handaxe. "You, there! They say you're the fastest sword in the duchy."
The unassuming-looking swordsman smiled thinly. "In the world," he replied, quietly.
Kothos sneered. "Let's find out. Come at me!"
As Kothos assumed a fighting stance, Quick stepped in and struck, once...a stinging, insulting blow. Kothos growled. "That's it? So much for the fastest sword in the world. Goodbye!" So saying, he raised his greatsword for a lethal downswing.
A split-second later, Kothos lay sprawled on the ground, bleeding from half a dozen wounds. His opponent nonchalantly considered a small gash on his shoulder--barely a scratch. "Like I said," he addressed the air. "In the world."
In the spirit of Snow Savant's Chain Gatling Tripper, I offer Jack B. Quick.
Human Fighter 20
1. TWF, Dodge, WF (Longsword)
2. Combat Expertise
3. Improved Trip
4. WF (Handaxe)
5.
6. Improved TWF, High Sword Low Axe
7.
8. Combat Reflexes
9. Karmic Strike
10. Double Hit
11.
12. Robilar's Gambit, Mobility
13.
14. Elusive Target
15. Power Attack
16. Overpowering Attack
17.
18. Improved Unarmed Strike, Defensive Throw
19.
20. Sidestep
The basic notion of the character is simple: for every strike of the opponent's, he will get repeated strikes in return. Early in his life, he's a fairly straightforward two-weapon fighter. Once he hits level 9, though, he begins to shift to his trademark fighting style--his opponent hits him, he strikes back with sword and dagger, trips, and hits again with the sword.
By level 12, he's a full-fledged menace. For every hit by the opponent, Jack will get the following attack sequence: sword-axe-trip-sword, sword-axe-trip-sword. Theoretically, this is eight attacks; however, since most DMs won't allow a player to trip an already-tripped opponent, realistically Jack is going to get six hits to his opponent's one.
At level 16, Jack gets the icing on the cake. He takes a single attack per round (at double damage.) Any attack against him provokes the retaliation above, ALSO at double damage.
While I'm quite happy with the rough build, I'm not as happy with the sequence of feats. Some important feats get left until late in the build. I'd especially like to get Elusive Target earlier, to prevent opponents from out-damaging Jack with one massive shot. I'd also like to find a way to squeeze in Deft Opportunist.
Thoughts?
Ya know, fighters almost had too many feats. Now, they have too few
Any way to fit in Two Weapon Rend for some sweet damage?You could squeeze in Two Weapon Rend rather than Sidestep at level 20; before that would be tricky.
I'd also like to fit in Oversized Two Weapon Fighting, so you could swing a battleaxe or Dwarven Waraxe in the off-hand and Power Attack with it if necessary.
You get access to psywar power stones, two bonus feats (which can be fighter feats - Sidestep AND Two-Weapon Rend), two powers known, and a pithy little number of power points. You lose 2 hp on average.
First off I'd just like to say that you have the better beginning blurb, so you're already one up on me.
Onto the build...
You've got the edge on me on number of attacks, thats for sure. That two weapon fighting-double hit combo is deadly. The build does suffer from some early level growing pains, but so do most pure fighter builds I feel.
He's going to have to be a strength primary fighter if he wants to keep up the tripping, I think. But there's more than one way to skin that cat. The duration for greater enlarge person is measured in hours now, isn't it?
The fact that the real damage of the build, i.e. (correct me if I'm wrong here) the overpowering attack feat comes in at 16th level is a bit of a disadvantage. Though the build does have a slight tactical advantage with the tripping.
All in all a good build.
I worry about the emphasis being too much on tripping (knowing how often it can backfire and how somethings you just can't trip) but as I said earlier, there are ways around that.
Oh, and it niggles a bit at my evaluation that your weapons are a bit limited in the amount of damage they do, but I'm sure you'll make up for it with damage from strength. (The main hand weapon should do 2x strength damage by the end and the off hand should be putting out 1x strength as well)
Hmm, well, it has to be said, I wonder which of our two characters would come out the victor should it come to blows. I suppose it really does depend on levels, doesn't it? But then again...
Victory in war is not glorious and not to be celebrated, but stems from devastation, and is to be mourned.
prototype00
You need reach in your build otherwise everything is going to blow up in smoke as soon as you fight someone with it. I'm not considering a potion of enlarge person here, since it's free game cheaply available to everyone.
Schmoe:"I attack Jack B. Quick"
Jack:"Ha, I robilar's gambit and karmic strike..."
Schmoe:"Oops, I'm 15' away... guess you miss...?"
You would run into Hold the Line / Large and In Charge problems, too.
I'm not terribly familiar with Overpowering attack or Defensive throw, but consider replacing them or something else with aberrant blood and inhuman reach.
The Psychic Warrior 2 allows you to take Jotunbrud, which you will probably need to trip more effectively.
You may want to take Spring Attack with the 2 extra feats for it in PHBII. If my reading is correct, Double Hit will apply to all of them, netting you six attacks, or if I'm not mistaken by your explanation, nine with trips?
End results:
Remove Improved TWF, Overpowering Attack, Defensive Throw, Fighter 2
Add Spring Attack, The PHB 'Spring attack+' feats (2). Psychic Warrior 2, or Aberrant Blood, inhuman Reach, Jotunbrud
"(S)He's so f**kin' pretty!"
I really dig the multiple hit strikers that are cropping up these days. I'll use this post as a placeholder until I have some time to really think about it, but I will make one suggestion: Wounding Weapons. Once's he's full into his attack routine (post level 12), the 5 actual hits (not the trip, in other words) can knock off 5 con to most foes, 10 if you invest in greater wounding, every time they strike him. 7 attacks (Single Attack on his turn, 6 in response to any blows) at double damage and -2 con will leave most living foes....well, not living.
~Blue
But it looks like Caelic is doing what Snow Savant did --- proving that a 20 level fighter can actually kick some butt!
Jack "Blade Bravo" Nimble
Gnome Martial Monk 2/Fighter 2/Swashbuckler 1/Feat Rogue 2/Cleric of Heironious (War domain) 1/Psychic Warrior 2/Blade Bravo 10
01: Improved Unarmed Strike, Dodge, Combat Expertise
02: Improved Trip
03: Combat Reflexes, Defensive Throw
04: Mobility
05: Weapon Finesse
06: Elusive Target, Weapon Focus (Handaxe)
07: Weapon Focus (Longsword)
08: Two-Weapon Fighting
09: High Sword Low Axe, Karmic Strike
10: Weapon Focus (Rapier)
11: Goad
12: Sidestep
13: Improved Two-Weapon Fighting
15: Double Hit
16: Blade Bravo bonus
18: Robilar's Gambit
19: Blade Bravo bonus
This variation gives up Overpowering Attack for the Blade Bravo's Lethal Riposte ability. If your opponent misses you, you actually can set up this chain of attacks TWICE, while still taking a full attack on your turn! I think this improves the damage a little, as by my calculation the build still gets five iterative attacks with ITWF and can have a speed weapon to boot.
Edited to put Sidestep back in. Ayeeyah, it's all so tight...
and since you're tripping them anyway, thus forcing them to make attacks while prone, they're taking a -4 penalty in addition to the penalties to later attacks in the sequence. Im fairly sure even in the event of a full attack against you you're only going to take one hit unless the opponent is very lucky.
Well, you're forgetting that they're getting a total of +8 to hit you, but that's fine if they're stupid and using Power Attack.
Not bad, but I like my spiked chain fighter better. Sorry, I'm not a big fan of Robilar's, I have reach on ya, specialized entirely in one weapon, and I got Deft Opportunist early. Betcha I win. ;) :D
Not really, because oddly enough, I'm not sure if you can't still make those AoOs whether you're in reach or not.
Not bad, but I like my spiked chain fighter better. Sorry, I'm not a big fan of Robilar's, I have reach on ya, specialized entirely in one weapon, and I got Deft Opportunist early. Betcha I win. ;) :D
So for the first few levels you guys are even, because you don't have any sort of uber stuff that Caelic's guy can't have at that level. And given a decent dex, which would naturally go with Caelic's build, and a few cross-class skills, he'll simply tumble through your range and whack you upside the head. Range doesn't become an issue in this case, and it's just about who gets off the first trip. And, he's getting more attacks than you, so if it came to swapping attacks, he's pouncing on you more times every round than you can to him. It's a very good melee build, IMHO.
So for the first few levels you guys are even, because you don't have any sort of uber stuff that Caelic's guy can't have at that level. And given a decent dex, which would naturally go with Caelic's build, and a few cross-class skills, he'll simply tumble through your range and whack you upside the head. Range doesn't become an issue in this case, and it's just about who gets off the first trip. And, he's getting more attacks than you, so if it came to swapping attacks, he's pouncing on you more times every round than you can to him. It's a very good melee build, IMHO.
It is an excellent build, but I do have the trip advantage, with reach. Being a fighter, his tumble won't likely be perfect, but even if he never fails, he has trouble tripping me...and I have little tripping him, as a goliath...and every round, I step back 5'.
and every round, I step back 5'.
It's the perfect strategy aye? It's foolproof.
It's the perfect strategy aye? It's foolproof.
LOL!
No, it isn't. There are tons of ways to mess it up. Still, I can go toe to toe, too. I get my Karmic Strike when he hits, so we both run out of AoOs...but mine hurt more. A *lot* more.
It is an excellent build, but I do have the trip advantage, with reach. Being a fighter, his tumble won't likely be perfect, but even if he never fails, he has trouble tripping me...and I have little tripping him, as a goliath...and every round, I step back 5'.
AHAHA, AHAHA, no.
AHAHA, AHAHA, no.
LOL!
That's hilarious...and an excellent example of why it *isn't* foolproof.
Keep in mind, guys...I think Caelic has a sweet build here. I said so. I dunno who would win, but I think I can. Cool?
LOL!
That's hilarious...and an excellent example of why it *isn't* foolproof.
Keep in mind, guys...I think Caelic has a sweet build here. I said so. I dunno who would win, but I think I can. Cool?
That example is what I was hinting at, actually.
That example is what I was hinting at, actually.
Ummm...yeah. I figured that. Still, under most circumstances, it is a good and valid tactic...just definitely not all!
Wait, what... could this actually mean that with all the fighter 20 builds popping out... theres actually viability for all those bonus feats?!
ZOMG!
Could it be that some newb in the future after their 15th level fo fighter wont be looking back and saying "Bugger, I would have been better off CoDzilla way!" like we did after our first fighters?! Just... wow. Simply wow.
(BTW Defensive Sweep would work well with Blade Bravo 10th Lethal Riposte no?)
If you just want a lot of feats then multiclassing heavily is still better for all the old reasons and should still grant a larger number of feats.
Not really, because oddly enough, I'm not sure if you can't still make those AoOs whether you're in reach or not.
I dont see how you could make the attacks of opportunity if the opponent is hitting you with a reach weapon and you are out of range to hit them back. How does that work?
I dont see how you could make the attacks of opportunity if the opponent is hitting you with a reach weapon and you are out of range to hit them back. How does that work?
Wow...I missed that one. Lol...no...ya can't. That's bad, limburger cheese. ;)
1. Yes, spiked chain (or, much better, chain lash) still enjoys the edge in terms of weapon uberness; it's a more versatile weapon, and mastering it isn't as feat intensive as High Sword Low Axe. One of the things I wanted to do with this build, though, was try to make a good, versatile fighter who wasn't reliant on wielding a chain.
2. The basic build is most definitely that: a basic build. There are all sorts of things you could do to trick it out and jazz it up. I like the PsyWar idea in particular. To me, though, that's the beauty of a basic build--everyone can take it and add their own touches and make it uniquely theirs. The Blade Bravo version is just cool...I've always liked that class.
3. Reach is definitely a concern, but I'm just not sure what to give up to get it. I vaguely considered
4. Double hit won't apply to Spring Attack. You don't make AoOs on a Spring Attack. Bounding Assault and Rapid Blitz WOULD allow me multiple Spring Attacks, and I thought about trying to include them in this build, but just couldn't afford the feats.
5. Damage, as mentioned, is a concern. The build relies on making a large number of relatively low-damage attacks, rather than a few high-damage attacks. It was actually designed for the type of campaign I see gradually evolving, where the value of Power Attack is drastically reduced because most opponents who can afford it have Elusive Target.
6. Wounding weapons would most definitely be tasty.
7. One thing I like about the build is that it isn't totally reliant on the trip mechanism. Even if I can't trip you, I still get four attacks against you for every hit you make on me!
In the meanwhile, looking at Psywar options. This guy becomes so much nastier with the Perfect Riposte power (free AoO against anyone who attacks you and misses within its duration) and 5 levels in Tempest. Maybe a Warmind? Sweeping Strike...oh god....somebody hold me...
5. Damage, as mentioned, is a concern. The build relies on making a large number of relatively low-damage attacks, rather than a few high-damage attacks. It was actually designed for the type of campaign I see gradually evolving, where the value of Power Attack is drastically reduced because most opponents who can afford it have Elusive Target.
Well, I think reach is a more important issue than this, but Weapon Specialization then Melee Weapon Specialization would grant you a +4/+2 damage increase and +2/+2 attack increase for your longsword/axe combination.
Or, if you were willing to drop high sword low axe, you could throw in Kusari-gama proficiency and focus, netting you the reach you wanted and retaining tripping. It even leaves you a feat open.
So I offer another variation
Remove: High sword low axe, weapon focus(axe), wf(sword)
Add: Jotunbrud, Exotic Weapon Proficiency(Kusari-gama), wf(kusari-gama)
Additionally: -Jotunbrud, -power attack, +Weapon Spec(kusari), Melee Wep Mastery(slashing)
Naturally, psychic Warrior 2 would be preferable in both situations. As you said, Elusive Target seems to pop up everywhere on this board so I wonder if power attack is really worth it at level 15, when your DM has watched you Elusive Target everything last level.
Well, I think reach is a more important issue than this, but Weapon Specialization then Melee Weapon Specialization would grant you a +4/+2 damage increase and +2/+2 attack increase for your longsword/axe combination.
Again, though, the feats are the concern. The build really has very few expendable feats. I'd love to have weapon specialization, greater WS, and melee weapon mastery, but I can't fit them all in.
Or, if you were willing to drop high sword low axe, you could throw in Kusari-gama proficiency and focus, netting you the reach you wanted and retaining tripping. It even leaves you a feat open.
That WOULD make me more dependent on tripping, though. With High Sword Low Axe, the trip attempt is a free result of making a hit with both weapons; I don't have to devote an attack to it.
Further, as I said, I want a build that's not dependent on some variant of the spiked chain. If the only way a fighter can be competitive is to use one specific weapon (and variants,) then there's something seriously wrong.
Naturally, psychic Warrior 2 would be preferable in both situations. As you said, Elusive Target seems to pop up everywhere on this board so I wonder if power attack is really worth it at level 15, when your DM has watched you Elusive Target everything last level.
I could be persuaded to give up Power Attack. That and Sidestep are the two most negotiable feats in the build.
I tried to visualize a combat between Jack B. Quick and a Barbarian or Frenzied Berserker with a stellar Strength bonus, and the only drawback is that trying to trip such a tank will almost always result in Jack being tripped in retaliation...
Further, as I said, I want a build that's not dependent on some variant of the spiked chain. If the only way a fighter can be competitive is to use one specific weapon (and variants,) then there's something seriously wrong.
Amen on that, brother.
Personally, I think a number of weapons are viable, just not optimal...and here on the CharOps board...fractions are often quibbled about.
I've been a proponent for fighters for a long time, along with their other full BAB, non-spell dependent bretheren...in real gaming situations, they never run out of gusto as long as they have blood in their veins and air in their lungs. (unlike my wizard...silly party won't stop to rest. *sigh*)
EDIT: And I just remembered that my build has a feat in it that helps the "I'm gonna ignore you now" mentality immensely: Goad. :D
Also, he gets feats on seventeen out of twenty levels, which is pretty nifty in and of itself.
If you are going for a completely counter-attacking build, then why not go for the 12th level fighter variant out of PHBII? It gives you counterattack. You attack once/round as a full round action, and anyone that hits you, you get an "unnamed" attack on them. I believe it would stack with Karmic Strike/Robilar's. I'm not sure if it would work with the level 16 sub from PHBII, as they both require a full round action.
Yeah...if I wasn't using the 16th level one...I'd gladly replace Karmic...and I like it better than Robilar's. Counterattack is truly sweet, if you aren't going to use Overwhelming Attack.
High Sword Low Axe
Double Strike
Sidestep
I have been looking for a half hour now and found none of them
Thanks,
Eric
Learn to love it.
What book are these feats in?
High Sword Low Axe
Double Strike
Sidestep
Complete Warrior; Miniatures Handbook (if it's Double Hit); Miniatures Handbook.
I'd want to get full attacked. Lethal Riposte can only be used once per round, but neither Karmic Strike nor Defensive Throw nor even Robilar's Gambit have any such limitation.
Robilar's is stll limited by your Dex bonus for Attacks of Opportunity though.
Could start the build, or end it, with Cobra Strike Monk to get Dodge and Mobility, and Psychic Warrior also, ofcourse. Thats two extra feats. Room for TWF Rend and Defensive Sweep mayhaps?
(BTW Defensive Sweep would work well with Blade Bravo 10th Lethal Riposte no?)
Or better yet, start with Passive Way monk to get Combat Expertise and Improved Trip without the Int 13 prerequisite (none of the other feats in the build require an intelligence of 13) to reduce MAD. Plus, you can give up your flurry of blows to get Decisive Strike, meaning you have double damage on AoO from early levels (provided your one attack is unarmed) and don't have to wait on Overpowering Attack
As a full round action, make one attack with an unarmed strike or special monk weapon, using your highest base attack bonus but taking a -2 penalty on this attack roll. If the attack hits, it deals double damage (as does any other attack you make before the start of your next turn.
Emphasis mine.
THe other build posted is a pretty example of CO at its best but most DMs that I know wouldn't allow the cherry picking.
I would love to see something in between the two, more straight forward simple variations on a very solid build.
It's just another possible option.
I recently posed this question to customer support, and I thought that people might be interested in the answer I received.
Q. If my character has both the Karmic Strike and the Robilar's Gambit feats activated, and he is struck by an opponent who is wielding a sword from a square that my character threatens, does my character get one attack of opportunity or two (assuming that I have the Combat Reflexes feat and that I still have two or more unused AoOs remaining for the current round)?
A. Using both Karmic Strike and Robilar's Gambit will double the penalties for the purpose of giving you the opportunity to take a single attack of opportunity against an opponent per swing. The main difference between these two feats is that Karmic Strike requires that your opponent actually hit you before you get the attack of opportunity. Robilar's Gambit only requires that they swing.
Based on this answer, it would seem that only one of these feats should be active at any given point in time. Not what many of us hoped to hear!
Hrm. Well, I have to disagree with their reasoning, but unless and until they're overruled, I accept that CustServ's position is the authoritative one.
Given this new info, I'm curious how you might change the build. I don't feel that the customer service ruling prevents this from being a unique and powerful build.
so does having twf and a light weapon automatically make it -2 to all attacks?
oh that i did not know
so does having twf and a light weapon automatically make it -2 to all attacks?
www.d20srd.org
Educate yourself.
Human Fighter 20
1 Weapon Focus (Light Mace), Two-Weapon Fighting, Combat Reflexes
2 Lightning Mace
3 Dodge
4 Weapon Specialization (Light Mace)
5
6 Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Pulverize Foe
7
8 Greater Weapon Focus (Light Mace)
9 Combat Expertise
10 Double Hit
11
12 Karmic Strike, Robilar's Gambit
13
14 Greater Weapon Specialization (Light Mace)
15 Melee Weapon Mastery (Bludgening)
16 Overpowering Attack
17
18 Weapon Supremacy (Light Mace)
19
20 Crushing Strike
It is completely overpowered if your Greatsword wielding opponent also has either Karmic Strike OR Robilar's Gambit...because he gets AoO's for every AoO y ou have on him.
In short, you would have started swinging, and so would have he, only he is dealing 3 times the damage you are. Even if you trip him, it doesn't matter...you have the AC penalty, and he's hitting you at par.
So, that example is very misleading...and that's also giving up a Trip advantage to a stronger fighter, since you need a higher Dex then he does to maximize usage of your feats.
In short, the story would have ended so...
"In the world," Jack said to the air, smiling.
Then, smile firmly in place on his face, his legs and head fell away from his torso, splattering as they hit the ground.
Schmoe got up, shook his head, muttered something about pansy swordsmen thinking they knew all the tricks, and went off to get a drink.
==Aelryinth
I thought it went without saying that the character requires a reasonably high Dex, given that he uses ITWF.
You also contradict yourself--you point out that I need a high Dex to make this work, then claim that the other fighter will match me swing-for-swing, then say that he can have a higher Strength because he doesn't need the high Dex.
Either he has the same Dex I do and can (almost) match my AoOs (I still come out on top because of the free trip/followup) or he has a higher Str and therefore fewer AoOs.
Lastly, there's also the fact that I can disengage at any time if I don't like the damage tradeoff, through the use of Sidestep.
With a 13 Dex and a +6 Dex buffer, Schmoe can get a 19 Dex and 5 AoO's total...with his greatsword and, say, his measley 26 str (more likely 30-34)
So, when you attack him with your two weapons, he gets to swing back...twice, once for each swing being taken on him. And he's dealing out MUCH more damage per swing. You need to have twice as many AoO's as him just to keep up with damage...and he gets all of his off before you get yours off.
I'd say Jack is pretty much toast. In the above example, there'd be the full attack single hit for double damage, and then each of you would get 5 swings...only his deal twice as much damage. The fact you get two for every one of his is irrelevant...they still get resolved one by one, and generated one by one.
And then, when he's done swinging, he Sidesteps and shuts down YOUR attacks. Remember, he's not dumb, and can use the same tactics you do.
Really, just take out the two weapons and your build actually clears up...you do more dmg per AoO, you don't need the massive Dex because you don't need as many AoO's to do the damage, and you get a spare feat or two.
That's a nice finding with the AoO per swing choice between Karmic Strike and Rob's Gambit. I guess nobody noticed they were both triggered by swings and so constitute the same AoO chance.
==Aelryinth
Caelic, remember that every single attack you make, including with that light, off hand weapon of yours, takes an AoO slot. Since your build is based around taking LOTS of AoO's, you need a 16 Dex to get off your combo just once....a 24 to do it twice.
Not so. Double Hit allows me to attack once with each weapon as part of an Attack of Opportunity. I'm not making two Attacks of Opportunity; I'm making 'an additional attack along with an Attack of Opportunity.'
Read Double Hit. At no point is the second attack referred to as an Attack of Opportunity; the language takes great pains to differentiate between the Attack of Opportunity and the second attack.
As for damage, you're overlooking Overpowering Attack entirely. Every one of my AoOs inflicts double damage. My opponent's do not.
I also note that my opponent somehow sprouted a +6 stat enhancement item there, while it's apparently being presumed that I won't have the same. Yes, if you assume that my opponent has massively higher overall stats than I do, he has an advantage.
And then, when he's done swinging, he Sidesteps and shuts down YOUR attacks. Remember, he's not dumb, and can use the same tactics you do.
Sure, if he's somehow managed to squeeze all of my feats into a build in addition to the feats he uses for his fighting style.
That's a nice finding with the AoO per swing choice between Karmic Strike and Rob's Gambit. I guess nobody noticed they were both triggered by swings and so constitute the same AoO chance.
==Aelryinth
No; we noticed that they weren't and didn't. While I accept CustServ's rulings as a matter of policy, that doesn't mean I agree with their reasoning.
Maybe with a little retraining :
Kothos
Human, Fighter 20
uses a greatsword
1 - Dodge, Combat Expertise, Karmic Strike
2 - Combat Reflexes
3 - Mobility
4 - Spring Attack
6 - Power Attack, Leap Attack
8 - Elusive Target
9 - Mage Slayer
10 - Improved Disarm
12 - Bounding Assault, Robilar's Gambit
14 - Pierce Magical Protection
15 - Defensive Sweep
16 - Deft Opportunist
18 - Close Quarters Fighting, Rapid Blitz
20 - Sidesteps
Now he should have a chance in front of Jack.
That's a nice finding with the AoO per swing choice between Karmic Strike and Rob's Gambit. I guess nobody noticed they were both triggered by swings and so constitute the same AoO chance.
I'm the guy who made that finding, but I still like Jack a whole helluva lot. Not because he's the most optimized guy I've ever seen, but because he's a new twist on an old theme, and also because he embodies some pretty interesting ideas. I think it's counter-productive if not absurd to argue about whether you could create a build that would beat Jack in toe-to-toe combat. Much better to focus on how the original build might be improved while still maintaining the original ideas.
- power attack-leap attack-charge (praying his target doesn't have elusive target)
- Rob - karmic - defensive sweep (if his target is a melee)
- spring attack tree (if his target is hitting harder than him)
- mage slayer - pierce magical protection (if his target is a caster)
now what i need to understand is :
if he want to be able to stand alive more than one round in front of Jack, should he use an elven courtblade. i have tests to make when i am back at home.
PS : i forgot to say it earlier but ... really nice build Caelic
It's a solid build, Saru. I'm not sure all of the feats you have there work well together, though. Leap Attack, for example, is going to be useless if you're Spring Attacking, and I'm not sure what the point of Defensive Sweep is in a build that seems to be focused around not ending up next to an enemy at the end of the round. Robilar's Gambit and Karmic Strike, as per the CustServ ruling, are utterly pointless in the same build, and both of our builds should drop one.
I think you'll still want to pick up Karmic Strike as early as possible for these types of builds since it's available way earlier than Robilar's Gambit. If you then decide to go the Robilar's Gambit route, you'll want use the new retraining rules to swap out Karmic Strike for a different feat that would have been available to you at the time you picked up Karmic Strike (e.g. Deft Opportunist). This will free up one of your post-12th-level feat slots for something else. I think a lot of builds on these boards in the future will need to start factoring in the awesome retraining rules from PHBII.
*Of official WotC products in response to Complete Psionic. Will be repealed when decent psionic support arrives, be it in other supplements or through the Mind's Eye.
On your turn you make only one attack but Jack has Double Hit, so he does one attack with each weapon and can still keep his sword-axe-trip routine.
And if one opponent hits him, he got an immediate attack (counterattack) and an AoO (karmic strike).
I'm working on some variants of the build using only one of the two feats; will post when they're finished.
Downside of builds like this is distance, without reach you lose and if you cant see where the arrows come from you lose. I also have an Air Genasi tempest/duelist that would totally cut Jack off (huhuhuh, I said Jackoff!), combat acrobat means you wont keep me down and with two-weapon spring + bounding assault with dual souldrinking weapons with every hit your chances of winning drop. Nox is getting better and better, I have yet to test him in battle.
I do like the tripper mechanics, as do so many people on these boards that every 1d3 days a new half-ogre spiked chain tripmachine shows up.
Sure, you could. Or you could beat him with a Wizard 20, or a Cleric 20, or a Druid 20.
I'm not sure how many times I can say "Jack is not meant to be an unbeatable build," or how many times I can point out that he was posted as a way to showcase a specific mechanic and test it with non-optimal weapons.
If we want to compare multiclassed power melee builds, we can do that; I have builds that could drop Nox in one shot.
That's really not what this thread is for, though--so, please, guys, stop with the "I could beat Jack with this build!" posts?
Which means, among other things, that your Deft Opportunist feat doesn't affect it ;). And you do take the two weapon penalty...
Schmoe would be using your Double Dmg option on his attack sequence, too, if he has any brains...and expertise, to take advantage of his superior TH ratio compared to yours. he could also take Improved Buckler Defense and have a higher AC bonus then your TW guy...
I'm also unclear as to how this would work with Overpowering Assault...I rather don't think the off hand would get the benefits of the ability, since it focuses on a single attack, but hey, what do I know.
I also never said you wouldn't get stat buffers...but I was inferring that you have a NEED for higher stats, i.e. MAD. Sir Schmoe needs a high Str and mediocre Dex. If nothing else, you need a higher Dex just for ITWF. So Schmoe should, all things being equal, have a higher Str then you. Combined with a bigger weapon, that means more damage.
Also note that you've got to be in position to deliver that Full Attack to get off your double dmg combo. With Schmoe Spring Attacking, you effectively never get the Double Dmg, but take all the disadvantages of being in the Gambit or KS stances.
Of course, the way I play 'payback' styles like this is making the stance easily recognizable to opponents...who then shower the unfortunate with ranged attacks or reached weapons...but that's just me.
===Aelryinth
You know, I can't help but wonder why people keep posting "Oh, but I could beat Jack with (build X!)"
Sure, you could. Or you could beat him with a Wizard 20, or a Cleric 20, or a Druid 20.
I'm not sure how many times I can say "Jack is not meant to be an unbeatable build," or how many times I can point out that he was posted as a way to showcase a specific mechanic and test it with non-optimal weapons.
If we want to compare multiclassed power melee builds, we can do that; I have builds that could drop Nox in one shot.
That's really not what this thread is for, though--so, please, guys, stop with the "I could beat Jack with this build!" posts?
Ever see my thread for Nox? Im surprized people arent saying "I can beat Jack AND Nox with a level1 commoner with an item of use-active greater invisibility. Sure I gotta wait until I roll a natural20 to hit you but good luck swinging those axes and swords at somebody you cant see!"
Who do I have to sleep with to get compliments like this
Show
I think the beauty of Caelic's build is that it's so damned simple. No DM could possibly argue with the mechanics of this; it's a straight fighter using fighter feats to the best advantage. This isn't spanning some fifty classes in twenty levels, grabbing from obscure campaign supplements, nor even using known broken feats. This is simply a case of good feats coming together for optimal effect. I applaud this build
I did take a look at Double Hit, Caelic, and you are correct...it's not an AoO.
Which means, among other things, that your Deft Opportunist feat doesn't affect it ;). And you do take the two weapon penalty...
Yep; I know that.
Schmoe would be using your Double Dmg option on his attack sequence, too, if he has any brains...
...except that Schmoe was full attacking, remember?
I'm also unclear as to how this would work with Overpowering Assault...I rather don't think the off hand would get the benefits of the ability, since it focuses on a single attack, but hey, what do I know.
A single attack plus all other attacks you make before the start of your next round.
I also never said you wouldn't get stat buffers...but I was inferring that you have a NEED for higher stats, i.e. MAD. Sir Schmoe needs a high Str and mediocre Dex. If nothing else, you need a higher Dex just for ITWF. So Schmoe should, all things being equal, have a higher Str then you. Combined with a bigger weapon, that means more damage.
Again: not if Schmoe wants to match me for AoOs. In order to get off an AoO for every AoO I get, he'll need a Dexterity just as high as mine.
Also note that you've got to be in position to deliver that Full Attack to get off your double dmg combo. With Schmoe Spring Attacking, you effectively never get the Double Dmg, but take all the disadvantages of being in the Gambit or KS stances.
Spring Attack is an issue, yes, but it's an issue for pretty much any melee combatant. Keep in mind that, while the MOVEMENT of Spring Attack doesn't provoke an AoO, the ATTACK you make during Spring Attack will still trigger an AoO from KS or RG...and if I can trip mister bouncy-boy, he's not finishing his movement.
Ever see my thread for Nox?
Well, yeah. I think someone mentions in post 4 or so that it's very similar to Jack B. Quick. IIRC, I posted maybe a day or two before you.
Who do I have to sleep with to get compliments like this on my work?
Well...given that the compliment is on the simplicity of the build, I'd say you have to keep things simple. Jack doesn't rely on templates; he's not a half-dragon or a voidmind, he doesn't concern himself with specific weapon abilities or magic items. He's just a nice, simple, human Fighter 20.
It's nice to squeeze every ounce of numerical efficiency out of a build, but there's something to be said for keeping things simple, too.
I'm new to this optimization thingy but i'll give it a shot
My build to works only with Robilar's Gambit since it works each time they swing instead of hits and of course the fact that there has been clarification of having only 1 AoO is using both Karmic Strike and Robilar's Gambit.
The Build:
Lvl 1 Ftr 1 Weapon Focus (Battleaxe), TWF, Oversized TWF
Lvl 2 Ftr 2 Weapon Focus (longsword)
Lvl 3 Ftr 3 Combat Expertise
Lvl 4 Ftr 4 Power Attack
Lvl 5 Ftr 5
Lvl 6 Ftr 6 High Sword Low Axe, Improved Trip
Lvl 7 Ftr 7
Lvl 8 Ftr 8 Two Weapon Pounce
Lvl 9 Ftr 9 Improved TWF
Lvl 10 Ftr 10 Combat Reflexes
Lvl 11 Ftr 11
Lvl 12 Ftr 12 Robilar's Gambit, Double Hit
Lvl 13 Ftr 13
Lvl 14 Ftr 14 Improved Sunder
Lvl 15 Ftr 15 Combat Brute
Lvl 16 Ftr 16 Overpowering Attack
Lvl 17 Ftr 17
Lvl 18 Ftr 18 Hold The Line, Dual Strike
Lvl 19 Ftr 19
Lvl 20 Ftr 20 Leap Attack
I am always concerned as a fighter of how to start a combat well since you do not start of a battle adjacent to opponents. So, I have Two Weapon Pounce to charge straight off the bat.
I took the Combat Brute chain so that when I manage to trip him with my HSLA, i can use the free attack to sunder his weapon and then if I succeed (hopefully I do since he gets a penalty on his attack roll when he is prone) I get a free attack on him through sundering cleave.
I had to take Oversizd TWF so I can weild one handed weapons on both sides so that I can Power Attack with them.
Later on, when he moves away or places himself that I cannot do a charge, I'll move and use Dual Strike. Usually good for Spring Attacking fighters. Also if i lose Initiative, and a fighter charges at me, I can use hold the line to make the AoO and sunder his weapon if the combo hits before he could resolve his charge.
Finally of course is the Leap Attack to boost the damage when use in conjunction with Two Weapon Pounce.
Comments welcome
Yep; I know that.
...except that Schmoe was full attacking, remember? .
He was using a full attack option...which can include overpowering assault. And if he's using AoO's to do damage to you, he's going to use the Assault option.
A single attack plus all other attacks you make before the start of your next round..
My logic here is based on the premise of it being restricted to the weapon with which you made your single attack...'common sense', as it were. I am NOT saying you are wrong, however.
Again: not if Schmoe wants to match me for AoOs. In order to get off an AoO for every AoO I get, he'll need a Dexterity just as high as mine..
Not true.
Remember, you are swinging twice as often as he is, but he's doing roughly twice the damage you are per swing. When he runs out of AoO's, he Sidesteps.
Run through your attack sequence. He attacks, hits you. Big damage. Now, you get two attacks. You attack back. However, if you haven't gotten a full attack off, you don't do double damage, and neither does he if he just closed. So you do two swings...one an AoO, the other accompanying it. Note you've got less of a chance to hit then he does.
Now he gets an attack back on you, as soon as your first attack resolves. This generates two more attacks for you. As soon as you take your first one, he replies. And on it goes until he's taken his five AoO and Sidesteps, obviating the rest of your attacks.
You've now taken roughly twice the damage that he has, if not more because of his higher hit %. Six attacks by a fighter with a THW is likely going to kill you. All the attacks you have on 'standby' never get a chance to resolve.
That's why I said your build would probably work better without two weapons.
Spring Attack is an issue, yes, but it's an issue for pretty much any melee combatant. Keep in mind that, while the MOVEMENT of Spring Attack doesn't provoke an AoO, the ATTACK you make during Spring Attack will still trigger an AoO from KS or RG...and if I can trip mister bouncy-boy, he's not finishing his movement.
And the attacks you make on him also trigger AoO, and he can hammer you back in the above pattern. He's also likely stronger then you and so has the edge with trip attacks. Actually, using the above sequence of attacks, you will never get off that second attack to use your High Sword, Low Axe, because the fight will move into the next round of AoO's...and you'll likely be dead before the second weapon comes into play.
Note that if you are fighting someone who doesn't have the above 'payback' feats, such as a monster with multiple attacks, you are indeed a cuisnart of attacks. If you are, however, you have a definite problem.
===Aelryinth
Not to rub Jacks weaknesses in your face, it was more like a question.
He was using a full attack option...which can include overpowering assault. And if he's using AoO's to do damage to you, he's going to use the Assault option.
Overpowering Assault only triggers when you use a full attack action to make ONE attack. You don't get to take your full attacks and activate Overpowering Assault, which is what you seem to want Schmoe to do.
If he takes his full attacks, I have double damage and he doesn't.
Not true.
Remember, you are swinging twice as often as he is, but he's doing roughly twice the damage you are per swing.
Not really. He's doing--perhaps--1.5 times the damage I'm doing overall. With Power Attack out of the picture, his two-handed damage advantage decreases significantly.
When he runs out of AoO's, he Sidesteps.
...as do I, at which point I continue with my attacks...which he can no longer answer.
Note you've got less of a chance to hit then he does.
Only with the off-hand weapon.
Now he gets an attack back on you, as soon as your first attack resolves. This generates two more attacks for you. As soon as you take your first one, he replies. And on it goes until he's taken his five AoO and Sidesteps, obviating the rest of your attacks.
...except that I can also Sidestep in response to HIS last attack. This is, of course, assuming that I don't trip him, which is a huge assumption.
You've now taken roughly twice the damage that he has
...a drastically overly generous assessment...
, if not more because of his higher hit %.
My hit percentage with my primary weapon is higher, thanks to Deft Opportunist. My secondary weapon is slightly lower. Overall, he has no higher hit percentage.
He's also likely stronger then you and so has the edge with trip attacks.
You keep saying this, but as I've pointed out over and over, he needs as much Dex as I do. I'm not making vastly more attacks of opportunity than you want him to make; I'm making the same number and getting a sequence of free attacks.
I need a 19 Dex for GTWF. That's it. He needs the same to make the number of attacks you want him to make.
Further, you keep saying he'll have the advantage in tripping, because he's stronger. First, as I've pointed out, he probably won't be stronger; second, you keep overlooking the bonus for Improved Trip. Is he going to be eight points stronger? Doubtful. That is, of course, assuming that I don't also equip myself appropriately--with a Sweeping weapon, let us say--something he is unlikely to do.
Actually, using the above sequence of attacks, you will never get off that second attack to use your High Sword, Low Axe, because the fight will move into the next round of AoO's
Wha....? I am not making a second AoO with the off-hand weapon. You acknowledged this, but you seem to have forgotten it again, because you keep insisting that I need to make twice as many AoOs and that I won't get my second attack off. The off-hand attack is part of the same AoO as the primary attack. They go off at the same time. He hits me; I hit him back with both weapons, attempt to trip, and hit him again. Certainly, he'll get attacks on me for each of those if he has up Robilar's Gambit; that's fine. By the time I'm done, he's on the ground, he's NOT Sidestepping when he runs out of AoOs (which he should after about one of my attack sequences,) and I'm free to continue beating on him.
We can actually model this out if you like.
...and you'll likely be dead before the second weapon comes into play.
...so now he's going to do enough damage to drop me in one shot? Without Power Attack? Doubtful.
Hey Caelic, can Jack Trip somebody who leaps 15ft into the air then comes diving down at him? If so, how do you think Taurus, the charger in my sig would do against him? If not, then the fastest blades in the world may fall to the biggest sack of bull crap to have ever been given a waraxe!Err...sure, he can, though I don't see a sig, let alone a charger, so I can't comment on specifics. Uber-charging Leap Attacking power attackers do VERY poorly against Jack, because he ignores their jacked-up power attack.
The revised version of Jack is also likely going to have Cometary Collision, which just ruins things for chargers entirely.
Hey Caelic, can Jack Trip somebody who leaps 15ft into the air then comes diving down at him? If so, how do you think Taurus, the charger in my sig would do against him? If not, then the fastest blades in the world may fall to the biggest sack of bull crap to have ever been given a waraxe!Err...sure, he can, though I don't see a sig, let alone a charger, so I can't comment on specifics. Uber-charging Leap Attacking power attackers do VERY poorly against Jack, because he ignores their jacked-up power attack.
The revised version of Jack is also likely going to have Cometary Collision, which just ruins things for chargers entirely.
Taurus is right here. Dont you need to be on the ground to be tripped? I know you cant trip a flying creature but what about a creature who is in the air at the time your high sword low axe would trip me?
You have to ready an action against a charge to use Cometary Collision, which ruins Jack's attacks (huhuhuh, I rhymed). Since Jack runs on a +4 dexterity mod and so does mine, without improved init and the initiative enhancement Taurus is much more likely to go first. The worst thing about Elusive Target@Negate PA is that its based on who you declare your dodge feat against, so if Taurus goes first Jack wont be able to Negate PA and take full damage at the end. I also have a revised version with brutal throw, power throw, exotic weapon prof (orc shotput) and hurling charge which will hurt.
It seems that you and I have similar CO style, we both enjoy to get the most out of tactical combat actions such as trip, bullrush and anything that doesnt begin with the words "I cast." To reference my appropriately-named PvP campaign, I want you to hit me as hard as you can.
I'd so love to see someone play an excellently optimized...and yet not over the top...character like Jack, in my game. He does have his vulnerabilities, but he's a damn good fighter. :D
Loved what Caelic did with Jack and got an idea as I was looking up his feats.
Overpowering Assault only triggers when you use a full attack action to make ONE attack. You don't get to take your full attacks and activate Overpowering Assault, which is what you seem to want Schmoe to do.
If he takes his full attacks, I have double damage and he doesn't.
Excuse me, I specifically said Full Attack Option. One of the Options of a Full Attack is to use Assault instead of multiple iteratives. Are you delibrately misinterpreting me?
Not really. He's doing--perhaps--1.5 times the damage I'm doing overall. With Power Attack out of the picture, his two-handed damage advantage decreases significantly.
That all depends on how Dex heavy a build you have. I assumed you'd be running with more Dex since you ARE more reliant on it. Nowhere have you indicated otherwise...especially since you need the GTWF early in your build...not at the end of it. Needing a 19 Dex at level, what, 6? is a far cry from needing it at 20. You have a heavier Dex build, face it.
...as do I, at which point I continue with my attacks...which he can no longer answer.
Except he's now out of range?
Only with the off-hand weapon.
Sorry, you get the TWF penalty with both weapons...-2 on both.
...except that I can also Sidestep in response to HIS last attack. This is, of course, assuming that I don't trip him, which is a huge assumption.
You can't Sidestep in response to an attack...you can only do it while making your AoO. And assuming you ARE going to trip him is a huge assumption. You are never going to get off the Sword/Axe auto trip combo against Schmoe.
...a drastically overly generous assessment...
Not if you have a Dex heavy build. Which you will, to satisfy the reqs of your build early on.
My hit percentage with my primary weapon is higher, thanks to Deft Opportunist. My secondary weapon is slightly lower. Overall, he has no higher hit percentage.
He has Deft Opportunist, and you've got a TWF penalty. His hit rate is therefore higher. His build is like yours, except he has just ONE WEAPON. He's also, I repeat,got a higher Str.
You keep saying this, but as I've pointed out over and over, he needs as much Dex as I do. I'm not making vastly more attacks of opportunity than you want him to make; I'm making the same number and getting a sequence of free attacks.
I need a 19 Dex for GTWF. That's it. He needs the same to make the number of attacks you want him to make.
Further, you keep saying he'll have the advantage in tripping, because he's stronger. First, as I've pointed out, he probably won't be stronger; second, you keep overlooking the bonus for Improved Trip. Is he going to be eight points stronger? Doubtful. That is, of course, assuming that I don't also equip myself appropriately--with a Sweeping weapon, let us say--something he is unlikely to do.
1) He probably will be stronger, because of the Dex reqs for your build that you need so much sooner in your career.
2) He's got Improved Trip. He is set up like you, but with ONE WEAPON.
3) ANd he's got Boots of steadfastness, so now it's a moot issue.
And since he doesn't have to blow feats on two weapons, he's got at LEAST four feats more to spare then you do.
Expertise, Improved Buckler Defense, Improved Sunder or Disarm? Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, Expertise? He could walk into the fight with 8 points more AC then you, with the same hit chance, or use Spring Attack and really ruin your day.
Wha....? I am not making a second AoO with the off-hand weapon. You acknowledged this, but you seem to have forgotten it again, because you keep insisting that I need to make twice as many AoOs and that I won't get my second attack off. The off-hand attack is part of the same AoO as the primary attack. They go off at the same time. He hits me; I hit him back with both weapons, attempt to trip, and hit him again. Certainly, he'll get attacks on me for each of those if he has up Robilar's Gambit; that's fine. By the time I'm done, he's on the ground, he's NOT Sidestepping when he runs out of AoOs (which he should after about one of my attack sequences,) and I'm free to continue beating on him.
We can actually model this out if you like.
Please do. Two attacks NEVER go off at exactly the same time...they go off in an order. And each time you take a swing, his AoO triggers back on you, starting a new sequence...and a new double attack. In short, it's going to be: He swings with his Big Sword, You swing with your sword, but before your Axe goes off, he gets another swing with his big sword, which triggers two more of yours, etc.
In short, you don't get two attacks to his one. You START a double attack sequence...but you only get one of them off before it's his turn because it triggers his AoO (it's an opponent's ATTACK, not ATTACKS). All of your second attacks are going to start once his AoO's are exhausted...at which time he'll be out of range. If you disengage first, he wins the damage exchange. If you don't disengage, he just gives up his last AoO to move out of your range, and you lose all your secondary attacks because he's now out of range of them.
...so now he's going to do enough damage to drop me in one shot? Without Power Attack? Doubtful.
He doesn't need one shot, he needs one attack sequence. he's going to get off six attacks to your six if you dare to attack him back, and he can break up the pattern at any time safely just by letting you get off a swing and then using his last AoO to instead move out of your range with Sidestep. Since all your AoO's have resolved, you can't Sidestep to follow, and then he'll either have his 5' step handy from his Full Attack or he'll continue his Spring Attack and move out of your range.
And taking six hits from a THF is a recipe for disaster. If this is a full attack option he's using, you've probably just guaranteed yourself at least 200 damage, probably closer to 300. If it's a Spring attack, then you likely are getting off with 'only' 150 or so.
==Aelryinth
Did I miss something here? Where is the build you are speaking of that can beat Jack and prevent his Sword/Axe/Trip/Sword sequence.
It would be a lot easier to figure out if you posted it. Or maybe you did and I missed it. It is kinda late for me here anyway.
How exactly do you prevent his combo from working?
He has Deft Opportunist, and you've got a TWF penalty. His hit rate is therefore higher. His build is like yours, except he has just ONE WEAPON. He's also, I repeat,got a higher Str.
I would also like to ask that you post your build, as it's currently very hard for everyone else to try and compare capabilities when we don't have your build's vital stats. You especially have Caelic at a disadvantage because you know his exact build, but he doesn't know yours, so whenever he tries to respond, he stumbles onto some aspect that hasn't been mentioned yet, such as your build having Improved Trip even though he has no way of using that feat offensively (being a greatsword wielder with, I presume, no levels of monk). I'm not saying you have that feat just to counter Jack, but no one would assume a THF would have it, thus Caelic's assumption that Jack could trip your build even though it theoretically has a higher strength.
Please do. Two attacks NEVER go off at exactly the same time...they go off in an order. And each time you take a swing, his AoO triggers back on you, starting a new sequence...and a new double attack. In short, it's going to be: He swings with his Big Sword, You swing with your sword, but before your Axe goes off, he gets another swing with his big sword, which triggers two more of yours, etc.
Take another look at Double Hit, it says "you may make an attack with your off hand at the same target at the same time." So in this case, his attacks do go off at the same time, and you don't get the chance to interrupt his two hit to trip combo. You would have two AoOs to use after that, but he gets two hits in response to each of those and, depending on who started the chain, you might be running low on AoOs already, since you're less reliant on Dex. Even if you Sidestep away when you run out of AoOs, you still have to suffer more from Jack every time you hit him in further rounds.
And taking six hits from a THF is a recipe for disaster. If this is a full attack option he's using, you've probably just guaranteed yourself at least 200 damage, probably closer to 300. If it's a Spring attack, then you likely are getting off with 'only' 150 or so.
First of all, I'm not sure how Schmoe is getting six attacks back, since 22 Dex sounds pretty high for a build that's "not as dex reliant," especially considering you put the bar for that at 19 Dex for Jack. Secondly, I think you're overestimating your damage, since you won't be able to use Power Attack against Jack. Even if you have a high enough Dex to make six attacks back, your damage will be about 42+9*Str. Even with a Str of 30, that's 132 damage, and I think we both agree that Schmoe probably doesn't have a Str of 30. Then again, there's probably some other aspect of your build I'm missing which would up the damage, so please post it so that we all can take a closer look at this 'Jack killer.'
Maybe I missed it in the earlier posts (only read first post, skimmed rest of thread due to time constraints), but how do you deal with that problem?
I think it would be crazy trying to figure this whole thing out with the build I made.
The whole Robilar's Gambit if 2 people have it along with Double Hit is nuts figuring out who gets what chain started first.
I could use some help here on figuring out what to switch in my build.
Slash & Grab build
Did I miss something here? Where is the build you are speaking of that can beat Jack and prevent his Sword/Axe/Trip/Sword sequence.
It would be a lot easier to figure out if you posted it.
Shhh! Unposted builds are the most optimized, since they can do anything.
Needing a 19 Dex at level, what, 6? is a far cry from needing it at 20. You have a heavier Dex build, face it.
Right, cause characters who start off trading Str for Dex can never compensate for it later in their careers. It's not as if they receive stat points to allocate on their way to level 20, let alone some kind of, I dunno, "items" that may raise particular stats.
Not if you have a Dex heavy build. Which you will, to satisfy the reqs of your build early on.
How many of your builds look the same at level 6 as at level 20?
His build is like yours, except he has just ONE WEAPON.
or use Spring Attack and really ruin your day.
Wasn't your intention to show that you could beat Jack at his own game? Caelic has already admitted that Spring Attackers could give the build some trouble. You haven't exactly accomplished anything by rehashing what is already known about one of the build's weaknesses.
You START a double attack sequence...but you only get one of them off before it's his turn because it triggers his AoO (it's an opponent's ATTACK, not ATTACKS).
You're assuming all of his Double Hits start with the primary weapon. You can make an AoO with any weapon you wield, whether it be held in the primary hand or the offhand. You swing, he hits you with his sword. You swing, he hits you with his axe and triggers High Sword Low Axe. Hell, he could wait until your second to last AoO to use the axe, then take all his queued axe swings once you're down. Point is, you can't deny him a hit with both weapons in one round unless you step away with your first AoO.
What are you trying to accomplish, aelryinth? If you don't post a build, none of your claims can be fairly evaluated. If you post a Spring Attack build, you're just jerking off by exploiting an established weakness. If you post a similar build designed specifically to counter Jack, you've completed another trivial exercise by showing that a purpose-built assassin can beat a build designed to showcase a new mechanic. La-de-da. Maybe you see yourself as the young Turk out to "claim the title", but there's no glory to be found here. Jack was neither claimed nor designed to be some sort of ultimate melee combatant. He's just a demonstration of how a few new abilities can synergize to make an interesting fighter specialized in retaliation.
I played a character very similar to this before PHB2 came out, using Karmic Strike. It made the DM cry. :D Suddenly all our opponents became big monsters that were hard for me to trip.
Maybe I missed it in the earlier posts (only read first post, skimmed rest of thread due to time constraints), but how do you deal with that problem?
From a player's POV...or a DM's? ;)
As a player...well...I built a bigtime AoO character that, if nothing else, can dole out some pretty good damage. Not quite as effective as tripping, perhaps, but it works. Other options could be viable, but not in the scenario you just gave, as a rule....I sunder and disarm pretty well, too.
One-trick ponies are fun for show, but you wanna play a character with options...I can even take my spiked chain into close combat, if need be...that said, Jack really isn't that two-dimensional. He does have his options...as much as most fighters do, anyhow.
=======================
You never, ever make two attacks simultaneously. One has to come before the other, especially since if you have feats like Karmic Strike or Robilar's Gambit, you are going to get to reply to one strike before the other one resolves.
I repeat, it says you get to reply after his Swing, not after his SWINGS, with the Gambit. The Double Hit gets to wait its turn between all the AoO's going off.
You can use Caelic's build exactly as it is...remove TWF, ITWF, DOuble Hit, and High Sword, Low Axe. Bing, now you have 4 feats free. Do what you like with em.
======================
Improved Trip does not require monk levels or a tripping weapon. It requires Expertise. And it is part of Caelic's build.
Also note that we are both quoting it wrong...it doesn't give a +4 to Trip attempts, it gives a free followup attack if you do succeed in Tripping someone, and stops the AoO.
And that Trip attempt is going to be at -2 in addition to anything else, because of the TWF modifiers. And since the trip isn't an AoO, it doesn't get Deft Opportunist, either...and since it IS an attack, it triggers an AoO.
So, Improved Trip isn't neccessary for Schmoe, I concede that point. IN place of it, he probably has Combat Acrobat or something, or perhaps Prone Fighting. 5 Feats free! he IS, however, likely better at tripping then Jack, because he focused his raises and gear into one stat, not two.
============
As for stats, I'm afraid I have to tell you to get your heads out of the ground.
At the level JAck gets ITWF, he has to have a 19 Dex. This is NOT at level 20. Logically, he'll have a +2 stat buffer if it's before 10th level due to gold restrictions. So that requires a base 17 Dex...which is a starting 15 Dex +2 raises, after level 8. At level 6, he has to start with a 16 Dex. In Point Buy, he's now severely crimping himself, esp with the 13 Int needed for Expertise.
So now his starting Str has to be lower, AND he's blown two level raises on getting his Dex to a point where he can employ the feats he himself has selected.
So he's a minimum of 4 Str behind Schmoe right from the get-go. And if he wants to have more AoO then Schmoe, he has to raise his Dex more. Given how far his Dex is likely to be ahead of his Str at this point, he's got a choice of gimping two stats or gimping one stat.
heck, look at his own flavor text...Schmoe is overly muscular compared to Jack.
==============
Combat Reflexes = AoO = 1 + Dex bonus, which is 4 from a 19, + his opening attack. Gee, looks like 6 attacks to me.
==============
I'm not trying to beat his Build. I'm pointing out that it works better with one weapon then with two...and I was irked by his flavor text assuming the greatsword wielder was totally incompetent. And then everyone jumped on me for pointing out the obvious.
====Aelryinth
So he's a minimum of 4 Str behind Schmoe right from the get-go. And if he wants to have more AoO then Schmoe, he has to raise his Dex more.
If Schmoe has as many AoO as Jack, then he must have an equal Dex mod.
You know what? Forget it. Just post a damn build. I stand by my comment that unposted builds are the most optimized since they can do anything.
If I wasn't on the CO boards all the time, my spiked chain wielder probably would've been built with a greatsword.
*worthless talking*
Until you post a build, I'm not going to read anything you post on this thread.
I take your lack of one, even after repeated requests, for lack of justification of your words.
You win. Aelryinth. Congratulations. Your build is a masterpiece of optimization second only to the "unbeatable mage."
I did build one, but not in response to Caelic's build...in fact, it predates his. I did at one time state that I felt that mine would win in a fight between the two. Caelic pointed out that he was simply showcasing some feat combos, and I agreed that they were certainly worthy of notice. The build isn't a 'Look at me, I challenge all comers', so my point wasn't that meaningful...and certainly, every other 'I can take him' is even less meaningful, since that was already pointed out.
Even then, I commented that I liked the build, and since then, it has become more defensive (not as posted, mind you, but by conception). I think it's entirely playable, even though that wasn't the point.
Let's take a breather here, folks. If you like the combos, good, use 'em. That was the point. If you don't like 'em...be constructive, ok? Why don't you like them? Do you have something better to offer? Don't be shy, show your combos...if they're really that good, they might be worth seeing...but maybe they're worth another thread, unless they build off Jack himself.
If he doesn't take them, then you've got a blizzard of AoO going off for a lot of damage whenever someone swings at him. with a high Dex, that generates a lot of maximized attacks. It's an anti-monster, anti-Full attack cusinart, with some options thrown in.
I AGREE with all that. But for case of simplicity of purpose and added flexibility, you are probably better off with one Big Weapon then two smaller weapons generating the Trips.
Damage will end up the same or better, less MAD. That's all.
===Aelryinth
Just to be fair, Aelrynth never had a build, as he stated, but was merely stating his opinion - that a 2-handed weapon build would be more effective. Why he didn't just say that, I dunno. At least that's what I get out of it.
Sure he was stating his opinion, but his opinion, in a case like this, is worthless. The build either is or isn't better, measured by its performance in a combat between the two. Opinions are neither desired nor necessary, as his position was that Schmoe, who we were never allowed to examine, would defeat Jack as posted. That's a simple mechanical test we could all carry out if he would only define Schmoe's vitals. Instead, he made repeated references to a build to which only he had access, proclaiming his superiority at every turn.
You wouldn't take someone's word for it if they ended every hand of poker with, "Well that's a nice hand, but I've got a flush this time. No, you can't see my cards." I just want him to lay his cards on the table for all to see.
Until you post a build, I'm not going to read anything you post on this thread.
I take your lack of one, even after repeated requests, for lack of justification of your words.
Thank you for the extremely polite and pointed debate *tips hat*. Such a sterling reply deserves only the best, of course!
Please refer to the very first post of this thread. Remove TWF, ITWF, HS/LA, and Double Hit from the build presented there. (Note: Posted for the second time, since the above poster seems to be unable to read clearly). Optionally, you can also remove Improved Trip.
Substitute in any four (five) feats you like. Equip with Greatsword or Greataxe. The build is now complete.
IS THAT SO BLOODY DIFFICULT? I've only had to repeat it, what, 3 times now?
===============
ON Ability Scores: Note, if you will, that with ITWF removed, the Dex req now drops to 13 to qualify for any and all Dex feats, from a former level of 19.
At level 20, we can fairly safely assume any fighter can lay hands on a +6 Dex mod. At lower levels, when these feats are being taken, such things cannot be safely assumed, and, indeed, the requirement for a higher Base Dex is fairly obvious. The very flavor text of the build supports a more Dextrous fighter, and to maximize tripping ability you should maximize one stat as highly as possible.
Caelic's replies seem to assert that such MAD does not exist, and he stops raising his Dex once he can reach 19. This alleviates only some of the MAD, because of the early requirements based on his feat selection...a problem Schmoe never has.
And lastly, Schmoe doesn't have to match Jack AoO for AoO. Caelic is first inferring that Jack doesn't need higher then a 19 Dex, and so he's going to be just as strong as Schmoe...and then people are turning around and saying how in the world Schmoe can match Jack for AoO's?
Schmoe has to match Jack in damage output...which, by the 'instant exchange' rule of AoO's, and a greatsword vs a one handed weapon, he is definitely going to be able to do. Once Schmoe has used up all his AoO's, he can either complete his Spring Attack, or step back out of Jack's range with the 5' step from a Full Attack, or the 5' step from Sidestep (or both, even?). The Exchange of AoO's end, the 'extra' Double Hits don't go off because the target is now beyond range.
==========================
Everyone loves Caelic. That's fine, and I understand it, wonderful, bravo, congrissimo. His Commandments to Practical Optimization I personally consider the finest things ever posted on these boards, and I wished more people used them.
That doesn't mean he's 100% right all the time, and the hostile tones and being overly defensive instead of looking at what I was saying bespeak more emotion then reason.
I never said he had a bad build. Go back and look. I said it could be better without using two weapons...a simple change which spawned this whole argument.
I like Caelic too. Now, can you get down off your unwavering moral support and look at what I'm saying instead of brushing such things off jsut because his name is the one involved?
Sheesh.
===Aelryinth
Nah, we're all just worshipping Caelic's feet. It's nothing you did.
Show me how you can effectively trip as an immediate action, while dealing double damage with 2 attacks of opportunity per attack of opportunity, using a greataxe. Even spiked chaintrippers dont do it as well as Jack does, there is no way you can do better than he does with a single weapon, he would have more AoOs than you, more damage and possibly a higher trip check. 19 dex is nothing at this level, so he can have as much strength as you if not more. Your build implodes, if your guy went against Nox he would lose even faster.
Jack B. Quick is an amazingly-effective tripper, never have I seen every single feat a fighter has synergize so well with each other. Make Jack a half-ogre and he has reach to make him more lethal, give that ogre the Voidmind template (third monster manual) and he can give serious penalties to opponents at worst, negate them at best. Now we all need to think of ways to make Jack B. Quick even better so my build will improve as well. The next person to say "I can beat Jack or Nox with this," implodes, explodes, gets tripped due to the High Implode Low Explode feat then implodes again cuz of the extra attack I get due to improved implode!
Aside: When you implode, what plane do you go to?
Edit: This build should take care of Nox as well
See, you STILL haven't given us a build. All you've told us is to take out some feats and "choose any four/five" to put in. WHAT four/five? I can think of dozens of feats that you'd qualify for, but I doubt Animal Affinity would help the build much. So please, tell us: what feats are you using to make this magically better?
Sure he was stating his opinion, but his opinion, in a case like this, is worthless. The build either is or isn't better, measured by its performance in a combat between the two. Opinions are neither desired nor necessary, as his position was that Schmoe, who we were never allowed to examine, would defeat Jack as posted. That's a simple mechanical test we could all carry out if he would only define Schmoe's vitals. Instead, he made repeated references to a build to which only he had access, proclaiming his superiority at every turn.
You wouldn't take someone's word for it if they ended every hand of poker with, "Well that's a nice hand, but I've got a flush this time. No, you can't see my cards." I just want him to lay his cards on the table for all to see.
But...we aren't talking about a build, here. It's the old 'A two-hander beats a TWF' thing...which obviously varies tremendously. Two-handers have undeniable advantages...which any given build might well negate. Mind you, I'm on niether side, here...and don't see why people are being so insistent on drawing lines in the sand. Caelic himself, in this thread, said that he didn't work out the build as a challenge, and knew he had weaknesses.
It's a good build, better than it had to be, to point out the combo. Caelic is like that - he optimizes well, and he doesn't do half the job...but beating it is far from impossible, and he knew it from the get.
*sheesh*
There is no contest, here. You don't get a prize if you can beat Jack. On the other hand, taking the other tack is just as silly. He's quite beatable, and Caelic knows it. Just posting a build that can do it means nothing...*especially* one designed to take advantage of his known weaknesses.
Yes, there are 2H builds that win. Yes, there are chargers. Yes, I could turn around and build something that then could kill them.
So what?
Figher 20 Red Wolf:
fighter 1 combat expertise, dodge, combat reflexes
fighter 2 improved trip
fighter 3 karmic strike
fighter 4 improved unarmed strike
fighter 5
fighter 6 knock-down, great throw
fighter 7
fighter 8 weapon focus (heavy flail)
fighter 9 defensive throw
fighter 10 weapon specialization (heavy flail)
fighter 11
fighter 12 melee weapon mastery (bludgeoning), robilar's gambit
fighter 13
fighter 14 mobility
fighter 15 sidestep
fighter 16 overpowering attack (fighter variant)
fighter 17
fighter 18 overwhelming assault, defensive sweep
fighter 19
fighter 20 combat acrobat
fighter 2 improved trip
fighter 3 karmic strike
fighter 4 improved unarmed strike
fighter 5
fighter 6 knock-down, great throw
fighter 7
fighter 8 weapon focus (heavy flail)
fighter 9 defensive throw
fighter 10 weapon specialization (heavy flail)
fighter 11
fighter 12 melee weapon mastery (bludgeoning), robilar's gambit
fighter 13
fighter 14 mobility
fighter 15 sidestep
fighter 16 overpowering attack (fighter variant)
fighter 17
fighter 18 overwhelming assault, defensive sweep
fighter 19
fighter 20 combat acrobat
In the interests of defending my good name, I'll respond to that.
See, you STILL haven't given us a build. All you've told us is to take out some feats and "choose any four/five" to put in. WHAT four/five? I can think of dozens of feats that you'd qualify for, but I doubt Animal Affinity would help the build much. So please, tell us: what feats are you using to make this magically better?
What good name, eh?
If you want to take animal affinity, go ahead. Without those five feats, the build still can go head to head with Jack, and will probably win. With those five feats, anyone who wants to can probably build a far superior engine of destruction.
Its the fact a THF has 5 feats to SPARE and literally gives up nothing that makes the change so profound.
===Aelryinth
Show me how you can effectively trip as an immediate action, while dealing double damage with 2 attacks of opportunity per attack of opportunity, using a greataxe. Even spiked chaintrippers dont do it as well as Jack does, there is no way you can do better than he does with a single weapon, he would have more AoOs than you, more damage and possibly a higher trip check. 19 dex is nothing at this level, so he can have as much strength as you if not more. Your build implodes, if your guy went against Nox he would lose even faster.
Jack B. Quick is an amazingly-effective tripper, never have I seen every single feat a fighter has synergize so well with each other. Make Jack a half-ogre and he has reach to make him more lethal, give that ogre the Voidmind template (third monster manual) and he can give serious penalties to opponents at worst, negate them at best. Now we all need to think of ways to make Jack B. Quick even better so my build will improve as well. The next person to say "I can beat Jack or Nox with this," implodes, explodes, gets tripped due to the High Implode Low Explode feat then implodes again cuz of the extra attack I get due to improved implode!
Aside: When you implode, what plane do you go to?
he can't trip as an immediate action...he has to hit with both his sword and axe first.
He doesn't get 2 AoO per shot...he gets an AoO, and then a second attack with it.
He has a free feat to utterly neutralize the trip attack...or he can take the Gold Jack spends on his second weapon and buy boots of steadfastness. Schmoe only needs the primary weapon, see.
If you are a half ogre, so am I. If you are a Voidmind, so am I. We are comparing a list of feats and what they come down to.
You are also being incredible facetious...you are saying every Fighter can have a 19 Dex, which Jack needs by level, what, 8??? and Jack will be STRONGER then a fighter who is satisfied with a 13 Dex and puts all his raises into his Str instead?
Sure, by level 20, Schmoe could be waltzing around with Dex 24, if you toss in a +5 Book on top of a +6 buffer. It also totally obscures the issue. We are talking about starting stat buffs, generally assumed to be the Elite Array unless you really want to go with Point Buy. Even then, a 16 starting Dex won't solve his problem...and will STILL cost him in other attributes. He needs a 13 Int for Expertise, and he's STILL going to have a higher Str then Schmoe the 13 Int, 13 Dex guy?
Jack generates a lot of trip attacks...IF he hits. however, he doesn't have an Optimized Tripping Weapon, and his MAD means he won't have the Tripping power of a pure Str or pure Dex build...and he can only focus on the latter because he needs that high Dex early on. If he splits his attention, you have MAD rearing its head.
The problem here is two fold...early MAD reduces the damage power of the build, and the heavy feat reqs of TWF reduce the flexibility of the build a lot. I shouldn't HAVE to give 4 or 5 feats out...they are completely unneccessary. From the spring Attack chain to the Melee Weapon mastery Chain to an Armor Optimization chain, Schmoe just has a lot more options then Jack does.
==Aelryinth
Schmoe is a good build, who is less focused.
In an honost fight schmoe could have the advantage based on his extra feats, but for points of comparison Jack is easier to talk about because all his variable[ feat wise] are given. Schmoe has 5 free floating feats and as such can continue to win everything caelic says.
I think Aerylinth has made a very valid point, but i also think that Caelic was not out to beat every chalenger brought forth. he simply wanted to show his nice idea. Jack is a simple, and focused build. I know that Aerylinth obviously prefers THF over TWF or he would not be so adamant on his point, i respect that he has taken our flame sin stride and not conceded his point out of frustration. i think Aerylinth must be an experienced teacher. no one else coudl withstand such arguing with out militant response.
And yet, I find that Schmoe will always beat Jack if his feats stay free, so I will take a stab at the build aerylinth sugests and fill in the five feats as best I can.
1. cloak dance Reason:full roudn action gives oponent 50% miss chance untiul your next action. One of those "payback" abilities triggers if they swing, whethe ror not they hit so this might help mitigate some of that damage.
cleave- prereq for style
IMproved bull rush req.
Weapon focus great club
Three mountains style- if you hit oponent twice in one round with yer great club they have to fort save or be nauseated whiuich means theyc an't attackfor oneround.
I know th eintent of this build is to attack when they attack, but this would be a nice edge
this is just one way i think to focus jack diferently.
Cloak dance to make it hard to hit you, when the oponent tries to hit you..... smack em with yer great lub as much as you can. If you manage to hit em twice then you just wail on their sickeneed self.
I know this is a buit of a take away from the original jack, but i think it would work well for a "slugger" type character. that is my take on schmoe.. may the philosophical debate continue
Kamikaze out.
oh .. and my
That way, people can focus on the different strengths and weaknesses of using a two-handed weapon in this fighting style, and not so much on whether it can beat Jack B. Quick. The same happened with Rhonin the Big's thread on Nox.
If you have suggestions or any other comments on Jack B. Quick, post them here. But trying to beat him isn't really appropriate for this thread.
Also, Aelryinth, I had the same thoughts when I made a a psychic warrior build inspired by Jack B. Quick and the other Gambit builds. I first used two weapons, and then figured that a spiked chain and extra feats would be a bit better.
As an aside from the internal sniping, Would this build benefit from Willing Deformity, and Willing Deformity[tall] from Champions of Ruin that would add an extra bit of reach to the build?
I think those feats are in Heroes of Horror, though I may be wrong.
Its the fact a THF has 5 feats to SPARE and literally gives up nothing that makes the change so profound.
No, it gives up High Sword/Low Axe and Double Hit, which means it gives up a free secondary attack and a free trip attempt. At least.
I'd say that's a hell of a lot.
If you are a half ogre, so am I. If you are a Voidmind, so am I. We are comparing a list of feats and what they come down to.
The reverse is also true, which is why Jack is better.
From the spring Attack chain to the Melee Weapon mastery Chain to an Armor Optimization chain, Schmoe just has a lot more options then Jack does.
Really? Show us one of them.
Let say Jack got 17 dex, 13 int at level 1 (no info on his str so i imagine 12). At lvl 8, he got 19 in dex. That's +1 to hit and 5 AoO per round with combat reflexes.
Schmoe on the other side got 13 int, 13 dex, and only info i found on him in this thread is that he got more str than Jack (i imagine you don't want to suffer the same MAD problem as Jack, so he doesn't have 17 str at lvl 1 : let say 15 +2 lvl increases = 17 at 8th lvl). That's +3 to hit and 2 AoO with combat reflexes.
As i understand it, Jack got 3 AoO more than Schmoe at 8th lvl with 2 attacks per AoO, which means he can make 6 more attacks than Schmoe.
His drawback : he got only +1 when Schmoe got +3 to hit.
At 20, Schmoe can have 24 dex (13 +5 manual +6 item) as he put all his attribute increases in str. But Jack can have 30 with the manual and the +6 item.
Schmoe will have 31 str (15 +5lvl +5 manual +6 item), Jack will have 24 str (12 +3lvl +5 manual +6 item).
Then Jack will have 10 AoO when Schmoe will get 7. Schmoe will get +10 to hit when Jack get +7.
you said Jack will have problems to hit while you get the same number of AoO than him.
This is where you lost me.
For me, only 2 points behind at 8 is not really a problem (even less 3 at 20), but maybe i am wrong. And Schmoe is 3 AoO behind Jack from 8 to 20.
So there is something i missed or not understood and i hope you'll help me.
PS: can you make a thread and post Schmoe please ? i would like to see a TH AoO fighter. You said to take Jack, remove some feats and choose others but it's those other feats which are important as they can totally change a build.
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=638676
1. "You can't make your primary attack and off-hand attack at the same time! Two attacks never go off at the same time!"
This is false. The text of Double Hit plainly states that you make the attacks at the same time.
If you could work in Mage Slayer and Pierce Magical Protection then I think it has more of a chance since then a cleric's and wizard's usual ac soups are negated (of course I read "Ignore spell-based bonuses to Armor Class" as anything, NA spell boosts, wis boosting spells if they've monked, dex boosting, bite of werebear boosts, divine metamagic persistant ac spell tricks, etc).
Damage reduction is another bane that this concept needs to overcome since the character will be taking many swings with average to low damage per hit. I think that is easy to deal with since there is a magical enhancement that could be added to the weapons so that they would adapt to a creature's dr.
Others have mentioned this, but I think tripping is going to become a problem, along with disarming since the character will be using one handed weapons and will be divided slightly between str and dex so he might not be fairing too well against opposed disarm. Locking gauntlets help with the disarm. Tripping would need some creative mix of the common tripping magic items to stay effective, otherwise the character might end up on the ground from countertrips.
Again--for about the fifteenth time--this is not meant to be a complete, play-as-is build. It's meant to be a showcase for the synergy of certain feats.
I didn't start this thread to show off a fighter who could beat all other fighters, or who could go toe to toe with a wizard at 20th level.
I started the thread to show off a fighter who could get six swings to his opponent's one--that's it. That was the whole point.
Really, I'm not sure how many more times I can say that, or in how many different ways. Of course the build as initially presented has weaknesses--it's optimized for one thing and one thing only, number of retaliatory strikes.
Those who insist on saying, over and over, "But if you cut down on the number of retaliatory strikes and add (X, Y, or Z) the build becomes better!" are missing the entire point of the thread.
Really, I'm not sure how many more times I can say that, or in how many different ways. Of course the build as initially presented has weaknesses--it's optimized for one thing and one thing only, number of retaliatory strikes.
Those who insist on saying, over and over, "But if you cut down on the number of retaliatory strikes and add (X, Y, or Z) the build becomes better!" are missing the entire point of the thread.
I think people just skim... like my boss at work, he reads every other line in an email then freaks out. Then I highlight the information for him from the email I just sent him and he tells me I wasnt clear enough.
I think people just skim... like my boss at work, he reads every other line in an email then freaks out. Then I highlight the information for him from the email I just sent him and he tells me I wasnt clear enough.
Whether not not that's true of most people, it's certainlytrue here. (And even more true on the What's a DM to Do? boards. Ugh...)
I'd also like to point out that even if the Double Hit is interrupted after the first attack, he can take his next AoO with his off-hand, allowing him to trigger High Sword Low Axe even if he never gets off a complete Double Hit.
By the very nature of AoO's, Double Hit is interruptable. the Second swing is not an AoO, and there is no such thing as simultaneity for weapon attacks in the game. You have to resolve one, then the other, and Schmoe can certainly get off an AoO in between them if he's able to. If you can interrupt the resolution of an AoO, you can certainly interrupt a second attack coming in with an AoO.
YES, he can use the Axe instead of the Sword to try to trigger his hit attempt. This is an offhand weapon, so he's automatically doing even less damage back...and as has been pointed out, unless he pours his points into Dex, he's not an Optimized tripper.
And even if Jack Trips Schmoe, it doesn't stop the AoO exchanges...it just gives him some better bonuses!
===Aelryinth
I don't even know why I'm still feeding this troll, but here we go.
No, it gives up High Sword/Low Axe and Double Hit, which means it gives up a free secondary attack and a free trip attempt. At least.
I'd say that's a hell of a lot.
The reverse is also true, which is why Jack is better.
Really? Show us one of them.
1) I agree. You incite and you flame, and contribute nothing. You are indeed trolling.
2) Against Schmoe, the secondary attack never lands, and the Trip attempt is less then guaranteed success. Especially with the MAD of the build. And Schmoe does more damage.
3) Which contributes nothing and explains nothing. Congratulations, you have made no point at all. Twice.
4) Huh. You can't list five feats on your own. Amazing.
Sorry, I've got more respect for people on the Opt boards then that. I personally think that just about anyone here can come up with 5 good feats for a THF in about ten seconds. That you are unable to is your problem, not mine, even though I did deign to give you some very, very basic guidelines. But you seem unable to process such.
==Aelryinth
and there is no such thing as simultaneity for weapon attacks in the game
Where are you getting this? I'm really not trying to enter the debate, just to clear up my own confusion.
-SLIH
Aelryinth let it go. Jack B. Quick gets more attacks per strike. That's the point of the thread. If you want to showcase a different AoO beast, do it somewhere else.
If some others weren't being so obtuse on the fact that the build can still be improved on, I would have let it go a long time ago. I never said he didn't get more attacks overall...against creatures that didn't have Payback-style feats.. Against creatures that do, it's not a Master Build for the Ages (like, say, The Gatling Gun Tripper, or something).
It IS a good, clean build. But you can make the build better and just as clean with a THW, is all I'm trying to say, and the claws lept out in Caelic's defense.
===Aelryinth
Where are you getting this? I'm really not trying to enter the debate, just to clear up my own confusion.
It's an unspoken rule. Simultaneous attacks in 1.0 and 2.0 lead to a lot of confusion, and it was often painful for the DM to resolve all the possible interactions which lead to arbitrary results. 3.0 and 3.5 have tried to eliminate this by ensuring there is always a sequence to attacks, so that the results of one always complete before the second occurs.
I think all we have here is a case of bad editting. Given WotC's overarcing desire to eliminate simultaneous events, I would have to say that the "at the same time" indicates that both attacks occur before the instigating event, but in the standard order of on-hand then off-hand, and does not indicate "simultaneous". Simultaneous is just a bad idea that was smart to discard, and the editors at WotC need a slap on the wrist for letting this case slip through.
-SLIH
Edit: The "Jack" build could be brutal with wounding weapons. Not that no one has thought of that...just something that occurred to me when my boss told me my new project.
It's an unspoken rule. Simultaneous attacks in 1.0 and 2.0 lead to a lot of confusion, and it was often painful for the DM to resolve all the possible interactions which lead to arbitrary results. 3.0 and 3.5 have tried to eliminate this by ensuring there is always a sequence to attacks, so that the results of one always complete before the second occurs.
I think all we have here is a case of bad editting. Given WotC's overarcing desire to eliminate simultaneous events, I would have to say that the "at the same time" indicates that both attacks occur before the instigating event, but in the standard order of on-hand then off-hand, and does not indicate "simultaneous". Simultaneous is just a bad idea that was smart to discard, and the editors at WotC need a slap on the wrist for letting this case slip through.
While in general, I would agree with you, I'm not sure there is a problem with this particular feat...in essence, both attacks combine into one attack. Is there a problem you can see there? The technique of hitting simultaneously with two weapons is a real-world technique...and I'm not sure where there would be a problem, but would like to know before it crops up in my own game...
I always thought the big problem with simultaneous events was when they were performed by separate people.
in essence, both attacks combine into one attack
That is a fairly good position, though I might make the attacks into a flurry so that they used the same attack roll (sort of like the Master Thrower's ability)
-SLIH
It's an unspoken rule.
Unspoken rules < Written rules.
We have two variables here:
1. People insisting that it's impossible to make two attacks at the same time, despite the fact that the rules never say so.
2. A rule that says "Make two attacks at the same time."
Argue intent all you want on this one--the feat says the attacks happen at the same time. It breaks the "unspoken rule," as feats often do.
Schmoe can get two attacks of opportunity, but he doesn't "interrupt my attack sequence." This isn't Magic.
Suffice to say that it uses a spiked chain, it flanks all by itself, and unless the opponent is immune to critical hits, he's probably never going to get an AoO again.
Is there a problem you can see there?
I see the slippery slope. One step down that path and you're drowning. I will not let my group even get close to there.
Is there something specific wrong with it? No, it probably won't screw things up; however, I will caveat that neither WotC nor I are capable of considering every permutation and combination that this forum is capable of putting together, and so there certainly could be some combination of weapon abilities, secondary abilities, dependent abilities, or spell effects out there now or yet to be released that when combined with this simultaneous event will result in an arbitrary ruling by the DM.
Guys--EVERYONE--please.
Simmer down.
Seriously, this has gotten way out of hand. Sure, I'd prefer it if people would take Jack and post their own, improved variants rather than saying "Jack is weak in X way, I could beat him!" Posting an improved build is constructive; saying "I could beat him!" isn't.
But there's no need for the level of acrimony that seems to have built up.
So I'm going to ask--nicely--for the following:
1. If you see a weakness in Jack's build...of which there are several...be constructive and post a variant that doesn't have that weakness. We all know Jack can be beaten. That's a given. Posts dwelling on it are just clutter at this point.
2. If you see a post that says "I could beat Jack!" just let it go. It's not worth getting angry over.
Since the build seems to have moved so many to post things that could shut down a KS/RG build, I'll post my own later.
Suffice to say that it uses a spiked chain, it flanks all by itself, and unless the opponent is immune to critical hits, he's probably never going to get an AoO again.
I was looking at the flanking by yourself thing back when I built mine, but stayed well away...I built mine as a playable character, not something to post and watch DMs go "Not in my game you won't!"...but it is a cool trick. :D
2. Combat Expertise (13 Int req)
3. Improved Trip
4. WF (Handaxe)
5.
6. Improved TWF (19 Dex req), High Sword Low Axe
7.
8. Combat Reflexes
9. Karmic Strike {Change to: Mobility}
10. Double Hit
11.
12. Robilar's Gambit, Mobility {Move up Elusive target}
13.
14. Elusive Target {Change to ? Quick Draw? Immediate Dodge?}
15. Power Attack
16. Overpowering Attack
17.
18. Improved Unarmed Strike, Defensive Throw
19.
20. Sidestep
=========================
This is the original build.
We've already seen the ruling the KS and Rob's gambit don't stack. Since swinging is better then getting hit, lets get rid of KS. Caelic can stick in Elusive Target there.
HS/LA has another hidden cost...Weapon Focus in TWO weapons. Ouch. Happily, he can throw Hand Axes. Since he wanted ET earlier, let's move that up, and give, oh, Quick Draw so he's got a missile weapon if his opponent decides to stay out of range of his AoO. Since this is likely a high Dex build, a thematic of lots of hand axes spiralling in if you stay out of reach of the cuisinart makes good sense...Precise Shot would be nice, but some modified Bracers of the Axethrower (***, Archery) would take care of the problem. Or we can throw in the Immediate Dodge feat (whatitsname) to maximize use of Elusive Target and Dodge.
Note, he also doesn't have Weapon Finesse...so our TH is based on Str still. Ouch!
Problems with the Build are the very early high Dex req, which basically forces this to be a high Dex build, or results in splitting your stat focus. If we use the Elite Array, we are probably going to end up with something like
S: 14 I: 13 W: 10 D: 15 Con: 12 Ch: 8.
Hmm. With a +2 Booster, you can't reach 19 Dex at level 6. Okay, we'll make the highest stat a 16 just so the build can work, and take the 14 down to a 13 (approximating stat buy).
So, we end up with Jack being about like this.
S: 13 I: 13 W: 10 D: 16 Con: 12 Ch: 8
He MUST start with a 16 Dex, get a +2 buffer, and drop a Raise on Dex to qualify for ITWF at 6th. If he waits until 8, then he can start with a 15 Dex and use the Standard Elite Array, but it takes another Raise....bascially a tradeoff.
So, at level 20, ignoring any buffers or books (we assume both have them), he is going to end up with Str: 17 Dex: 17 OR Str: 13/14 Dex: 21/20 If he wants to be a good Tripper, and get lots of AoO's, he's probably better off with the High Dex build.
His tripping will be based on Dex, but his TH rolls are still based on Str (unless he throws his Axe).
==========================
==========================
Now, let's go to Schmoe.
Schmoe's stats focus on his Strength.
At level 1, he's going to be something like
Str: 15 Int: 12 W: 10 Dex: 13 Con: 14 Ch: 8
Doesn't need the following: Weapon focus (second weapon), TWF, ITWF, HS/LA, Double Hit.
Instead of taking Expertise and Improved Trip early for the Int Req, He waits until level 8, taking Combat Reflexes and Mobility instead. The +2 Stat buffer he gets is Int, rather then Dex, which lets him take Expertise a bit later on.
1. ? (Power Attack), Dodge, WF-Beatstick
2. Combat Reflexes
3. Mobility
4. ? (Weapon Spec-Beatstick)
5.
6. ? (Spring Attack),? (Close-Quarters Fighting)
7.
8. Combat Expertise
9. Elusive Target
10. Improved Trip
11.
12. Robilar's Gambit, ? (Melee Weapon Mastery - Beatstick)
13.
14. ? (Immediate Dodge Feat)
15.
16. Overpowering Attack
17.
18. Improved Unarmed Strike, Defensive Throw
19.
20. Sidestep
Let's move Power Attack to level One. Rarrgh!
We finish out Dodge and Mobility with Spring Attack for some flexibility in combat.
Weapon Spec lets us take Melee Weapon mastery.
Close Quarters fighting gives us a nasty surprise aagainst all those big monsters that want to grapple us early on.
And we tack on the feat later that lets us change our Dodge target as an immediate action to make using Power attack against us totally useless by switching Dodge to whoever is attacking us.
In any event, how do we come out?
Ignoring books and stat buffers, Schmoe's base stats are
Str: 20 Int: 12 Wis: 10 Dex: 13 Con: 14 Ch: 8
Plusses: With his Weapon Mastery and higher Str, he has a base +4 TH advantage over Jack. Since Jack is using Two Weapons, this is actually +6.
His damage is going to be +3 for Str, +4 for Spec/Mastery per swing better then Jack's Str bonus, or +7 dmg more. So, he's +6 Th/+7 Dmg (at least!) per swing over Jack by 20, and that's ignoring what kind of Beatstick he has. Even if Str and Weapon damage evens out, his Feats give him the damage edge...and he hits FAR more often. He also does his full normal damage on standard actions like a charge or a closing attack, which Jack does not...Jack relies on AoO's.
At level 20, with just a +6 stat buffer, Schmoe gets 5 AoO. that's plenty. At 10 he probably has 3, 15 he has 4. he doesn't need a lot of AoO. He probably has a 31 Str for a +15 dmg mod, +5 for magic, +4 for feats. If something wants to get hit by him for +24 dmg 5 times, potentially doubled, he's likely to let it.
Jack had to downgrade his Con because of his MAD to get those attacks early. Schmoe has 20 more HP then Jack.
If he's Grabbed, somebody pays big time...and the special AoO doesn't even count against his total.
With Spring Attack, he has in and out capability to avoid AoO while closing...which is a particular weakness of Jack's.
He has Power Attack from the get-go. That's always nice.
And he only had to shell out money for one weapon, which probably leaves him 100k+ to spend on other gear by level 20.
All of which leaves him a lot of flexibility overall. The extra minor gear could especially address build weaknesses...such as Steadfast Boots, or be used to raise AC, or saves, or something.
Optionally, if he uses a OHW Two handed, he could instead keep a shield in his off hand to raise AC for those times when he doesn't want to deal two handed dmg. This costs dmg output some, but then he has the possibility of +7 Shield AC with a Large Shield.
Their AC is likely the same or very close, between Armor and Dex tradeoffs.
=================
Another option is to drop CQF, Spring Attack, and the Immediate Dodge for GWF< GWS< and Weapon Supremacy, tweaking levels and whens a bit. This makes him a right terror with a Greatsword, especially to a Grappler. It is somewhat less flexible, however.
=======================
A last option is to go for some AC and defenses. Give up Weapon Spec, Spring Attack and Melee Weapon Mastery for Sheild Specialization (Buckler), IMproved Buckler Defense, and Shield Ward.
Th/Dmg goes down by +2/+4, but at level 20, you pick up +7 Shield Ac at all times, including against Touch Attacks, without having to resort to Animated Shields and more gold layout.
======
I'm sure some others can contribute 5 feats, from the Combat Focus feats (you can get all of them), to the Mounted Combat ones, to pursuing a second set of ranged feats for some flexibility, to the Mage Slayer tree.
===============
Note I am not comparing gold layouts for gear, except specifically the cost of not needing a second uber weapon. Nor am I comparing later stat mods, as we can assume these are completely equal (books and buffers). I am not comparing templates, size mods, armor types, weapon bonuses, or anything similar. I have not resorted to PrC's for feat maximization or class abilties.
I am comparing a fighter build focusing around usage of a Payback feat. You could even take the Fighter Options.
=======================
If you want to 'adjust' the build with your own five feats, please do so and post it. Caelic's build is an excellent framework for customization...he built his to manufacture Trip attempts and extra attacks. I believe mine to be better as a generic fighter, and still be able to Trip, and it will hit and outdamage Jack significantly...or have far superior defenses.
Use the Schmoe 'Str build' stat block, the Caelic "Dex" build or the Caelic "MAD" build for stats, and see what you can do.
Don't worry about special gear, templates, or the like. All builds are equal in that regard, tweaking with magic comes seperately. Also assume human for the extra feat, although I suppose Strongheart is possible. No PrC's.
See what you can do.
===Aelryinth
Should we add two levels of monk to jack so that he has improved unarmed strike, combat reflexes and improved grapple crammed into two levels, along with better saves and evasion?
Also, can Jack have flaws so that he has more of these feats earlier? What if Jack wasn't human and had four arms attacking with two axes and two swords, is that interesting?
Just popping some quick ideas out.
Would you look at my build and do a simple critique? The link is above, in this thread. I did something very similar, before the recent rash of AoO builds started up...or as they did...mine was one of the first, if not *the* first, and he's a straight Ftr, too. He was human until someone sold me on Goliath.
With that being said, and keeping the proper respect for the awesome synergy in Caelic's build of Jack (accomplishing the stated goal in a fantastic way), I really feel that aelryinth is right; despite the fact that he has failed to present a build doesn't in any way, in my opinion, demerits his arguments: focus on a build is good only to a certain point; it's like that totally amazing and mind-boggling (almost theoretical) build (I think it was from tsuyoshikentsu) that could enervate a guy for 32 negative levels in two rounds by casting a 4th-level spell - until 16th level you're basically a caster with ALMOST no feats. Worse, you're a caster with Iron Will... (granted, you took a flaw to get -3 to will saves). Sure, after 16th level you rock, but until then... you're behind other casters... would you play it on a pre-16th-level game? But I'm not getting to my point.
My point is that (and maybe I'm just repeating some logics already layed out throughout the thread) the build could be narrowed down, letting Schmoe be almost as good as Jack, while being better at the iconic things that fighters tipically do - thus, achieving a greater degree of versatility - and that's even BEFORE 4 or 5 potential feats are chosen for him.
I really can't follow the kind of math you do, but, in my book, a +5 to hit difference (as demonstrated by saru - which did not account for the -2 to TWF, btw) is a great deal, be it at 5th or 20th level. It generates 25% more hit chance. The most advantgeous move by Jack in respect to Schmoe is using tumble.
Please, bare in mind that I'm not pitting the two fighters against each other. Mainly because in a fight with such optimized builds (and they ARE optimized, though they have room to being it further) that have similar class featured capabilities, the dice will define the winner (barring, of course, different player's skills), but also because the Game ;) tends to throw you against different situations than those imagined here. More "real", so to speak; after all, when did you last faced a "boss" that was a mad skulking hulking tripper of doom?
That's why I keep finding, in my play sessions, that I would rather have versatility (and I know that many people that skim or post in these boards also do) as the kind of demonstrated by Schmoe, rather than Jack's (even though the tumble would be excellent for a fighter, and could generate very devious plays that would make most DM's cry in despair).
So, in conclusion, I tend to agree with aelryinth's reasoning. If I would to go in a campaign I would tend to use Schmoe's build much more than Jack's one. BUT, if I were to play in an arena... hell, yeah, bring those 5:1 to me, and grab a beer with the attack that's left, while you're at it... once the dust has settled you'll like it to cool your sore, parched throat from laughing in the face of your opponents.
Aside note: please, forgive my bad english. In a country where English is kind of a "third" language we just hope to manage, not excel. Guess I should have had those human paragon levels and grab Speak Language as a class skill... :P
Cheers to everyone; you guys make this a really excelent forum!
[EDIT]: Ok, when I wrote this about 10 of those posts above this one was not there. Now there is a build presented by aelryinth that seems very good. Shall we finally hear some constructive support to everyone's ideas? ;)
Some assumptions:
1. Both characters can survive enough hits to actually do this comparison
2. Both hits from Double Hit happen at the same point in the resolution order, because of the "same time" wording.
3. Jack has a Dexterity bonus equal to or higher than Schmoe.
If Robilar's Gambit and Karmic Strike do not stack, a "Schmoe" character will pretty much always be authorized to take his full complement of AoO's (Dex mod +1), because every AoO Jack takes with Double Hit triggers two AoO's from Schmoe.
Jack will either get one or two more AoO's than Schmoe, depending on which one started the loop. Because of Double Hit and High Sword/Low Axe, he will get a total of 3 to 5 extra swings for damage - once HS/LA works once, Schmoe is prone and not logically trippable, therefore HS/LA shuts itself down after working once.
If Robilar's Gambit and Karmic Strike *do* stack, contrary to the CustServ answer that has been posted, Jack starts to do better. Every retaliatory hit Schmoe makes will provoke two more attacks of opportunity, putting Jack up to near a limit of his own Dex bonus +1, unless his bonus is more than twice Schmoe's. Schmoe already was at his limit, so he gains nothing more from them stacking.
Practically, in an endurance test between these two, it comes down to the basic damage comparison between THF and TWF. As Robilar's adds to damage per hit, it helps TWF more, but the basic comparison seems to be between the average damage of both attacks from Jack versus one from Schmoe. Jack gets one extra tag somewhere along the way from HSLA, but it's nothing a THF can't at least answer with the Great Throw/Knockdown trick I posted a couple pages back.
More important, I think the number of AoO builds out there may require integrating more combo-breakers than Sidestep. A successful Sunder or Disarm could shift the odds significantly, and not being out-reach'ed is amazingly important.
Tyryt, the High Sword Low Axe style feat requires weapon focus in both weapons.
For weapons, dual souldrinking weapons are much nastier and less resisted than dual wounding/marrowcrushing. If all goes right, the opponent will take 6 negative levels, less damage than 12 con damage but negative levels come with penalties.
Drop Power Attack, improved unarmed strike, defensive throw and karmic strike. 3 of those are redundant effects that you dont need thanx to the Custserv ruling (thank you Caelic for teaching me what custserv means!) and power attack isnt that useful for a build who only makes a single melee attack on his turn. I would recommend weapon spec for both handaxe and longsword, melee weapon mastery (slashing of course) and oversized two-weapon fighting, those 4 would up your damage by 6 with each weapon (possibly moreso depending on offhand weapon choice) and your attack by 4, which are a better option than deft opportunist. If you wanna go for all out damage, replace dodge and mobility (which arent as useful unless your moving around alot) with two-weapon pounce and two-weapon rend, both are useful to close in on those pesky archers and you can still get off HSLA from a distance. If you go half-ogre then you can probably drop oversized two-weapon fighting and two-weapon rend from my suggestions list for the +2LA, reach is incredibly useful. The possibilities are endless cuz thanx to official ruling you have 6 feats you dont need.
1. TWF, Dodge (13 Dex req), WF (Longsword)
2. Combat Expertise (13 Int req)
3. Improved Trip
4. WF (Handaxe)
5.
6. Improved TWF (19 Dex req), High Sword Low Axe
7.
8. Combat Reflexes
9. karmic strike
10. Double Hit
11.
12. counterattack, Mobility
13.
14. elusive target
15. mage slayer
16. Overpowering Attack
17.
18. pierce magical protection, combat acrobat
19.
20. power attack
EDIT : i wonder if i can put dual strike in this build to use sword and axe when he only get one attack.
PS : where can i find the beatstick as it's not in SRD ?
Here is a try on Jack v2.0 :
1. TWF, Dodge (13 Dex req), WF (Longsword)
2. Combat Expertise (13 Int req)
3. Improved Trip
4. WF (Handaxe)
5.
6. Improved TWF (19 Dex req), High Sword Low Axe
7.
8. Combat Reflexes
9. karmic strike
10. Double Hit
11.
12. counterattack, Mobility
13.
14. elusive target
15. mage slayer
16. Overpowering Attack
17.
18. pierce magical protection, combat acrobat
19.
20. power attack
PS : where can i find the beatstick as it's not in SRD ?
lol! A "beatstick" is the general term for any 2handed bludgeoning weapon.
lol! A "beatstick" is the general term for any 2handed bludgeoning weapon.
then how can you make a trip attack with a greatclub ? an heavy flail ok, it's in the description of the weapon, but a greatclub ...
"How" is not necessarily a good question for this forum. Not all that interested in visualization as much as just the mechanics, and the mechanics allow tripping with anything.
the mechanics allow tripping with anything.
really ? i thought you can only trip with a weapon allowing trip attempt as written in weapon description or make a trip attack as an unarmed melee touch attack.
I made another error. Combat Defense is the feat giving you the Immediate Dodge ability on defense...it's a combat Focus feat, so you'd need that first. Jack can't get it, and I'd need to drop another feat for Schmoe to.
IUS and Defensive Throw are in Jack's build to optimize his tripping. Remove them and you've got room...and for Combat Vigor or Stability, too!
=================
Eldon, I'm not a great optimizer, especially when you start throwing out races and templates and multiple classes. Like you noted, I"m an old schooler and prefer simpler things...just keeping track of key feats is hard for me! I suggest starting a new thread and seeing what interest you get in it...but note most Trip builds get referred to Snow Savant's classic thread.
====================
On the Dual Strike issue:
Look people, let's take an extreme view. You Dual Strike, and with your right hand decide to Sunder, and to your left hand to Disarm.
You don't have either Improved Feat.
Your DM blinks. By Caelic's rule, your enemy now gets exactly ONE AoO for TWO attacks that are triggering AoO...because they are both the same attack.
That's clearly not happening. You can SEE there are two dif attacks.
Let's have you Disarm with one attack and just swing with the other.
Now, your enemy gets an AoO on one attack before it comes...obviously, breaking up your attack. Does he break up your second hand if his return AoO disarms your main weapon? By Caelic's rule, since they happen at the 'same time' and your primary hand never actually managed to swing, he does!
I don't think you'd like that.
Simultaneous Attack happens only one way in the game, and that's by a rend...you land with both attacks, and the combo does additional damage. It in no way infers that the individual attacks are not treated as such.
So, what happens is that when Schmoe attacks Jack, he triggers a gambit response AoO. he wallops Joe.
Jack swings back, twice. He swings and hits with his primary hand!
AoO time. Schmoe wallops him back. Triggers two attacks!
Jack, uh, somehow swings twice, but his other offhand attack from the first AoO is still 'on the way'. AoO's can interrupt one another.
He hits with his off hand, trying for the Trip Combo. Trip resolution commences!
For simplicity, we go on. Schmoe swings back and connects!
Jack swings twice. Primary first. Hits.
Schmoe replies with his AoO. Swings. Hits.
Repeat.
Now, Schmoe is down to his last AoO, and Jack has 4 attacks (which are not AoO's, they are Dual Hits) waiting in the wings to go off.
Deciding he'd rather not take those hits, he uses Sidestep on his last AoO to remove himself from range, and gives up his AoO.
Jack's turn. Unfortunately for Jack, there's no further AoO triggered, and his waiting Dual Hits are not AoO, so he can't use Sidestep to advance on Schmoe and continue the barrage. His waiting axe fricasses the air four times in frustration, once with his sword.
Schmoe then either takes an additional 5' step backwards as entitled to his full attack, or completes his Spring Attack to get completely out of Full Attack range.
In any event, by exchanging AoO and interrupting all other actions, Schmoe has limited Jack to exactly the same number of attacks as himself.
Unfortunately for Jack, Schmoe has a huge damage advantage over him. At level 20, with a greatsword, that's 2-12 +24 damage, assuming no overpowering assault to start things off. Jack likely did about 1-8 +12-14.
So, Schmoe just dealt out 153 dmg or so, and Jack did about 85. And that's assuming Jack hit every time, as he has the better chance of failure.
And that's how Schmoe would beat on Jack. One attack starting the chain, and then Sidestepping and moving away before Jack could complete all his combos. With the extra feats, he can easily overcome the Trip threat, and with the extra money neutralize it entirely.
==Aelryinth
On the Dual Strike issue:
Look people, let's take an extreme view. You Dual Strike, and with your right hand decide to Sunder, and to your left hand to Disarm.
You don't have either Improved Feat.
Your DM blinks. By Caelic's rule,
Correction: by the rules as written. It's not my rule, it's the rule that appears in the book. Please don't mischaracterize.
your enemy now gets exactly ONE AoO for TWO attacks that are triggering AoO...because they are both the same attack.
No, they are NOT both the same attack. Nobody has said they are both the same attack. The rule does not say they are both the same attack; it says the attacks happen at the same time.
Please do not invent strawman arguments.
That's clearly not happening. You can SEE there are two dif attacks.
Of course there are. Nobody else seems to be confused on that point. There are two different attacks...which happen at the same time, as the rules for Double Hit explicitly state.
Simultaneous Attack happens only one way in the game, and that's by a rend...you land with both attacks, and the combo does additional damage. It in no way infers that the individual attacks are not treated as such.
No, it happens in two ways (at least.) It happens with a rend, and it happens when you launch a Double Hit. As the feat explicitly states.
The rest of the rationalization is irrelevant, as it's based on false premises and strawman arguments. The attacks from a Double Hit happen at the same time; no substantiative refutation of that fact has been offered.
You Dual Strike, and with your right hand decide to Sunder, and to your left hand to Disarm.
You'd get an AoO for each attack before either of them landed. Could really ruin his day.
Alternatively, you take an AoO for one reflecting that the attacks are happening so quicly you don't have time to respond to everything.
Chalk it up to DM's discretion.
Let's have you Disarm with one attack and just swing with the other.
He'd get an AoO for the disarm and, if successful, the disarm doesn't happen. The regular attack would continue as normal.
I'm really not seeing so great of an issue with it.
-SLIH
P.S. Sorry, Caelic posted a bit faster than I. There's also a feat in Complete Adventurer that allows you to make two attacks with a single attack roll isn't there? Am I remembering it incorrectly?
Eldon, I'm not a great optimizer, especially when you start throwing out races and templates and multiple classes. Like you noted, I"m an old schooler and prefer simpler things...just keeping track of key feats is hard for me! I suggest starting a new thread and seeing what interest you get in it...but note most Trip builds get referred to Snow Savant's classic thread.
==Aelryinth
Oh, I've seen Snow's legendary build...ages ago. Mine doesn't actually concentrate on tripping, so much, it just fights, using whatever seems best at the time...and...get this...all it is is a Goliath Ftr19. Was Human Ftr20, but I was convinced that the Goliath's bonuses were worth the loss of a level. He uses a spiked chain, as you apparently surmised, but he has a lot in common with Schmoe, and that's why I asked your opinion...
Let's say the attacks are simultaneous. Following the RAW, Schmoe now gets two AoO's, one if you hit with the sword, one if you hit with the Axe. Your Trip attempt gets queued, but the hits are resolved, so the AoO's go off before your trip attempt.
So, Schmoe now gets to hit Jack twice, simultaneously because Jack's attacks were simultaneous. If yours are simultaneous, Schmoe's AoO's have to be, too.
He could attack with one, and Sidestep with the other. They're simultaneous, so which goes first? This isn't inherently prevented by the RAW, because we've let simultaneous hits creep in. We're now in "Nightmare of timing" world. Schmoe is now attacking from a spot 1/2-way between two squares. And what does that do to Jack's return AoO for the one hit that Schmoe might be allowed to take? Since Jack's Double Hit for the AoO comes after the attack is comepleted, but the Sidestep may not be completed, does Jack get his AoO before the completed 5' move, when it's 1/2 completed, or after in which case he's no longer threatening Schmoe?
Or, because the RAW doesn't say anything against Schmoe hitting Jack twice simultaneously with the same weapon (it just makes no logical sense, but we're not worried about reality here, after all), Jack takes two THW attacks, and has two AoO's provoked himself. He makes four simultaneous hits, two with each weapon, but again Jack's Trips are queued up behind Schmoe's AoO responses.
Can't you see the nightmare of timing simultaneity creates? No sane DM allows things to get this complex. The only way to prevent this whole chaotic mess is to read "at the same time" as being "both occur before whatever the opponent normally chooses to do next , but in the order of on-hand then off-hand."
The RAW needs to make sense on its face, or we must retreat to the determination that the RAW was not written as intended, and then attempt to determine what was intended.
EldonG, is that what you were looking for in terms of Timing Nightmares?
Okay, Caelic, can't you see what kind of horrible timing you're getting into?
Let's say the attacks are simultaneous. Following the RAW, Schmoe now gets two AoO's, one if you hit with the sword, one if you hit with the Axe. Your Trip attempt gets queued, but the hits are resolved, so the AoO's go off before your trip attempt.
So, Schmoe now gets to hit Jack twice, simultaneously because Jack's attacks were simultaneous. If yours are simultaneous, Schmoe's AoO's have to be, too.
He could attack with one, and Sidestep with the other. They're simultaneous, so which goes first? This isn't inherently prevented by the RAW, because we've let simultaneous hits creep in. We're now in "Nightmare of timing" world. Schmoe is now attacking from a spot 1/2-way between two squares. And what does that do to Jack's return AoO for the one hit that Schmoe might be allowed to take? Since Jack's Double Hit for the AoO comes after the attack is comepleted, but the Sidestep may not be completed, does Jack get his AoO before the completed 5' move, when it's 1/2 completed, or after in which case he's no longer threatening Schmoe?
Or, because the RAW doesn't say anything against Schmoe hitting Jack twice simultaneously with the same weapon (it just makes no logical sense, but we're not worried about reality here, after all), Jack takes two THW attacks, and has two AoO's provoked himself. He makes four simultaneous hits, two with each weapon, but again Jack's Trips are queued up behind Schmoe's AoO responses.
Can't you see the nightmare of timing simultaneity creates? No sane DM allows things to get this complex. The only way to prevent this whole chaotic mess is to read "at the same time" as being "both occur before whatever the opponent normally chooses to do next , but in the order of on-hand then off-hand."
The RAW needs to make sense on its face, or we must retreat to the determination that the RAW was not written as intended, and then attempt to determine what was intended.
EldonG, is that what you were looking for in terms of Timing Nightmares?
Ummm...no...I get kind of lost when Schmoe's return attacks have to be simultaneous...pretty early in your scheme of things. They don't, not that I can see...they're just in response to two attacks that were simultaneous...says nothing about them...and then I get a bit lost. I'm not sure what meaning anything has, beyond then...I mean, him sidestepping is the same, no matter what...he sidesteps, and anyone without reach gets no more attacks on the other...in this case, that ends the round.
At that point, the DM has to rule. Are Schmoe's AoO attacks simultaneous or not? You (EldonG) chose no, but there's no rule you can fall back on to prove your point. Whatever the choices are, the rules don't help us, and we're suddenly making it up.
Like I said before, it's an unwritten rule that no events are ever simultaneous. It seriously needs to be written.
then how can you make a trip attack with a greatclub ? an heavy flail ok, it's in the description of the weapon, but a greatclub ...
Easy, we do stuff like this in stickfighting all the time. It usually involves deflecting a strike with the business end and then slipping the part of the grip that stends past your hand under their arm, under their leg, against their throat or behind their head and pushing/pulling with your hand/arm bracing their body to prevent them rebalancing themselves. A big stick is also useful in locking joints as you can brace things against it.
In D&D it's considered an unarmed strike, which I think is entirely appropriate.
Okay, I'll explain it like this. Since Jack's attacks are simultaneous, and there is no rule against simultaneous attacks, Schmoe is within his rights to demand that the AoO's Jack provoked are simultaneous. They don't have to be, but they can be and he stakes his claim.
At that point, the DM has to rule. Are Schmoe's AoO attacks simultaneous or not? You (EldonG) chose no, but there's no rule you can fall back on to prove your point. Whatever the choices are, the rules don't help us, and we're suddenly making it up.
Like I said before, it's an unwritten rule that no events are ever simultaneous. It seriously needs to be written.
I see what you're getting at...the Dual Hit breaks that unwritten rule, but the rule still needs to be written, so that the response to it plays out logically...and Schmoe *can't* claim it to be simultaneous...hmmm...it seems obvious enough, but putting it in black and white clears up ambiguity.
Okay, I'll explain it like this. Since Jack's attacks are simultaneous, and there is no rule against simultaneous attacks, Schmoe is within his rights to demand that the AoO's Jack provoked are simultaneous. They don't have to be, but they can be and he stakes his claim.
...except that his claim is irrelevant. Is there a specific rule stating that his attacks are simultaneous? If not, then why should his "claim" be an issue? I can claim that all of my normal attacks are simultaneous, but my claiming so holds no weight.
At that point, the DM has to rule. Are Schmoe's AoO attacks simultaneous or not?
There doesn't seem to be an issue here. Attacks are ordinarily not simultaneous. Barring an exception to that rule of thumb, there's no reason to assume that attacks are simultaneous. Schmoe's attacks don't need to be simultaneous to satisfy the conditions of his feat.
Like I said before, it's an unwritten rule that no events are ever simultaneous. It seriously needs to be written.
...except that that "unwritten rule" has enough exceptions that it's pretty questionable whether you can even afford it the status of an "unwritten rule."
===That is the text of the feat Double Hit.
Caelic, use your own common sense rules. What you are proposing is that this feat now breaks all of the AoO and normal attack timing rules.
You are escalating 'at the same time' to the province of 'simultaneity', i.e. two attacks that are essentially one. But then you turn around and claim the second attack isn't an AoO, and if the first attack doesn't succeed, it has no effect on the second.
To me, 'at the same time' means that as you are making your AoO with one weapon, you get to add an attack with your off hand. This attack is completely seperate, it is resolved completely seperately, and it happens within the timeframe of your AoO, essentially getting dragged along for the ride.
The 'at the same time' is there to clarify it happens during the span of your AoO, not at the same instant of the other weapon. AoO can be interrupted, split and otherwise halted, and so can Double Hit. To do otherwise is just complicating matters horrendously...another common sense issue.
But it IS a seperate attack, and your unearthly 'simultaneity' ability just doesn't hold water. It's an AoO that has no AoO 'cost' attached, simply to benefit TWF types.
Stand back, apply your own common sense rules, and stay away from adding an additional complicating mechanic to the game that does not exist in any stated form.
Common sense says this rule exists to give TWF a way to deal off hand damage with an AoO. Going beyond this is simply wishful thinking...don't overdo things.
===Aelryinth
You are escalating 'at the same time' to the province of 'simultaneity'
2 entries found for simultaneity.
si·mul·ta·ne·ous Audio pronunciation of "simultaneity" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (sml-tn-s, sml-)
adj.
1. Happening, existing, or done at the same time. See Synonyms at contemporary.
2. Mathematics. Containing variables for which there are values that can satisfy all the equations: simultaneous equations.
[Latin simul, at the same time; see sem-1 in Indo-European Roots + English -taneous(as in instantaneous).]simul·tane·ous·ly adv.
simul·tane·ous·ness or simul·ta·nei·ty (-t-n-t, -n-) n.
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
simultaneity
n : happening or existing or done at the same time [syn: simultaneousness]
Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
I believe, as does the AHD and WordNet, that simultaneity is in fact the sam thing as "at the same time."
To me, 'at the same time' means that as you are making your AoO with one weapon, you get to add an attack with your off hand. This attack is completely seperate, it is resolved completely seperately, and it happens within the timeframe of your AoO, essentially getting dragged along for the ride.
No, they are NOT both the same attack. Nobody has said they are both the same attack. The rule does not say they are both the same attack; it says the attacks happen at the same time.
Basically, you're both saying the same thing.
The 'at the same time' is there to clarify it happens during the span of your AoO, not at the same instant of the other weapon.
It is, that's the meaning of 'at the same time'. Both attack happen during the same instant. This doesn't prevent 2 AoO from the target of the attacks.
It just means Jack is doing 2 different attacks (one with primary hand, one with secondary hand) at the same instant.
Caelic, use your own common sense rules. What you are proposing is that this feat now breaks all of the AoO and normal attack timing rules.
...many of which aren't rules, but generally agreed-upon conventions.
You are escalating 'at the same time' to the province of 'simultaneity', i.e. two attacks that are essentially one.
No, I'm saying that 'at the same time' means 'at the same time'--i.e., one doesn't happen before the other.
The 'at the same time' is there to clarify it happens during the span of your AoO, not at the same instant of the other weapon. AoO can be interrupted, split and otherwise halted, and so can Double Hit. To do otherwise is just complicating matters horrendously...another common sense issue.
Aelyrinth, no offense, but it seems to me that you're the one complicating things here, with all the talk of attack sequences and interrupts and "My AoO prevents his off-hand attack from ever going off."
The two attacks happen. If my opponent has KS, they provoke two AoOs that happen before the attacks (as an aside, I personally think that AoO pre-emption is one of the stupidest rules WotC ever came up with, and the source of ninety percent of the confusion around this issue.) If my opponent has RG, they provoke two AoOs that happen after the attacks.
There's nothing confusing here. The confusion stems entirely from the stupidity of having AoOs "interrupt" the attacks that provoke them. All of the examples mentioned--launching a disarm in response to an attack that can't happen if the weapon is disarmed, for instance--stem from that, NOT from 'simultaniety.'
...except that his claim is irrelevant. Is there a specific rule stating that his attacks are simultaneous? If not, then why should his "claim" be an issue? I can claim that all of my normal attacks are simultaneous, but my claiming so holds no weight.
Attacks are ordinarily not simultaneous. Barring an exception to that rule of thumb, there's no reason to assume that attacks are simultaneous.
Have your cake and eat it too? No way. Either the convention is true, in which case Jack does not roll his Double Hit attacks simultaneously, or the convention is not true, and Schmoe can claim his AoO's are simultaneous. You may choose one or the other -- you may not choose both interpretations in order to maximize your own personal benefit.
I will repeat: if you violate the convention, then the convention is not real and therefore, you can not use it for your own benefit. The convention is either an unwritten rule that someone in WotC messed up on when they wrote Double Hit, or the convention doesn't exist at all and you cannot claim it for your own purposes. The convention applies equally to Jack and Schmoe: if applied to Schmoe, it must be applied to Jack.
You are asking me to believe that the convention exists unwritten, but Double Hit is intended to be a violation. This I cannot do. As an unwritten convention, we must sanity check all rules against it, and that includes Double Hit; otherwise, players can claim the convention does not exist at all.
WotC makes mistakes, and often big ones. Do you think Pun Pun is intended to exist just because the RAW allows his existence? Jack's abuse of Double Hit violates a baseline assumption of DnD: that simultaneity is not allowed under any circumstances. Jack's problem is Pun Pun's problem: the nightmare it creates is not reasonable for a DM to allow.
Consequently, though it is technically allowed by the specific wording of Double Hit, at the table the attacks must not be allowed to be simultaneous, because it gives the appearance of simultaneity being allowed under 3.5.
Have your cake and eat it too? No way. Either the convention is true, in which case Jack does not roll his Double Hit attacks simultaneously, or the convention is not true, and Schmoe can claim his AoO's are simultaneous. You may choose one or the other -- you may not choose both interpretations in order to maximize your own personal benefit.
I will repeat: if you violate the convention, then the convention is not real and therefore, you can not use it for your own benefit. The convention is either an unwritten rule that someone in WotC messed up on when they wrote Double Hit, or the convention doesn't exist at all and you cannot claim it for your own purposes. The convention applies equally to Jack and Schmoe: if applied to Schmoe, it must be applied to Jack.
You are asking me to believe that the convention exists unwritten, but Double Hit is intended to be a violation. This I cannot do. As an unwritten convention, we must sanity check all rules against it, and that includes Double Hit; otherwise, players can claim the convention does not exist at all.
WotC makes mistakes, and often big ones. Do you think Pun Pun is intended to exist just because the RAW allows his existence? Jack's abuse of Double Hit violates a baseline assumption of DnD: that simultaneity is not allowed under any circumstances. Jack's problem is Pun Pun's problem: the nightmare it creates is not reasonable for a DM to allow.
Consequently, though it is technically allowed by the specific wording of Double Hit, at the table the attacks must not be allowed to be simultaneous, because it gives the appearance of simultaneity being allowed under 3.5.
That is an incredibly fallacious argument. Feats break rules. That's what makes them unique abilities. By the way, it isn't Jack doing the breaking...it IS the feat...which is part of the rules.
Feats don't break rules, they create new ones. They can be characterized by the term "exception", but they are rules in and of themselves.
Technically, there is no rule for Double Hit to break. The "no simultaneous events" standard is not a rule, just a convention. It is in place, though, for a historically solid reason. DM's that have played under simultaneity in 1.0 and 2.0 do not want that nightmare world to return, under any interpretation.
In the case of Double Hit, we have a statement that suggests simultaneity. The question is: was that phrase placed there for simultaneity, or for clarity regarding another situation?
I suggest it was the latter. For the pruposes of this example, remove the "at the same time" from Double Hit. Take a L18 Fighter without Improved Grapple. He attempts to Grapple a character with Double Hit. The character taking the AoO now hits twice, but without an indication of when the off-hand hits, the Grappler can suggest that since he's doing an FA attack sequence, the timing should land the second blow after his Grapple attempt. That gets complex, so the designers say that the second hit needs to land before the provoking attack, too.
At that point, it is easy to be short sighted and word it "at the same time" when it was actually intended to be more like "both attacks are made before the provoking AoO." "At the same time" is innocuous, but as I've tried to demontrate, it gets into simultaneity problems that we are only uncovering 2 years later! If this was an easy find, it would have been found soon after Mini's released.
In fact, it does get into problems at release time. What if both weapons try to Sunder without Improved Sunder? The defender gets two AoO's provoked simultaneously, and both occur before the two attacks. But, that example just popped into my head now, and we've been thinking about this for how long?
I will repeat: if you violate the convention, then the convention is not real and therefore, you can not use it for your own benefit. The convention is either an unwritten rule that someone in WotC messed up on when they wrote Double Hit, or the convention doesn't exist at all and you cannot claim it for your own purposes. The convention applies equally to Jack and Schmoe: if applied to Schmoe, it must be applied to Jack.
...except that, as pointed out, feats violate rules without negating those rules all the time. The rule is that making a melee attack does not provoke an AoO; Robilar's Gambit and Karmic Strike both break that rule, but only for the character who has the feat. It doesn't mean that, suddenly, there's not a general rule that making a melee attack doesn't provoke an attack of opportunity.
You are asking me to believe that the convention exists unwritten, but Double Hit is intended to be a violation. This I cannot do.
Actually, no; YOU'RE asking ME to believe that the convention exists unwritten. I think it's fictional, unbinding, and the lack of it is only problematic if deliberately made so.
As an unwritten convention, we must sanity check all rules against it, and that includes Double Hit; otherwise, players can claim the convention does not exist at all.
I so claim, but am willing to accept for the sake of argument that the convention exists. If we're willing to just scrap the whole silly notion of no simultaneous actions--which we should, as it can easily be disproven by any number of rules examples and causes more problems than it solves--then we're done here.
Jack's abuse of Double Hit violates a baseline assumption of DnD: that simultaneity is not allowed under any circumstances. Jack's problem is Pun Pun's problem: the nightmare it creates is not reasonable for a DM to allow.
My, that's a lot of hyperbole, Br'er Fox!
First: comparing the use of double hit to land an off-hand weapons strike at the same time as a main-hand weapons strike to a build which gives you infinite ability to break the rules is just a bit overstated...in the same sense that the Pacific Ocean is just a bit damp.
Second: There is no such baseline assumption, and never has been. Disproof by example: Twinned spells take effect simultaneously.
Consequently, though it is technically allowed by the specific wording of Double Hit, at the table the attacks must not be allowed to be simultaneous, because it gives the appearance of simultaneity being allowed under 3.5.
...which it is. Or does the word "simultaneously" ALSO not imply simultaneity?
In fact, it does get into problems at release time. What if both weapons try to Sunder without Improved Sunder? The defender gets two AoO's provoked simultaneously, and both occur before the two attacks. But, that example just popped into my head now, and we've been thinking about this for how long?
How is this more of a problem than one weapon Sundering without Improved Sunder? The problem here lies with the whole "Attacks of opportunity preempt the actions that provoke them" silliness, not with taking two attacks simultaneously.
...many of which aren't rules, but generally agreed-upon conventions.
No, I'm saying that 'at the same time' means 'at the same time'--i.e., one doesn't happen before the other.
Aelyrinth, no offense, but it seems to me that you're the one complicating things here, with all the talk of attack sequences and interrupts and "My AoO prevents his off-hand attack from ever going off."
The two attacks happen. If my opponent has KS, they provoke two AoOs that happen before the attacks (as an aside, I personally think that AoO pre-emption is one of the stupidest rules WotC ever came up with, and the source of ninety percent of the confusion around this issue.) If my opponent has RG, they provoke two AoOs that happen after the attacks.
There's nothing confusing here. The confusion stems entirely from the stupidity of having AoOs "interrupt" the attacks that provoke them. All of the examples mentioned--launching a disarm in response to an attack that can't happen if the weapon is disarmed, for instance--stem from that, NOT from 'simultaniety.'
Caelic, 'at the same time' is a convention ladled onto any usage of two weapons. "I'm attacking with two weapons at the same time!" means you are attacking with two weapons, not adding in 'simultaneity'. By your reasoning, all off hand attacks can acclaim to be simultaneous.
And your own example falls hideously flat. Okay, you attack with two weapons, and TWO AoO's go off simultaneously after the attack?
How exactly is my greatsword supposed to be in two places at the same instant? I'm not using two weapons, and I don't have some feat that allows me to do this. Logically, with one weapon, I'd have to give up an AoO. By the rules, this makes utterly no sense at all.
You then further compromise your own position by saying that any problems are the result of how AoO's work, not because of problems with this feat.
But if we take out your 'simultaneous' strike, everything works the way it is supposed to, one attack at a time, triggering one after another. We ONLY have a mess when your interpretation comes up.
That says the problem is not the feat...its how you are reading it.
So, hey, keep it simple and use common sense like the rest of us, aye?
===Aelryinth
The more I think about it, the more it seems that the physically-impossible resolution method, where simultaneously-provoked AoO's are taken simultaneously, is right by the rules. In the following, both generate the same number of AoO's, but what changes is when they get resolved.
And your own example falls hideously flat. Okay, you attack with two weapons, and TWO AoO's go off simultaneously after the attack?
WHY do the AoOs need to be simultaneous? Do you have a feat that specifically says they are? (Yes, yes, I know, we're dealing with an invented distinction between "at the same time" and "simultaneously" here, but frankly, I don't accept that there IS a distinction; the terms are synonymous.)
How exactly is my greatsword supposed to be in two places at the same instant?
It's not; your AoOs aren't and don't need to be simultaneous. My two attacks go off--at the same time, as established by the feat I possess--then your two AoOs go off, one after the other. All rules, both stated and "understood," are satisfied; common sense is not violated.
Again, this is a case of manufacturing a problem where none need exist.
But if we take out your 'simultaneous' strike, everything works the way it is supposed to, one attack at a time, triggering one after another. We ONLY have a mess when your interpretation comes up.
Let's talk a little bit about which interpretation causes "messes."
We'll accept, for the moment, your assertion that there's an invisible rule banning simultaniety. Fine.
I'm a Half-Ogre with the Knockback feat. I hit you while using Power Attack. Normally, this would automatically trigger a free bull rush--my blows are so strong that they knock people down. Ah, but YOU have Karmic Strike! So you take an attack of opportunity before my swing and a SECOND attack of opportunity after my swing hits you and does damage but BEFORE it knocks you down...and since you have sidestep, you step five feet away, and the impact of my blow magically dissipates, somehow never knocking you down!
Yep. THAT makes sense.
And now you have a conundrum...is your one sword in two places at the same instant, like his two weapons, or are you taking your AoO's one after the other, before his strikes go off?
Logic says the latter, because the former is clearly impossible.
And logic is correct. As I pointed out, the issue of whether you can take your AoOs simultaneously is a strawman. You don't need to make them simultaneously in order to satisfy the conditions of your feat; you don't have an ability that allows you to make them simultaneously; therefore, you don't make them simultaneously, and all the confusion goes away.
instead of pulling this 'simultaneous instant' stuff out of nowhere?
It's not being pulled out of nowhere. "At the same time doesn't mean the same thing as simultaneous" was pulled out of nowhere. "There's a hard fast rule that somehow doesn't appear in any book that states that nothing happens simultaneously" was pulled out of nowhere.
You're entitled to your opinion on this one, Aelyrinth, but please stop trying to make it look like yours is the opinion based on specific language in the rules, because it's not.
WHY do the AoOs need to be simultaneous? Do you have a feat that specifically says they are? (Yes, yes, I know, we're dealing with an invented distinction between "at the same time" and "simultaneously" here, but frankly, I don't accept that there IS a distinction; the terms are synonymous.)
It's not; your AoOs aren't and don't need to be simultaneous. My two attacks go off--at the same time, as established by the feat I possess--then your two AoOs go off, one after the other. All rules, both stated and "understood," are satisfied; common sense is not violated.
Again, this is a case of manufacturing a problem where none need exist.
Let's talk a little bit about which interpretation causes "messes."
We'll accept, for the moment, your assertion that there's an invisible rule banning simultaniety. Fine.
I'm a Half-Ogre with the Knockback feat. I hit you while using Power Attack. Normally, this would automatically trigger a free bull rush--my blows are so strong that they knock people down. Ah, but YOU have Karmic Strike! So you take an attack of opportunity before my swing and a SECOND attack of opportunity after my swing hits you and does damage but BEFORE it knocks you down...and since you have sidestep, you step five feet away, and the impact of my blow magically dissipates, somehow never knocking you down!
Yep. THAT makes sense.
Uh?
So, your attacks magically happen at the same instant, and my two AoO's, which by consensus of simultaneity, MUST BE triggered at the same instant, instead take place one after another?
That's logical? That's not changing the rules on attacks? Riiiight. You are again adding complexity where none is needed, and attempting to change how attacks and AoO's are handled.
And you totally and completely lost me on your Karmic Strike example. I don't see where you are getting two AoO's from?
And the free Bull Rush Attempt is not a Free Bull Rush Attack. It's part of making the hit...it doesn't even say you have to do damage! Karmic Strike works after hits happen but before they resolve, so the bull rush and damage are already 'on the way' even as you are swinging back. thematically, you are hitting him so hard he is falling back...you are not walking up to him and giving him a shove, and a knockback doesn't start an AoO anyways.
So, what exactly are you trying to prove with your examples, neither of which is consistent?
==Aelryinth
Uh?
So, your attacks magically happen at the same instant, and my two AoO's, which by consensus of simultaneity, MUST BE triggered at the same instant, instead take place one after another?
No; my attacks happen at the same time because the rules say they do. I know you're trying very hard to pretend that that passage isn't there, or that it means something other than what it says, and that I'm "magically" inventing rules--frankly, it's the reason I'm getting a little short-tempered here. I think it's extremely disingenuous of you to consistently imply that reading "at the same time" as meaning "at the same time" is somehow "magical."
That's logical? That's not changing the rules on attacks? Riiiight.
Yes, it's logical, and, no, it's not changing the rules on attacks. If you're going to ask a rhetorical question, make sure the answer is the one you want.
You are again adding complexity where none is needed, and attempting to change how attacks and AoO's are handled.
The only added complexity I've seen thus far comes from your attempts to invent situations where two strikes landing at the same time "cause a problem." Thus far, you have yet to produce such a situation, although you've produced a number of strawman situations.
And the free Bull Rush Attempt is not a Free Bull Rush Attack. It's part of making the hit...it doesn't even say you have to do damage!
Wait, wait, wait...my Players' Handbook says that a Bull Rush is an attack! In numerous places, even! Why, if we accept your assertion here, then...it's possible to make two attacks simultaneously!
Sarcasm aside, this is also a drastic reversal from your earlier assertion that the free trip attempt that comes from High Sword Low Axe was an attack and would trigger an AoO from Schmoe.
So: attacks can never, ever, ever happen simultaneously because the world would come to an end--but as long as we call one of the attacks an attempt rather than an attack, everything's fine and dandy.
Of course, earlier you said that NOTHING in D&D happens simultaneously.
Karmic Strike works after hits happen but before they resolve, so the bull rush and damage are already 'on the way' even as you are swinging back.
And you can accept this, but not the notion that the damage from two weapons is "on the way" even as you're swinging back. You have an odd definition of "logic and common sense," aelyrinth--and that's why your repeated exhortations to "use common sense" haven't moved me. MY common sense tells me that, yes, attacks CAN hit simultaneously. I know this for a fact, having landed attacks simultaneously in real life...and that's to within a tenth of a second.
thematically, you are hitting him so hard he is falling back...you are not walking up to him and giving him a shove, and a knockback doesn't start an AoO anyways.
Yes, I know that's how it works thematically--but YOUR position says that a bull rush attempt and an attack can't HAPPEN simultaneously, because "nothing happens simultaneously in D&D." I don't recall qualifiers on that.
My point, of course, is that there are LOTS of situations where "things happen simultaneously"--even multiple actions normally defined as attacks--and that claiming that this can't happen leads to ridiculous situations.
No; my attacks happen at the same time because the rules say they do. I know you're trying very hard to pretend that that passage isn't there, or that it means something other than what it says, and that I'm "magically" inventing rules--frankly, it's the reason I'm getting a little short-tempered here. I think it's extremely disingenuous of you to consistently imply that reading "at the same time" as meaning "at the same time" is somehow "magical."
I think it's extremely liberal of you to interpret 'at the same time' as anything other then a flavor statement made to impress the fact that you are dealing with two weapons, and instead are expanding the whole AoO universe with a brand new rule on simultaenity.
In short, you are violating two of your own rules...keeping it simple, and looking at intent. I highly doubt authorial intent was to add something there to the universe of rules, other then allowing you to have two attacks per AoO opportunity as a nod to TWF. You seem to want MUCH more out of the feat, and are using Rules Lawyering to get it. That is SO unlike you it's just confusing me. Are you sure you are the same guy who wrote those commandments?
Yes, it's logical, and, no, it's not changing the rules on attacks. If you're going to ask a rhetorical question, make sure the answer is the one you want.
No, it's not logical, and yes, its changing the rules, and no, the question was not rhetorical. And since your arguments is weak, you ended with a derisive comment. Thanks!
The only added complexity I've seen thus far comes from your attempts to invent situations where two strikes landing at the same time "cause a problem." Thus far, you have yet to produce such a situation, although you've produced a number of strawman situations.
Actually, the only complexity that gets added is now I have to change how I handle attacks from this guy completely different from how I handle attacks from anyone else for determining AoO. And then I have to apply that logic and break the system again. Even Karmic Strike doesn't do this.
This isn't a strawman...it's a problem you are unwilling to acknowledge and see by strict application of language rules-lawyering that you so decry from others.
Wait, wait, wait...my Players' Handbook says that a Bull Rush is an attack! In numerous places, even! Why, if we accept your assertion here, then...it's possible to make two attacks simultaneously!
Sarcasm aside, this is also a drastic reversal from your earlier assertion that the free trip attempt that comes from High Sword Low Axe was an attack and would trigger an AoO from Schmoe.
Again, you are willfully misinterpreting, using hyperbole and exaggeration to misdirect my point. Caelic, what has gotten into you?
The Knockback effect is an extension of the attack..it is not making two attacks from two weapons at the same time. Why are you even mentioning it? Beating up the bushes for an argument again?
As for the Hs/LA thing, I was inferring that the Axe never lands...thus, the Trip attempt never went off. If it DID land to trigger the Trip Attempt, the Axe swing would trigger the AoO...NOT the free Trip Attempt.
Follow that?
So: attacks can never, ever, ever happen simultaneously because the world would come to an end--but as long as we call one of the attacks an attempt rather than an attack, everything's fine and dandy.
Of course, earlier you said that NOTHING in D&D happens simultaneously.
Again, you are beating down the scarecrow in the field.
Where does successive effects have anything to do with simultaneity? Things happen in succession...which is exactly what is going on here...and you are beating up the wheat field while I'm hollering at you from the road. Even Karmic Strike, that muddled language mastery of a feat, which tries so hard to imply that things resolve at the same time, explicitly eschews 'simultaneity' which you are clinging to so raptly, in favor of resolving things in sequence while trying to convey the fact that what is REALLY happening is both attacks are going off 'at the same time'.
And you can accept this, but not the notion that the damage from two weapons is "on the way" even as you're swinging back. You have an odd definition of "logic and common sense," aelyrinth--and that's why your repeated exhortations to "use common sense" haven't moved me. MY common sense tells me that, yes, attacks CAN hit simultaneously. I know this for a fact, having landed attacks simultaneously in real life...and that's to within a tenth of a second.
So you are saying you have Double Hit? And now you are blaming me for the wonky language of karmic strike?
What you just said about 'real life' is yet ANOTHER artificial tangent that has nothing to do with what we are talking about! Do you Twin Fireballs, too?
I could use your same language, "I'm attacking with two weapons at the same time!", scream it at the DM...and he's still going to resolve first one, then the other. It's JUST TWF. That's it. That's all. You do one, then the other, in a nice orderly sequence, and if there's AoO's, you apply them in sequence, and if there's not, you get both weapon attacks off before it's your opponents turn again.
See, common sense. No need to be a rules lawyer and add a new level of wonkiness to the AoO rules.
But you are elevating Dual Strike to a whole new level. I can clearly interrupt your two strikes with AoO's...I can interrupt one, then the other...but you are saying I can't interrupt them BOTH, because they both have to resolve at the same instant.
Your logic is highly inconsistent with how AoO's are handled and how to evenly apply the rules. And instead of adhering to your own rules of Practical Optimization, you keep holding to making this one feat 'special' because of fine points of language. Caelic, that's the kind of rules lawyering you protest so much on these boards!
Yes, I know that's how it works thematically--but YOUR position says that a bull rush attempt and an attack can't HAPPEN simultaneously, because "nothing happens simultaneously in D&D." I don't recall qualifiers on that.
And they aren't...they are happening in sequence!!!!!!!!!
My point, of course, is that there are LOTS of situations where "things happen simultaneously"--even multiple actions normally defined as attacks--and that claiming that this can't happen leads to ridiculous situations.
Okay, real life example...Initiative.
It. Doesn't. Exist. Everything happens simultaneously in Real Life. People don't stand still as one mini and then another mini make their moves and attacks.
Everything. Happens. In. Sequence. Because it's a game. And now you are trying to break the game rules with your talk of 'simultaneous'.
A character with two weapons is attacking with two weapons AT THE SAME TIME. There's your language. Guess what? The attacks resolve in sequence.
Your Dual Hitter is attacking with a second weapon AT THE SAME TIME as another. Guess what? The attacks resolve In Sequence.
Because it's a game, and we are trying to keep it simple and logical.
=================
If you want to cling to your point of the feat and the 'at the same time' language, I can explicity and directly point at Robilar's Gambit and counter you every single time you go kooky RAW on me.
In return, they provoke attacks of opportunity from you each time they swing. Resolve your attack of opportunity after your foe's attack. ==Robilar's Gambit
Now, I can Rules Lawyer with RAW you back on nitpicky language.
A second attack is a seperate swing, isn't it? A second attack is an attack, isn't it? It doesn't say that Dual Strike 'is treated as one attack', does it? (Man, would that open a can of worms). DS is not treated as 'one swing', is it? RG doesn't say resolve after your opponent's 'attackS', does it?
Go ahead. keep Rules Lawyering. Your entire argument resolves around FOUR BLOODY WORDS. I can simply post the text of Robilar's Gambit and utterly trump you with my own nit-picky language, and now the only thing that can happen is we both whine about which feat has prevelance.
Or, you can treat the Dual Strike attacks like any other attacks under the rules, apply the AoO rules in sequence, and the world is a bright and happy place of unrealistic order that it was before and after this feat.
===Aelryinth
If we assume Aelryinth is right, then we have to ignore the phrase "at the same time" in double hit, which could be interpreted any number of ways, and Jack's offhand axe is somehow frozen in "AoO Limbo" while he and Schmoe have fun interrupting each other's sword strikes. Jack loses half of his attacks, the entire reason he was TWFing in the first place, and Schmoe sidesteps and spring attacks all over the place, laughing as his Str based character outmaneuvers a Dex based character.
If we assume Caelic is right, and Jack gets both attacks at the same time (or simultaneously, if you want to split hairs), then Schmoe is left with 2 AoOs that both trigger from simultaneous actions. If we try to have both AoO resolve simultaneously, they Schmoe's sword has to be in two places at once, and we have an exponentially growing number of simultaneous AoO, as Jack gets 4 simultaneous attacks in response to Schmoe's, giving Schmoe 4 simultaneous attacks, and so on. On the other hand, if we make Schmoe resolve his AoOs sequentially, then Jack is free to interrupt each one, and suddenly Schmoe is the one being left with a bunch of hanging AoOs as Jack sidesteps away.
As I said, either interpretation completely screws the other person's build. If this came up in a game, it would be even worse, as neither person would want to back down and watch his character get owned. The RAW is just vague enough so that each person can say he's supported by the RAW, when in reality we're all using an interpretation based on how we interpret colloquial English phrases like "at the same time" which can be used to mean many different things. If we were in a game, it would come down to a very tough DM call, but we don't have a DM on the CO boards. So we have two civil options: come to a compromise, or agree to disagree. This thread isn't getting any shorter, and it isn't serving the purpose of the thread, which is to improve Caelic's build and explore other options for massive retaliation strikes. If we want to keep looking at this grey area of the rules, I'd suggest we do it in a new thread, and, just for kicks, send a description of the conflict and a question to CustServ to see if it causes anyone's head to explode :angelhide
I think it's extremely liberal of you to interpret 'at the same time' as anything other then a flavor statement made to impress the fact that you are dealing with two weapons, and instead are expanding the whole AoO universe with a brand new rule on simultaenity.
So kindly enlighten us as to why it's in the feat text and not the description, considering that pretty much every feat in that book is a study in brevity.
I highly doubt authorial intent was to add something there to the universe of rules, other then allowing you to have two attacks per AoO opportunity as a nod to TWF. You seem to want MUCH more out of the feat, and are using Rules Lawyering to get it.
Number one, you can't argue for someone else's intent. Number two, even if you could I'd disagree. Number three, I'd actually say YOU'RE RLing because you DON'T want this to work, and are going against the text of the feat.
Actually, the only complexity that gets added is now I have to change how I handle attacks from this guy completely different from how I handle attacks from anyone else for determining AoO. And then I have to apply that logic and break the system again. Even Karmic Strike doesn't do this.
This isn't a strawman...it's a problem you are unwilling to acknowledge and see by strict application of language rules-lawyering that you so decry from others.
Yes. THAT'S THE POINT OF A FEAT.
Even Karmic Strike, that muddled language mastery of a feat, which tries so hard to imply that things resolve at the same time, explicitly eschews 'simultaneity' which you are clinging to so raptly, in favor of resolving things in sequence while trying to convey the fact that what is REALLY happening is both attacks are going off 'at the same time'.
I utterly fail to see why Double Hit shouldn'y wok one way just because Karmic Strike doesn't as well.
I could use your same language, "I'm attacking with two weapons at the same time!", scream it at the DM...and he's still going to resolve first one, then the other.
Not if it's me. I'll have you pick up two differently-colored d20s, pick one to represent each weapon, then have you roll them at the same time. I'll have you roll damage at the same time, too, and add it all together. Then I'll add up all the damage and count it as one total, seperating it for the purposes of things like typed damage reduction and so forth. Magical concept, isn't it?
But you are elevating Dual Strike to a whole new level.
Oh! That's why you're not making sense! You're not even talking about the right feat!
A character with two weapons is attacking with two weapons AT THE SAME TIME. There's your language. Guess what? The attacks resolve in sequence.
And where does it say in the rules that they're attacking with both weapons simultaneously?
A second attack is a seperate swing, isn't it? A second attack is an attack, isn't it? It doesn't say that Dual Strike 'is treated as one attack', does it? (Man, would that open a can of worms). DS is not treated as 'one swing', is it? RG doesn't say resolve after your opponent's 'attackS', does it?
This is kind of amazing, but I went and looked up what Dual Strike actually does, and the answer is yes: it does in fact count both as one swing! (It specifically says to make one attack roll for both.)
Of course, we're not talking about Dual Strike here, we're talking about Double Hit.
and, of course, your example of the two attacks falls short because you aren't interrupting them both with AoO, and you avoid the mention of Robilar's Gambitting them both. You just stay in your safe little bubble of normal play and do what is convenient. It doesn't change anything at that point.
But, stick AoO or interrupt those attacks, and amazingly you have to start worrying about sequence. Again. Because if you roll both those die, you have to interrupt both...and, amazingly, TWF doesn't use the same language as Double Hit. And for some reason, no one thinks that TWF happens simultaenously.
==Aelryinth
and, of course, your example of the two attacks falls short because you aren't interrupting them both with AoO, and you avoid the mention of Robilar's Gambitting them both. You just stay in your safe little bubble of normal play and do what is convenient. It doesn't change anything at that point.
The attacks are made at the same time. Robilar's triggers after the attacks are made, so Robilar Schmoe gets two attacks after I've finished both of mine. What's your point?
I'm going to make one more response to answer your frequently-asked question of why I'm taking the position I'm taking, and that's pretty much all I'm going to address--because Khan's right, this is getting us nowhere.
If you go back and take a look at my discussions on RAW, and my issuess with RAW--the issues that provoked the Ten Practical Commandments in the first place--you'll find that my biggest issue is with people attempting to claim the legitimacy of RAW for things that aren't even in the rules.
That is exactly what you're doing here.
There is no rule banning simultaniety in D&D. You keep insisting that there is, that it's an underlying principle of the game. It's not. Actions can happen simultaneously. Spells can happen simultaneously. The rules tell us this, very very specifically.
It's one thing to say "I can have a hundred and fifty seven arms because the rules don't say I can't!" I don't hold with that. Some things don't need to be stated in the rules.
But when the rules tell me--explicitly--that spells can go off simultaneously and that attacks can happen at the same time--when I can find multiple examples of things that happen simultaneously in the written rules--and then someone comes along and says, "Well, there's an unwritten rule that says this can't happen, so those written rules don't mean what they say," that's just plain silly.
Manyshot fires a volley of arrows that all use the same attack roll. Which one is first? Dual Strike uses the same attack roll for two weapons, one in each hand. Which is first? Twin Spell causes the spell to take effect twice simultaneously. Did they not mean "simultaneously?"
You can argue that simultaneous actions cause problems; they can. You can argue that simultaneous actions are a headache; they are. You can argue that actions shouldn't be simultaneous; it's debatable.
What you cannot do is say that it's not allowed by the rules of the game. Well, you can say it, but you're wrong when you do.
It's exactly like the people who steadfastly insist that there is no rule saying that you lose the abilities of a PrC when you lose the requirements, because there's an unwritten rule saying so, and because having that rule causes problems.
THAT is why I've taken the position I've taken. Clinging to the literal wording of a rule as dogma is bad in some cases; clinging to the nonexistent wording of an imaginary rule as dogma is much worse.
All I see are a bunch of rules lawyers arguing over a point that is unprovable.
It is unprovable because everyone is going to see it a different way.
Why can't we simply accept that and move on?
And by the way Caelic, I can empathize with your frustration at your original
build concept being drug so far off course.
Let me say that I think that Jack is a very good idea and I hope you
continue to expand upon him.
Okay, real life example...Initiative.
It. Doesn't. Exist. Everything happens simultaneously in Real Life. People don't stand still as one mini and then another mini make their moves and attacks.
Everything. Happens. In. Sequence. Because it's a game. And now you are trying to break the game rules with your talk of 'simultaneous'.
I'm probably beating a dead horse here but the only way it ever made any sense to me
was like this. Initiative doesn't determine who goes first (only in a out-of-character sense),
but which in-game character REACTS the most quickly.
D&D states that one round is approximately six seconds of real world time.
If we accept that everything happens in sequence then if there are four players and two
monsters, one player takes his turn during the first second and then suddenly freezes and
does absolutely nothing for five seconds while his compatriots and then the monsters each
take their consecutive turns. I think that the action all occurs during the six second
time frame simultaneously. That's the way real life works, and that's the way me
and my friends see it. But hell. Who am I anyway. I could be wrong.
The attacks are made at the same time. Robilar's triggers after the attacks are made, so Robilar Schmoe gets two attacks after I've finished both of mine. What's your point?
The point is now you are applying the rules governing AoO's incorrectly. Because you now have made two swingS when Robilar's specifically lets you only swing once, and landed two attacks when Robilar's specifically says you only get one.
You aren't making ONE attack roll, and adding damage together. You aren't making a TWIN offhand attack, like a metamagic feat. You are making a second attack at the same time as an AoO, and one resolves, and then the other.
And thus, you've made a House rule of it. Since the Gambit might very well kill the attacker with the first attack, you've also split the rules and caused a new sequence of how to handle AoO's...instead of one by one, you now have a 'group me, we're simultaneous!' precedent for all your TWF attacks...not just double hit.
Wonderful.
===Aelryinth
Aeylrinth,
I'm going to make one more response to answer your frequently-asked question of why I'm taking the position I'm taking, and that's pretty much all I'm going to address--because Khan's right, this is getting us nowhere.
If you go back and take a look at my discussions on RAW, and my issuess with RAW--the issues that provoked the Ten Practical Commandments in the first place--you'll find that my biggest issue is with people attempting to claim the legitimacy of RAW for things that aren't even in the rules.
That is exactly what you're doing here.
There is no rule banning simultaniety in D&D. You keep insisting that there is, that it's an underlying principle of the game. It's not. Actions can happen simultaneously. Spells can happen simultaneously. The rules tell us this, very very specifically.
It's one thing to say "I can have a hundred and fifty seven arms because the rules don't say I can't!" I don't hold with that. Some things don't need to be stated in the rules.
But when the rules tell me--explicitly--that spells can go off simultaneously and that attacks can happen at the same time--when I can find multiple examples of things that happen simultaneously in the written rules--and then someone comes along and says, "Well, there's an unwritten rule that says this can't happen, so those written rules don't mean what they say," that's just plain silly.
Manyshot fires a volley of arrows that all use the same attack roll. Which one is first? Dual Strike uses the same attack roll for two weapons, one in each hand. Which is first? Twin Spell causes the spell to take effect twice simultaneously. Did they not mean "simultaneously?"
You can argue that simultaneous actions cause problems; they can. You can argue that simultaneous actions are a headache; they are. You can argue that actions shouldn't be simultaneous; it's debatable.
What you cannot do is say that it's not allowed by the rules of the game. Well, you can say it, but you're wrong when you do.
It's exactly like the people who steadfastly insist that there is no rule saying that you lose the abilities of a PrC when you lose the requirements, because there's an unwritten rule saying so, and because having that rule causes problems.
THAT is why I've taken the position I've taken. Clinging to the literal wording of a rule as dogma is bad in some cases; clinging to the nonexistent wording of an imaginary rule as dogma is much worse.
And yet, your wording clearly doesn't work vs the Gambit, while my interpretation satisfies it just fine.
Strange, no?
===Aelryinth
Yes, I know I said I was finished, but it's midnight here, I have nothing better to do, and I'm too tired to care.
So in short - thanks, Caelic, for this. I love it. =]
Among the assumptions that aelryinth is making is that there is some certain point in time at which an AoO is triggered by an attack. I don't know this to be specifically true. The AoO is happens before the action that provokes it.
So Jack attacks twice simultaneously and both attacks provoke an AoO all on their own. Now Schmoe must make an AoO at any point in time before Jack's attacks are resolved. Not simultaneously, just before.
I'm not seeing any real problem here.
-SLIH
Caelic: Your wrong, its forty-seven.
Rhonin the Big: Soooo ... anything new with Jack B. Quick that I can apply to Nox yet? No?! You both implode!
I have officially unsubscribed from this thread. Any relevent information that can help both of our builds (Jack and Nox) please post them in the thread for Nox here
How are Robilar's Gambit and Karmic Strike not attempting to provoke 2 attacks for the same opportunity, something which is prohibited by the AoO rules? As I see it, they both allow you to take an attack of opportunity when you are either swung on, or hit, not necessarily both. (Also, we have 3 separate posters stating that CustServ says that KS is resolved after damage from the attack that triggers it, like RG)
I'm also confused as to why Double Hit would need to be simultaneous, anyway. I haven't read all the way through, because the argument makes my head want to melt, so if someone can summarize, I would appreciate it. I like this build and want to throw my PCs up against it, and want to minimize the 'how...WTF how are you doing that?' factor.
Only really posting this here because a: Caelic hasn't put in his $.02 on the issue I've brought up over in 'evasive reflexes: omg', and it's not been moved to the new forums, and b: my point affects this build.
How are Robilar's Gambit and Karmic Strike not attempting to provoke 2 attacks for the same opportunity, something which is prohibited by the AoO rules? As I see it, they both allow you to take an attack of opportunity when you are either swung on, or hit, not necessarily both. (Also, we have 3 separate posters stating that CustServ says that KS is resolved after damage from the attack that triggers it, like RG)
I'm also confused as to why Double Hit would need to be simultaneous, anyway. I haven't read all the way through, because the argument makes my head want to melt, so if someone can summarize, I would appreciate it. I like this build and want to throw my PCs up against it, and want to minimize the 'how...WTF how are you doing that?' factor.
As one of the 3 posters that Kirby179 is referring to, I have to offer a slight clarification. CustServ has never said that KS is resolved after damage from the attack that triggers it. They have said that the AoO from KS takes place at the exact same time as the attack which triggers it, which means that there's no way for the Karmic Striker to negate the effects of the triggering attack. In my case, the CustServ rep. went so far as to point out the possibility that two foes can actually kill each other through these simultaneous attacks.
Note that CustServ has been remarkably consistent in their answers to this question when it has been asked by different people.
I reprint the pertinent info below:
Wed. 3/8/2006
Q. I am confused about the Karmic Strike feat described in the Complete Warrior book. The feat description states that this feat grants you an attack of opportunity any time an opponent makes a successful melee or touch attack against you. The text seems to imply that your attack of opportunity takes place simultaneously to the attack which triggers it. Most attacks of opportunity are considered to take place before the events which trigger them. Is Karmic Strike an exception to this general rule? The answer to this question has a deep impact on the game mechanics for this feat, because if the attacks are simultaneous, you cannot use Karmic Strike to prevent the attack which triggered it.
A. Great Question!
You are correct. Due to the nature of the feat, you are not actually striking your opponent before he strikes you. You are striking each other at the exact same time. So you cannot interrupt the attack, slay your opponent with your own hit, and prevent his attack from damaging you.
....
You could however knock eachother out, which is sweet. :D
Good Luck and Game On!!!
You are correct. Due to the nature of the feat, you are not actually striking your opponent before he strikes you. You are striking each other at the exact same time. So you cannot interrupt the attack, slay your opponent with your own hit, and prevent his attack from damaging you.
You could however knock each other out, which is sweet.
CustServ have given replies like this, consisently stating the simultaneous nature of Karmic strike since the feat was first printed Oriental Adventures 3.0.
All I see are a bunch of rules lawyers arguing over a point that is unprovable.
It is unprovable because everyone is going to see it a different way.
Why can't we simply accept that and move on?
And by the way Caelic, I can empathize with your frustration at your original
build concept being drug so far off course.
Let me say that I think that Jack is a very good idea and I hope you
continue to expand upon him.
I agree, I like the build and its concept. It's sad to see a good thread get hijacked by a BS argument, Next time show some respect to the OP and take your arguements to new thread.
1. This issue has been pretty much resolved by CustServ's response; while some believe in ignoring them, I consider the most recent CustServ response to be authoritative as a rule of principle. Unless and until they are contradicted by a more authoritative source, RG and KS do not provoke two attacks of opportunity, and any revised version of the Jack build will take that into account.
2. As mentioned, the consistent ruling from CustServ has been that KS triggers simultaneously with the attack that triggers it.
3. It's not so much that Double Hit needs to trigger simultaneously; it's that it does trigger simultaneously according to the wording, and that wording contradicts no actual rules, and I think it's ridiculous to argue that a written rule is invalid on the basis of an unwritten, nonexistent rule. (The answer to 2, above--like so many other examples--invalidates the wild claim that nothing happens simultaneously in D&D 3.5.)
The whole question arose because another poster believed that, by virtue of having Robliar's Gambit, he completely nullified Double Hit--that Jack would never get his off-hand swing because Robliar's Gambit would "interrupt" it.
Only really posting this here because a: Caelic hasn't put in his $.02 on the issue I've brought up over in 'evasive reflexes: omg', and it's not been moved to the new forums, and b: my point affects this build.
How are Robilar's Gambit and Karmic Strike not attempting to provoke 2 attacks for the same opportunity, something which is prohibited by the AoO rules? As I see it, they both allow you to take an attack of opportunity when you are either swung on, or hit, not necessarily both. (Also, we have 3 separate posters stating that CustServ says that KS is resolved after damage from the attack that triggers it, like RG)
I'm also confused as to why Double Hit would need to be simultaneous, anyway. I haven't read all the way through, because the argument makes my head want to melt, so if someone can summarize, I would appreciate it. I like this build and want to throw my PCs up against it, and want to minimize the 'how...WTF how are you doing that?' factor.
I find it interesting Kirby that I responded to your argument already here ->Tome of Battle preview - Evasive Reflexes: OMG?!
And yet you ignored it, posted something off-topic and then repeated yourself here. I'm curious at what others have to say about my reply.
1. This issue has been pretty much resolved by CustServ's response; while some believe in ignoring them, I consider the most recent CustServ response to be authoritative as a rule of principle. Unless and until they are contradicted by a more authoritative source, RG and KS do not provoke two attacks of opportunity, and any revised version of the Jack build will take that into account.
Which is a valid position although I personally disagree with it, firstly because the RAW outlines RG as responding to the attack roll whereas KS responds to the hit, and secondly because we need as many stacking fighter feats as we can get (see sereg's quote in my sig). I applaud Caelic's consistency though.
RadicalTaoist, did I ever tell you that the first time I ever saw a post of yours I swore your name was "Radical Toast"?
RadicalTaoist, did I ever tell you that the first time I ever saw a post of yours I swore your name was "Radical Toast"?
YOU ARE THE MILLIONTH PERSON TO SAY THAT.
Jack B. Quick gets an AoO against whomever attacks him, and thus he double hits, tripping them and gaining another attack. The improved trip feat allows him to make an attack as if he hadn't used his attack action as a trip. Ok, so far so good. But with Rolibar's gambit and karmic strike, one can still only take one AoO against any one opponent. So wouldn't he get only 4 attacks, not 6. The second AoO prompted by a hit from Karmic strike won't allow him to gain another AoO. Right?
Or am I just inept at D&D.
Does your DM interpret "Any time the character is attacked" and "Any time the character is hit" as two seperate conditions? Then both AoOs trigger.
Does your DM interpret them as the same condition? Then only one AoO triggers.
YMMV.
I am still looking forward to the chain fighter version of jack.
1. TWF, Dodge, WF (Longsword)
2. Combat Expertise
3. Improved Trip
4. WF (Handaxe)
5.
6. Improved TWF, High Sword Low Axe
7.
8. Combat Reflexes
Unless I'm mistaken, you're using a Longsword, and a Handaxe, and no tripping weapon. Why exactly is Improved Trip at third level instead of Combat Reflexes?
Ultimately...like so many other things in this game...it comes down to DM interpretation.
Does your DM interpret "Any time the character is attacked" and "Any time the character is hit" as two seperate conditions? Then both AoOs trigger.
Does your DM interpret them as the same condition? Then only one AoO triggers.
YMMV.
I don't see how a Dm could equate being "swung at" and being "hit" as the same thing. Custserv does apparently, but I think they're the only ones. ;)
Unless I'm mistaken, you're using a Longsword, and a Handaxe, and no tripping weapon. Why exactly is Improved Trip at third level instead of Combat Reflexes?
The feat High Sword Low Axe grants you a free trip attempt when you hit an enemy with both the longsword and handaxe. Improved Trip is there for the better trip modifier and the free attack on a successful trip.
I don't see how a Dm could equate being "swung at" and being "hit" as the same thing. Custserv does apparently, but I think they're the only ones. ;)
They arent the same thing, but being hit is also being swung at. I believe "opportunity" here is like moving through multiple squares doesnt provoke multiple AoOs from the same attacker even thou they are different opportunities.
I can understand their ruling on this
Swing but must hit grants AoO - Karmic Strike
Swing but must miss grants AoO - Defensive Throw
Swing hit or miss AoO granted - Gambit
I think these are all the same opportunity but with different results... but that is an interpretation of the raw. I can see it being ruled the opposite.
I'm not limited to punching you only once. Similarly, if someone attacks me Unarmed, and I have Robilar's Gambit up, I get two AoOs. You would be in a better position to argue that you would only get one AoO in that situation. As one attack would provoke 2 opportunities. Robilar's Gambit and Karmic Strike refer to two different things, and thus two qualifiers.
I think these are all the same opportunity but with different results... but that is an interpretation of the raw. I can see it being ruled the opposite.
It is not merely an Interpretation, it is a contradiction of terms.
prototype00
"Thog not know, club or rock?"
prototype00
Doesn't matter. Jack would beat him. ;)
A situation (swinging, hitting, etc) cannot provoke an AoO. Only an action can provoke an AoO. From this, swinging and/or hitting are triggers that activate a feat that allows an AoO because of an attack. However, the attack is what provokes.
Normally I would agree with you. However, Karmic Strike makes an exception to this case.
Doesn't matter. Jack would beat him. ;)
The secret there, is to use a bigger rock.
I wanted to clarify something both Caelic and aelryinth quoted. I think it is in error.
It's exactly like the people who steadfastly insist that there is no rule saying that you lose the abilities of a PrC when you lose the requirements, because there's an unwritten rule saying so, and because having that rule causes problems.
If a character no longer meets the requirements for a prestige class, he or she loses the benefit of any class features or other special abilities granted by the class.
My question...
Given CustServ's silly ruling regarding KS and RG, Caelic's “Jack” and, In post 146,aelryinth's “Schmoe”, uses RG.
But in post 160 aelryinth describes how Schmoe would beat Jack, using a set of queued AoO's. RG has no queued AoO's.
So did I miss something or is most all of post 160 in error? Have we seen and details on how Schmoe would beat Jack?
Unless I'm mistaken, you're using a Longsword, and a Handaxe, and no tripping weapon. Why exactly is Improved Trip at third level instead of Combat Reflexes?
The feat High Sword Low Axe grants you a free trip attempt when you hit an enemy with both the longsword and handaxe. Improved Trip is there for the better trip modifier and the free attack on a successful trip.
Yes, but you missed my point. High Sword Low Axe is at 6th, meaning Improved Trip is a useless feat for three levels. Meanwhile, if he put Combat Reflexes at 3 he could actually benefit for three levels, rather than being equivalent to a Warrior.
I was suggesting moving Improved trip to 6th or later, and putting Combat Reflexes at 3rd to optimize the feat order.
1 -- Joe swings at Jack;
2 -- Robilar's triggers an AoO for Jack; Double Hit turns it into one with each weapon;
3 -- Joe's attack hits Jack;
4 -- Karmic Strike triggers an AoO for Jack; Double Hit turns it into one with each weapon;
5 -- Jack attacks once with his sword and once with his axe, hitting both times, triggering
6 -- The High Sword, Low Axe trip attempt, which succeeds, triggering
7 -- The Improved Trip "attack"
8 -- The AoO from Karmic Strike is executed, with each weapon striking once.
Oh. Never mind. So the six hits are 1. Sword from Robilar's; 2. Axe from Robilar's; 3. Trip; 4. Improved Trip attack; 5. Sword from Karmic; 6. Axe from Karmic.
When I wrote it all out just now, it all-of-a-sudden made sense to me. So that's it, right?
I'm Cleo!
Regarding Combat acrobat. It seems as if Combat acrobat only hurts you vs. Jack as you remain standing after being tripped, as still standing after being tripped still provokes, provoking the “impossible”second trip. Right?
I wanted to clarify something both Caelic and aelryinth quoted. I think it is in error.
My question...
Given CustServ's silly ruling regarding KS and RG, Caelic's “Jack” and, In post 146,aelryinth's “Schmoe”, uses RG.
But in post 160 aelryinth describes how Schmoe would beat Jack, using a set of queued AoO's. RG has no queued AoO's.
So did I miss something or is most all of post 160 in error? Have we seen and details on how Schmoe would beat Jack?
Caelic's argument on the 'queue' is that Double Hit makes two attacks go off simultaneously. The problem is that nothing in D@D goes off simultaneously.
So what happens is that I'm pointing out that the 'second hit' from Double hit never goes off...it keeps getting interrupted by the Ao) on the primary attack, which triggers a double hit, the first one of which triggers an AoO..
So, Schmoe gets way ahead on damage, and if he's smart, instead of taking his last AoO, just takes a step back out of range and all the AoO's from Double Hit waiting to go off don't have a target.
But, as Caelic says, if by some miracle you call Double Hit simultaneously, unlike any other combat sequence, then what happens is Schmoe somehow simultaneously gets two AoO every time he gets Double Hit...the same thing happens, but without a 'queue' of attacks.
It's really no different then an AoO triggering an AoO triggereing an AoO and on and on...until you run out of triggers and start retracing your step.
===Aelryinth
Caelic's argument on the 'queue' is that Double Hit makes two attacks go off simultaneously. The problem is that nothing in D@D goes off simultaneously.
You still have yet to prove this.
You still have yet to prove this.
IF you can prove to me how I get two AoO to go off simultaneously from my one weapon because he somehow gets two simultaneous attacks from his AoO attempt, I'll say we're even.
Otherwise, we have to default back to AoO's interrupting the sequence of events, like normal. I use the standard rules for interrupting actions...I don't HAVE anything to prove. It's the "Double Hit is so special you can't interrupt it" rule that has yet to be proven to me.
===Aelryinth
Unless it's hidden away someplace very obscure, there is no rule in any 3.5 rulebook that says things can never happen simultaneously.
Until you produce such a rule, I don't think there's any point to continuing.
So what happens is that I'm pointing out that the 'second hit' from Double hit never goes off...it keeps getting interrupted by the Ao) on the primary attack, which triggers a double hit, the first one of which triggers an AoO..
This is what I ment to point out...
YOU ARE BOTH USING RG, AND RG DOES NOT INTERRUPT!!!!
Need the read the rules again aelryinth.
I am going by memory here but I thought Karmic was "cust serv" ruled to work the same way, i.e. AoO "After the attack"? I might be wrong on that.
Let it lie. Seriously. It was a train wreck the first time, and there's no reason to repeat it.
The build was never meant to be some sort of be-all end-all "I Win" build. At this point, it's horribly obsolete; there are a number of recent mechanics that can completely shut the build down. Even when I made it, there were many builds that could dish out damage better.
That was never the point. The point was to make a cool and unusual straight fighter build that didn't rely on the same old Two-Handed-Power-Attack rigmarole.
At any rate, that point was sort of buried under the vigorously-beaten dead horse; let it decompose in peace.
I agree the horse has been beat to a fine paste. I waited a long time to post here because of the sillyness.
But about half the tread is about "interrupting AoO's" and the feats involved do not interrupt.
Hey now... You said you would be bringing back "Jack" with chains. Are you copping out now?
I agree the horse has been beat to a fine paste. I waited a long time to post here because of the sillyness.
But about half the tread is about "interrupting AoO's" and the feats involved do not interrupt.
??? ONce again, Eld is saying things that make no sense. Feats don't interrupt? What? AoO's interrupt the action that would normally follow.
If Jack gets to swing with Double Hit, he is making two attacks. He swings with weapon 1. Fine and Dandy. Now there is an AoO from Schmoe, because Jack completed an attack. Once that resolves, jack now gets another Double Hit. he attacks. His first attack resolves. Now Schmoe takes his AoO. This triggers another Double Hit from Jack after Schmoe's AoO resolves.
Repeat, until Schmoe is down to his last AoO. Now, he takes a 5' step out of reach. Jack starts swinging his second hits that kept getting interrupted, but Schmoe is no longer in reach, and they 'fizzle' unless there's a hapless foe to vent them on elsewhere.
But the second hit never goes off because Schmoe gets every one of his AoO's just as surely as Jack does...and he gets them after every attack, he doesn't have to wait for TWO attacks to go off...that makes absolutely no rules sense. Every single attack of Jack's triggers an AoO, not every OTHER attack.
The Crux of our disagreement is simple: Caelic is saying he gets BOTH of his Double Hits attacks off before Schmoe gets to attack back. This would result in a weird situation where Schmoe would get TWO hits off with his big moose cutter...because he gets an AoO for every single attack of Jack.
And I disagree.
AoO's trigger after every single attack, not after every combo attack, double attack, combat sequence, or whatever. Each attack of Jack's resolves seperately, in whatever order Jack likes, and then the AoO goes off...he doesn't get to sneak his Double Hit in there. One follows the other. There's no language exempting the Double Hit from AoO triggering language, nor that it takes place faster then an AoO generated by either attack.
In short, it obeys the rules for any and every other attack. So, in essence, Jack and Schmoe end up exchanging single blows via the Gambit until Schmoe decides to end it by moving out of range, and then the Double Hits waiting in the queue go off without a target.
This is no different a queue then using a bunch of other combat moves one after another that generate AoO's, and there's nothing in Double Hit that exempts it from these rules.
===========================
So, Eld, you go learn to read the rules on how AoO's work, and do learn to type in normal size fonts. Big ones just prove, again, that you can't make up a cogent argument.
And Caelic, no, I don't want to get into the argument again, but Elderich, you know, he just can't let things lie...and he can't argue for beans, either.
==Aelryinth
??? ONce again, Eld is saying things that make no sense. Feats don't interrupt? What? AoO's interrupt the action that would normally follow.
While any reader still here is probably bored into tears, i only ask that you actualy READ the text of Robilar's Gambit. It explicitly changes the timing for the opportunity it allows you (after the attack, rather than "interrupting" it like a normal AoO).
Since the timing has been explicitly changed, this interruption sequence cannot happen.
I'm futzing with a Jack-In-Irons build. It's tough to stick to pure fighter with ToB out there, so I'll probably be making numerous versions. I really want to find ways to circumvent the new abilities that deny AoOs, since those almost totally shut down the character.
I certainly love Jack as is, and am anxiously awaiting some of the variants you've been playing around with.
KARMIC STRIKE [GENERAL]
You have learned to strike when your opponent is most vulnerable: at the same instant your opponent strikes you. This feat is also called ai uchi. Prerequisites: Dex 13+, Dodge.
Benefit: You can make an attack of opportunity against an opponent that hits you in melee. You take a –4 penalty to your Armor Class, in exchange for the ability to make an attack of opportunity against any creature that makes a successful melee attack roll or melee touch attack roll against you. The opponent that hits you must be in your threatened area, and this feat does not grant you more attacks of opportunity than you are normally allowed in a round. If you hit with your attack of opportunity, you and your opponent deal and take damage simultaneously. You specify on your turn that you are activating this feat, and the change to your Armor Class and your ability to make these special attacks of opportunity last until your next turn.
You never, ever make two attacks simultaneously. One has to come before the other, especially since if you have feats like Karmic Strike
Even Karmic Strike, that muddled language mastery of a feat, which tries so hard to imply that things resolve at the same time, explicitly eschews 'simultaneity' which you are clinging to so raptly, in favor of resolving things in sequence while trying to convey the fact that what is REALLY happening is both attacks are going off 'at the same time'.
IAIJUTSU DUELS
If the initiative check is a tie, the attacks actually occur simultaneously, with both samurai considered to be flat-footed. On rare occasions, two samurai have been known to strike each other down in the same instant in what is called a karmic strike.
I think it is funny how much goes away when you just quote the rules.
On the other hand, while Karmic Strike has been reprinted and (I think) now lacks some of that wording, I don't think Iaijutsu has been reprinted...so I guess that would still apply.
I'm futzing with a Jack-In-Irons build.
I'd be interested in a Jack-In-Stilettos build. If you have the time.
All of which is 3.0, correct?
On the other hand, while Karmic Strike has been reprinted and (I think) now lacks some of that wording, I don't think Iaijutsu has been reprinted...so I guess that would still apply.
That's great, but I think what's he's saying is the precedent has been set that things can happen simultaneously. There is no reason to believe that this has changed, and thus, things can happen simultaneously.
The wording on that particular piece goes to state that anyone who makes a successful Melee Attack or Touch Attack (and if they're in your range) against you, you get an immediate AoO against them. Along with the flavor title text saying "You have learned to strike when your opponent is most vulnerable - the same instant your opponent strikes you".
It doesn't state "resolve the attack as normal, then use your AoO", it says when they successfully hit you, you get your Attack on them, meaning you both roll against each other.
thx - JFB
Which feats, specifically, do you need sources for?
The real problem with the build isn't the damage output, it's the lack of reach. At the higher levels of the game, reach is vitally important, which is why you see the ()&^*)& spiked chain so much...reach near and far.
And by the way, a spiked chain cannot sunder...it does piercing dmg. You have to do blunt or slashing to sunder.
===Aelryinth
It's feat intensive. It gets enough attacks that Rogues could use it to good effect. I'm personally still of the opinion that being a THW fighter with the build instead of a TWF works out better, but lots of bonus damage may turn the tide, who knows?
The real problem with the build isn't the damage output, it's the lack of reach. At the higher levels of the game, reach is vitally important, which is why you see the ()&^*)& spiked chain so much...reach near and far.
And by the way, a spiked chain cannot sunder...it does piercing dmg. You have to do blunt or slashing to sunder.
===Aelryinth
You are completely right about the reach. Like I said I basically made this guys character for him. After a few levels I realized the reach problem. I felt really bad for him, and didn't want to punish him for my mistake. The scimitars I gave him were pseudo-weapons of legacy, and I gave them a force effect that gave reach. Worked out really well, but most old school DM's would roast me for that one. There just isn't a perfect build, although I tend to agree with you about about the 2 handed weapon. Frees up a lot of feats and stat points too. If I had it to do over again, I would probably go that route.
And by the way, a spiked chain cannot sunder...it does piercing dmg. You have to do blunt or slashing to sunder.
Kusari gama would be the answer...
So do you now agree you where wrong when you stated...
"You never, ever make two attacks simultaneously"
Kusari gama would be the answer...
So do you know agree you where wrong when you stated...
"You never, ever make two attacks simultaneously"
What is it;where is it from, this kusari gama? I'm interested in this build. I made one like it for a player. Then found this guy on the board, and j.b.q. is better than what I came up with.
What is it;where is it from, this kusari gama? I'm interested in this build. I made one like it for a player. Then found this guy on the board, and j.b.q. is better than what I came up with.
I think it is page 144 or so. You can search the boards for my name and the weapon, I have it referenced in a few threads.
As your reviewing the Jack B Quick thread skip to this post first. 100% of the problems in this thread is because one person refuses to actually read the rules, as I point out.
I think it is page 144 or so. You can search the boards for my name and the weapon, I have it referenced in a few threads.
As your reviewing the Jack B Quick thread skip to this post first. 100% of the problems in this thread is because one person refuses to actually read the rules, as I point out.
You referring to that Double Hit stuff again? Or how the Rob/Karma don't stack? Or karma AoO timing? Caelic already agreed to disagree, do you really like starting up flame wars again?
==Aelryinth
You referring to that Double Hit stuff again? Or how the Rob/Karma don't stack? Or karma AoO timing? Caelic already agreed to disagree, do you really like starting up flame wars again?
==Aelryinth
Why would you post a personal attack against me instead of addressing the actual Rules I posted?
Personal attacks are against the CoC. You have been warned repeatedly.
Post another Personal attack and I will report it.
You say he's 100% of the problem, and yet I see him now addressing a legitimate issue with the build (reach) and you rehashing crap that no one wants to get into again.
Just let it go.
Why would you post a personal attack against me instead of addressing the actual Rules I posted?
Personal attacks are against the CoC. You have been warned repeatedly.
Post another Personal attack and I will report it.
Thank you, Khan.
Please, Eld, report me. I'd really like to see what happens when you are specifically calling me out and insulting ME with your posts above. I actually have better grounds to go on then you do.
==Aelryinth
He's not so much attacking you personally as he is questioning exactly why you're harassing him about something that was dropped 9 months ago.
You say he's 100% of the problem, and yet I see him now addressing a legitimate issue with the build (reach) and you rehashing crap that no one wants to get into again.
Just let it go.
The point that the whole fight was over was aelryinth's insistence that the rules said something they did not.
To reiterate, I posted that readers of this thread should note that many of the older posts in this thread discussed an issue now proven to have been addressed explicitly in the rules.
As for Eld...I haven't heard a thing about 'the issue being resolved', and it's a moot point for the most part, anyways.
===Aelryinth
That's ToB material, none of which is in the Jack B. Quick build. TWF craziness gets really bad with Windmilling Girallons and stuff from Tiger style and so on. It also doesn't work with Fighters, because Fighters get saddled with half manifester levels (while Warblades get -2 Fighter levels, go figure).
As for Eld...I haven't heard a thing about 'the issue being resolved', and it's a moot point for the most part, anyways.
===Aelryinth
Wow. That could get crazy. Its so feat intensive you would have to use robilars gambit, which I don't like as much. Maybe a fighter/warblade. It would be a tight build, if possible at all. Worth it though.
Wow. That could get crazy. Its so feat intensive you would have to use robilars gambit, which I don't like as much. Maybe a fighter/warblade. It would be a tight build, if possible at all. Worth it though.
There's multiple TWF threads using ToB out, but most of them are not generic, they optimize for race as well (race and templates, often enough).
I prefer builds done with the Elite Array and no race behind them, that way the build stands on its own and people can add the race to shift things as they want to customize. Ergo, just use Human and Able Learner, and everything is neutral and easily altered.
The big combos go for Storm Warrior, Robilar's, and using Windmill Girallons for insane combo dmg.
===Aelryinth
Wow. That could get crazy. Its so feat intensive you would have to use robilars gambit, which I don't like as much. Maybe a fighter/warblade. It would be a tight build, if possible at all. Worth it though.
[thread=862371]Robilar's not necessary.[/thread]
It took me a good while working on it, though, and it's not nearly as clean as Jack B. Quick. (On that note, Cycle would get murdered by Jack B. Quick because of the BAB difference).
As for Eld...I haven't heard a thing about 'the issue being resolved', and it's a moot point for the most part, anyways.
Try reviewing here
And here
Not moot, as any AoO user would need to be aware of this...
I'm sure Pun Pun has it though.
prototype00
Instead of High Sword Low Axe and its wasteful pre-reqs, use Knock-Down. It's a lot more efficient.
Except that High Sword/Low Axe is very specific that you get to use get to use the Improved Trip's ability to make another attack against him once you have him tripped.
Knock Down doesn't say that.
Try reviewing here
And here
Not moot, as any AoO user would need to be aware of this...
I see you screaming for attention, about an incorrect interpretation of double hit. Was that what you were talking about?
==+Aelryinth
Except that High Sword/Low Axe is very specific that you get to use get to use the Improved Trip's ability to make another attack against him once you have him tripped.
Knock Down doesn't say that.
That's true. but Knock down also doesn't require you to declare a trip...it works on EVERY attack you deal enough dmg with (instead of every successful combo). Thus, it's likely to generate a lot more trips.
And it has a lot less pre-reqs.
==Aelryinth
Your HD and BAB are not quite as good as straight fighter but your saves end up more favorable IMO.
EDIT: After counting the feats a fighter gets I realized that this build does not get more feats, it just gets some of them earlier. I still like it though because the saves are better and my skills are customizable.
Instead of High Sword Low Axe and its wasteful pre-reqs, use Knock-Down. It's a lot more efficient.
I thought knockdown got nerfed out in 3.5. I looked high and low for it. If its still in, please show me. According to the feat index, its in sword and fist.
Its was one of my favorite feats.
There was errata on it for the 3.0 Sword and Fist version, but it got reprinted in the Deities and Demigods book, and has crossed over into 3.5 in the SRD with no errata so far.
It's up to you to follow the errata or not.
I see you screaming for attention, about an incorrect interpretation of double hit. Was that what you were talking about?
Can you actually read the links and actually look up what quoted rules say, than rethink your errors and post an apology or retraction???
Knockdown is in the 3.5 SRD in the Deities and Demigods section.
There was errata on it for the 3.0 Sword and Fist version, but it got reprinted in the Deities and Demigods book, and has crossed over into 3.5 in the SRD with no errata so far.
It's up to you to follow the errata or not.
It might be noted that the same thing happened lots in the 3.0->3.5 DMG, and no errata has changed it in 5+ years. for example the kusari gama...
Knockdown is in the 3.5 SRD in the Deities and Demigods section.
There was errata on it for the 3.0 Sword and Fist version, but it got reprinted in the Deities and Demigods book, and has crossed over into 3.5 in the SRD with no errata so far.
It's up to you to follow the errata or not.
Sorry, but what does SRD mean. On the "official d&d errata" page their is no deities and demigods book errata, so I assume SRD is the book or page where it is found.
Sorry, but what does SRD mean. On the "official d&d errata" page their is no deities and demigods book errata, so I assume SRD is the book or page where it is found.
This is the SRD.
SRD = System Reference Document
L'Avantgarde Noire
Can you actually read the links and actually look up what quoted rules say, than rethink your errors and post an apology or retraction???
Could you stop trying to bait me, then rethink your attempts to gain attention and post an apology or retraction?
==+Aelryinth
Could you stop trying to bait me, then rethink your attempts to gain attention and post an apology or retraction?
==+Aelryinth
Sure, I would love to, right after you actually read the rules and post your "apology or retraction?"
DM interpretation is all that stupid argument is going to come down to, so there's really very little point in arguing over it.
Couldn't find anything...damn...
Actually wolfie-kun, no DM interpretation is needed. The point i am making is that the rules actually specifically address the "simultaneous" issue in a reasonable and well thought out way. (Very hard to believe with WoTC I know, but then again it was 3.0)
I understand you thing this is an argument between two people, but it is not. It is about what the rules actually say VS what someone keeps pretending they say. I think that is important.
Do you not?
L'Avantgarde Noire
Why is this thread still active? It's a great build; let's just move on already. -.-
L'Avantgarde Noire
The thread is active because people still post to it.
I am still posting because other posters are still repeating the same errors that aelryinth originally asserted.
Since this assertion is wrong I am going to the source to get it corrected.
Knockdown is in the 3.5 SRD in the Deities and Demigods section.
There was errata on it for the 3.0 Sword and Fist version, but it got reprinted in the Deities and Demigods book, and has crossed over into 3.5 in the SRD with no errata so far.
It's up to you to follow the errata or not.
So its in the 3.5 SRD. How official is this? I really like knockdown, so I don't want to make a case without all the info. Could you use it in official "Living Greyhawk" campaigns or Gen Con events?
So its in the 3.5 SRD. How official is this? I really like knockdown, so I don't want to make a case without all the info. Could you use it in official "Living Greyhawk" campaigns or Gen Con events?
the SRD is basically a compilation of every thing that wotc coast has made open-source/licence. so it IS official material and ruleing on 3.0 stuff is generally that if it hasn't been updated/errataed in any new sources it stands as is, if it HAS been updated then the latest update is the viable source. sooo one assumes that as it is as is in the 3.5 srd then that's the latest source on the item in question. as to wether or not it's good for gen con or LG campaigns, I'd say that's harder to swing as they ban the oddest things there. so I guess print off the stuff in question and present it to the local dm and let them make the call.
Post incoming...
Waiting...
Human Wild Shape Ranger 6/ Master of Many Forms 10/ War Shaper 4
Wild Shape Ranger 5/ Master of Many Forms 7/ War Shaper 4/ MoMF +1/ Ranger +1/ MoMF +2
Track, Power Attack, Combat Reflexes, Alertness, Endurance, Leap Attack, Frozen Wild Shape, Robilar's Gambit, open feat, Defensive Sweep
Str 13+, high Con and Wis, decent Dex if starting low level, Int and Cha are irrelevant
No magic items are required, but nice ones to have are Gloves of Dex +6, Monk's Belt, Armbands of Might, Amulet of Mighty Fists +1, and 1st level Pearls of Power.
*Yeah, this is kinda subject to DM approval, but most of the sentiment I've seen says that an additional Quick Sheathe feat is just a terrible idea.
Somebody mentioned Quick Draw a while back; I've also seen alternate build ideas going up, with people leaving Fighter20 behind. Contingent upon gaining a stupidly high Str score, my idea is to take a level of Exotic Weapon Master to get Uncanny Blow with your bastard sword or war axe. Use Quick Draw to stow your off-hand weapon* (short sword or handaxe), make a two-handed overpowering attack to use Uncanny Blow (for a total of 4xStr to damage), and then draw the weapon again to make ready your AoOs.
*Yeah, this is kinda subject to DM approval, but most of the sentiment I've seen says that an additional Quick Sheathe feat is just a terrible idea.
This won't work. Sheathing a weapon is a move action. You could drop it, but then you'd need a lot of off-hand weapons and that's simply not worth it.
A Soulknife 5 could pull this off a lot easier, though (dropping a weapon is a free action and creating a mind blade is also a free action).
I wonder who would win, Jack B. Quick or Nox! *
Curious, is this Nox thread alive?
Would love to see what this build is.
Jack's build is awesome, playing one right now..but would like to see what is the build on this contender.
I wonder if you could fit in Disciple of Dispater 8 into the build for a crazy critical threat range, with kukris, and put a bunch of crit hit abilities on them, like enfeebling and the bursts.
Jack B Quick has the standard TWF basic problems: Stat allocation; massive feat requirements; gold requirements for weapons. Caelic also made the error of stacking Robilar's and Karmic Strike, which was ruled not to work.
The problem is that it's generally more efficient to use the same tactic with a Two handed weapon. You hit more, you do more dmg per AoO, you've got a better weapon, and you spend three to five less feats, which you can use for other things.
==Aelryinth
Caelic also made the error of stacking Robilar's and Karmic Strike, which was ruled not to work.
I don't see that anywhere in the FAQ or the Errata, so it's up to the DM running the game to decide. If he uses it in his build, then his build assumes the DM thinks they do both work.
It was mentioned in a Custserv answer. Unfortunately like most Custserv answers it has no basis in the rules.
Actually the basis was pretty clear. You were getting two AoO's off one attack roll, for it being an attack roll.
Two chances on one Opportunity is generally denied everywhere in the rules. Different opportunities generating multiple attacks is fine.
Karmic Strike works on the attack roll that hits you, and robilar's after a swing at you. Both are working on the attack roll. General precedent is you get one AoO. Now, if he was trying a disarm, you'd get one because he didn't have the feat, which is a different opportunity.
Regardless, the Greatsword version of the build still works better, because it gets its allotment of AoO's off faster, and does more dmg per AoO.
The no karmic's/Robilar's combo has been accepted on the Optimizer's Board for some time. Better to accept it and move on then, as with many rules.
==Aelryinth
that being said, the greatsword version does more damage per hit but doesn't get as many possible hits in.. .remember jack isn't always going to be fighting bad guys with OMGWTF AC, and the twf build has all the same provoke aoo feats that the greatsword version has.
'Getting Swung At' pretty much means 'attack roll'. Quit picking a nit, they trigger off the same thing...the enemy taking a bash at you. One triggers if he hits, one triggers after the swing is complete, hit or miss (which amounts to at the same time).
A greatsword deals more dmg on average per attack then two swings from a TWF. The number of AoO's allowed is limited absolutely by Dex. The THW guy gets his 6 monster AoO's off just as fast or faster then Jack does. Actually, in a duel between the two, THW wins every time, because it comes down to an exchange of single attacks triggering AoO's back and forth, and Greatsword wins that every time.
==Aelryinth
getting swung at is not the same thing as "when an enemy makes a melee attack roll against you", if it was, they would have mentioned attack roll. I will nit pick when you claim it to be the right and correct way of using something that the rules allows for using differently. They trigger at different times, if you acutally read the feats.
all things considered, twf with double hit does more damage to thw. sorr for 4e terms but thw does 1W + 1.5str mod each hit, twf gets 1W + strmod + 1W +1/2 str mod. If the twf is uing a weapon in both hands that does more weapon damage than half of a greatsword, for instance if he wields a pair of elven thinblades, he does more damage and crits more often; all things considered equal. Plus if one of twf attacks misses from the pair, at least he still deals damage, instead of swing and miss with the thw.
And don't you dare try to tell me that double hit would provoke 2 attacks from the greatsword guy using robilar's gambit right after trying to tell me that robilar's gambit and karmic strike don't work together because they trigger at the same time. Double Hit explicitly says you swing both of your weapons at the same time. Oh and TWF is dex based = more AoO than thw = more damage.
Pretty sad day when "you" try to speak for the accepted judgement of the Charops boards. That just sounds like your making stuff up unless theres some "Accepted judgement of the boards thread" that I dont' know about.
So I'm gonna disagree with you out right Ael...
One feat triggers off the unconfirmed swing.
The other?
Triggers off a sussesfull hit.
Those are different things. Here's how we know that. Ready?
Lets say you have a pc with just robilars. The AoO is generated by virtue of the swing.
The swing provokes regardless of if they hit you or not, they just get to finish the swing before you can make the AoO (positioning till they're on the backswing etc)
Now if you have robilars, and karmic strike.
The opponent swings. . . Provokes from robilars.
but... misses... no swing from karmic.
Why karmic requires "succesful" melee attacks.
Thats 2 different triggers.
One No matter what, as long as you swing at me. The
Other only if you actually get hit.
Taking a swing is different from getting hit.
So even if the boards (you in this case) say "the moon is made of cheese" that don't make it so.
Nezkrul. You are correct.
Jack suffers a -2 to hit if using two weapons. He misses more then greatsword guy...statistically, he does 10% less damage per swing, and crits less frequently. If these weapons are not light, like, say, longswords, it's -4. If they don't match, he doesn't get spec between them.
And, oh yeah, he has to PAY for both of them, the THW guy pays for ONE...meaning he outright has a better weapon.
The only way a TWF gets better dmg then THW guy is if he has a ton of bonus damage apply to every attack...things like sneak attack, specialization, and magic bonuses. Str favors THW guy, base dmg tends to be equal (SS x 2 = Greatsword).
But that penalty to hit is a killer. And statistically, critting twice as often for half the damage isn't any more impressive. Also take note, that TWF guy doesn't get 4 off hand attacks, so he never gets a true doubling, and the THW guy gets at least 5 feats that Jack had to spend on his tricks...and 5 feats is HUGE.
Potentially, Jack can do more damage. Realistically, he does not. When it all goes well, it sure is spectactular and a lot of dice rolling, however!
===Aelryinth
Since an AoO happens BEFORE the action that triggered it, it's the last AoO stated that launch first, right?
So, let take the sequence back:
Shmoe attacks
Jack start swinging for 2 attacks (robilar into double hit).
Shmoe change his swing to retaliate (robilar).
Jack changes too so that he goes first (robilar into double hit).
Shmoe is nearly out of AoO and decide to pull back (Sidestep).
End of the AoO sequence since Jack can't follow Shmoe.
So sidesteps is the first thing to happen, Shmoe is now out of range, then all the attacks that where waiting in the queue starts occuring, but none land.
At the end Shmoe's turn, he is out of AoO, Jack lost many of his and no damage were dealt in the process. I love these type of fights
Hey ... when did Caelic get an avatar?
(?!)
A little grave digging.
Since an AoO happens BEFORE the action that triggered it, it's the last AoO stated that launch first, right?
So, let take the sequence back:
Shmoe attacks
Jack start swinging for 2 attacks (robilar into double hit).
Shmoe change his swing to retaliate (robilar).
Jack changes too so that he goes first (robilar into double hit).
Shmoe is nearly out of AoO and decide to pull back (Sidestep).
End of the AoO sequence since Jack can't follow Shmoe.
So sidesteps is the first thing to happen, Shmoe is now out of range, then all the attacks that where waiting in the queue starts occuring, but none land.
At the end Shmoe's turn, he is out of AoO, Jack lost many of his and no damage were dealt in the process. I love these type of fights
Actually, Jack potentially can follow Schmoe, since he can Sidestep with his second weapon attack with Double Hit, and follow Schmoe.
(Tempest abuses this all to hell in his Sidestep movement thread)
And double hit will trigger Robilar's twice, since it has two attack rolls...both trigger an AoO. The 'at the same time' language is fluff...it then just means both AoO's in retaliation go off at the same time, too!
==Aelryinth
My bad.
Joe hasn't taken his second swing from his Double Hit. Seeing you step away, he takes it as Sidestep, and follows Schmoe. The cycle of attacks continues.
Schmoe will be able to take his attack instead of seeing it whiff.
Joe will be able to take his first Double Slice AoO. Then HE can either take a second hit, which then triggers an AoO from Schmoe (and starts another AoO chain), or he can Sidestep away from Schmoe, and Schmoe's first hit that started this whole cycle whiffs.
If Schmoe has as many AoO's as Joe, circumstances will favor a 2h weapon wielder over the Double Slicer, because Schmoe will be dealing more damage with each of his AoO's, and getting them out faster, as Double Slice provokes 2 AoO's with every attack. In short, Schmoe will carve up Joe well before Joe can carve up him, just from the extra damage of a bigger weapon, +50% Str, and doubled Power Attack.
==Aelryinth
Actually, Jack potentially can follow Schmoe, since he can Sidestep with his second weapon attack with Double Hit, and follow Schmoe.
(Tempest abuses this all to hell in his Sidestep movement thread)
I don't think either of these work as advertised.
Sidestep (the feat) allows you to take a 5' step after a single attack of opportunity. Double Hit allows you to swing with both weapons as a single "attack" of opportunity. Thus, you can't take the 5' step after the first swing - the two attacks from Double Hit are the same "attack of opportunity" and Sidestep doesn't trigger until that attack's over. Basically, the two swings from Double Hit are treated as a single unit, and you can only sidestep after the second attack roll.
The same logic prevents Double Hit from working with Evasive Reflexes (the feat we used in Flip the Bird and the Flash Step article, which I'm certain you're referring to). Evasive Reflexes replaces an attack of opportunity with a 5' step. Double Hit has two weapon attacks as part of a single attack of opportunity. If you swap that opportunity for a 5' step with Evasive, you can't take the two swings. Likewise, if you take the two swings, they're a single unit - you can't replace the second one with Evasive Reflexes.
(Evasive is better than Sidestep in that it has fewer prerequisites and can be used 1+Dex times per round with Combat Reflexes. Sidestep is better than Evasive in that using it doesn't consume an AoO, although its prerequisites are a pain - the main reason Jack excelled with it is because he's going up the Dodge tree due to Karmic Strike.)
i.e. there's nothing in the description of the ability that says those attacks don't provoke AoO's independently.
Or, to put it another way, if I do a trip with one and a disarm with the other, and don't have the Improved Line, you're saying I only provoke one AoO because it's only one attack? Same deal going with Robilar's.
The language is 'at the same time', not 'these are considered one attack.' It's not Manyshot.
I'm probably down with a Double Slice eating a full AoO for evasive reflexes, and not splitting it. But it definitely provokes twice.
And I'm pretty sure you can't double slice with a double weapon, Draco. Specifically requires wielding two weapons, IIRC?
==Aelryinth