[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.25438625 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Ok guys, I will give you a challenge.

Try to list up any feats from Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 or Pathfinder that you consider to be useless in typical combat situations.

>> No.25438667

all of them

play GURPS

>> No.25438703


That's like choosing between a mouthful of nails and a mouthful if razorblades. I'd prefer something, y'know, fun.

>> No.25438717


>> No.25438732

Elephant Stomp.

>> No.25438761


>mouthful of nails

Welcome to the Salty Spitoon, how tough are ya?

>> No.25438771

I know how to roll initiative in FATAL.

>> No.25438784

That is not a challenge.

>> No.25438813

I ran a 4 game campaign with 3 of the worse "that guys" I have ever meet.

>> No.25438816

>not choosing the razorblades
lil pussy

>> No.25438823

I once played an entire round of SS13. Without griefing ONCE.

>> No.25438829


Right this way, sorry to keep you waiting.

>> No.25438851

Fuck you, Toughness is a decent Feat. Play some REAL campaigns and you'll learn to love those extra HP.

Dodge. Terrible in 3.5 since you have to declare and it only works against one dude, slightly better in PF, but still awful since that 1 AC will never really make a difference.

>> No.25438877

I played a Fighter in a high fantasy campaign with focus on extraplanar adventures, everyone else in the party was a spellcaster of some kind.

>> No.25438879


Looks like you can't into IVORY TOWER GAME DESIGN, boot licker.


I've played the Wraeththu RPG

>> No.25438906

faget plz go

>> No.25439049


>> No.25439073


>> No.25439100

That's the one where everyone is a functional hermaphrodite because the author hates men, right?

>> No.25439126


Not everyone, there are still normal humans. Only men can become Wraththu, and they're going to beat out humanity, since they're much more successful.

>> No.25439150


>> No.25439169

Come on man, don't leave us hanging. Storytime that shit

>> No.25439183

>Try to list up any feats from Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 or Pathfinder that you consider to be useless in typical combat situations.

Any feat which wouldn't benefit a combat action the build I was playing that session would take.

Being more specific would require additional information which you failed to provide in your opening post.

For most every combat action, there is at least one or more synergistic feats, if not outright specifically built for the purpose of altering a given mechanic (move/attack) or action (standing up from prone). By the end of 3.5's run, most splats covered what was listed in the combat chapters, or expanded upon them, mechanically.

To elaborate on the previous point, as Pathfinder continued where 3.5 left off, the system inherited/revised many of the 3.5 feats, and with the Pathfinder spalts, continued to expand upon. It's gotten to the point where Pathfinder mechanic glut is beginning to rival that of 3.5, if not outright give it a run for its money (The latest Ultimate splats).

>> No.25439206


Well, it is at least trying to give combat classes more options than just full-attack every turn

>> No.25439408

I actually read the entirety of the book, hand rolled a character and played a campaign of FATAL, two session a week for six month. Please kill me

>> No.25439451

Skill Focus: Speak Language.

Technically a valid feat, technically has no effect what-so-ever.

>> No.25439480

Wait, you're not that guy who had an entire rapist party who went around yelling "We're the Aristocrats!" are you?

>> No.25439511

No, it was a "serious game" and I played an ogre based of an African Since I'm pretty sure that's who they are based off. I'd love to storytime but I need to go to work.

>> No.25439539

Sure, if you count being able to speak 3 extra languages as no effect

>> No.25439601

Doesn't qualify, since Skill Focus has only one feat entry regardless of what you take it with.

It is singularly useless though, right up there with Weapon Specialization: Net.

>> No.25439647

... Luke fon Fabre?

>> No.25439698

that game was not good

>> No.25439732

Say that to my face fucker not online and see what happens.

>> No.25439757

destiny 2 and symphonia that's right motherfucker I went there r betr

>> No.25439898

Never take Monkey Grip. It is the very definition of a newbie trap, even compared to other weapon-related feats which tend to have nonsensical prerequisites for actions any decent game would let anyone try.
Since there are no [W] dice in 3.5, the size of your weapon stops mattering the moment it becomes impossible to one-shot most enemies. Always choose a weapon with a high crit chance or a bonus to tripping.
The ONLY exception to this is Claws Of The Beast, because your damage dice are far beyond normal weapons and you can stack size increases more easily, but that build doesn't use the Monkey Grip feat.
You're taking a -2 penalty to ALL attacks for an increase in damage comparable to what Weapon Specialization grants for "free", and that's not even a very good feat.
It's not *useless* in the dictionary sense because it does *something*, but you just spent a feat slot for an option that makes no difference mathematically and may actually hinder you at high levels.
If I were running a game, I'd let everyone do that, the feat would remove the penalty, and weapons made of mithral would be oversized.

>> No.25439909

you mean eternia? cause eternia was pretty ass

destiny 1 and abyss are the best in the series imo

>> No.25440084

a barbed mithril net could deal damage... but you're right, you'd be better off sinking the feats into an actual weapon and using the net as a mix-up tactic.

on that subject, I actually built a lizardman barbarian/ranger/scaled horror that fought with a net, trident, and light shield. his whole shtick was to net you, drag you into water or mud, then trip you and continuously stab the fuck out of you while you were drowning/floundering in mud, because he took no penalties for watery or muddy terrain and could hold his breath for like, 8 or 16 times his constitution, which was beefy, especially while he raged. named him Go'Mek, after the (formerly) worlds largest living crocodile.

that "sword" across his back makes it look like he has penises coming out of his ass... one of them is huge and black, too.

I feel like Exotic weapon proficiency is pretty useless. there's other feats that grant you equal or better advantages than most of the exotic weapons, there's options and class features for bypassing a need for it, and most of these work-arounds have better utility to begin with. and there a load of Exotic weapons that don't even feel like they should be considered such to begin with. some stuff, like spiked chains and scourges and wonky double weapons make sense. that shit is mostly silly. but even they frequently have simple or martial weapon anologues (what's an orc double axe but a choppy quarter staff? what's a dwarven urgrosh but a halberd with more pokey bits?). I'm willing to give those a pass for "you need special training." but shit like "its a longsword, but bigger," "it's a halberd, but bigger," "its a spear/bow/crossbow/what-the-fuck-ever, but bigger" is total bullshit in my book. at least make the fighters and barbarians proficient with those right off, for fucks sake. its not like they don't have enough limitations and taxes to pay to begin with.

>> No.25440222

preach it, brother.

other useless feats? I agree with >>25438851 on dodge. it sucks dick. I was houseruling it to be like the PF version since 3.0. but it builds up to some really good stuff, like whirlwind attack and spring attack.

toughness is... middling to low utility in my book, at least in our home games, because I give max HP every hit dice (to the monsters too though). in PF Society its almost required though, if you intend on multiclassing or skill-monkeying at all, since that's going to suck up all your favored class bonuses.

I seem to recall an April Fools article in Dragon or Dungeon magazine on the ecology of the Kobold, except it was all meant to be funny. there were kobold specific feats like "Dying scream" which let you shout off a single phrase whenever you die, and "Bad Decision," which read simply "you have a nagging feeling that you've made a very poor decision..." and had no effect text...

>> No.25440268

It's not really fair to call them out on an April's Fools joke as an example of a useless feat.

>> No.25440301

It doesn't add three ranks, so you don't get three languages. It adds a +3 modifier to the rolls, and it is a skill which you never ever roll.

>> No.25440318


>> No.25440329

>Dr. Rage
Fuck off

>> No.25440345

Haven't seen him before, is this some new MR. RAGE knockoff?

>> No.25440485

wasn't really "calling them out" on it, just offering it as an example, or an amusing related anecdote.

I don't think Skill Focus is as useless as everyone says though. I mean, yeah, it sucks, but it can be quite useful. for instance, when I was playing a Kobold Trapsmith, using the rules that a trap that makes an attack roll uses 1/2 the craft (trapsmithing) check that set it as its attack modifier, that +3, combined with max ranks, racial bonuses, max INT, masterwork tools, and some situational synergies meant that my 2d6+2 damage bear traps attacked at a MINIMUM of +8 at level 1, and frequently much higher. add to that the fact that I trapped my traps by wedging an alchemist's fire in the jaws of the bear traps and almost every trap I used caused status effects (poison, blinding, entanglement, restricted movement, tripping, bleed, etc) that high accuracy made for some world-o-hurt situations from the works of a tiny kobold.

I think Skill Focus should either offer a scaling bonus, or simply say "this skill is always at max ranks, you no longer have to put skill ranks into it. all previously spent ranks are refunded."

>> No.25440519

It's not bad in UMD, for a few builds. But then, UMD is rather powerful anyway.

>> No.25440527

Skill Focus: Use Magic Device is fantastic as well. Those DCs are pretty high, you need to be able to hit them every time to use the skill to its fullest extent, and it's hard to find items that improve the skill.

>> No.25440672

We got that, it was called Tome of Battle.

>> No.25440703

isn't Craft Wondrous Item a feat available by 5th level?

Or do you have a house rule that no PCs can craft their own custom items?

>> No.25440714

>give combat classes more options
Are we reading the same Pathfinder?

>> No.25440726

You see, that's the thing. Alot of the issues that come up in regards to feat usage is that a single dip in a different class can oftentimes do what you were trying to do with a feat, but do it much, much better, even moreso when you start making use of splats to swap out one class ability for another.

>> No.25440732

Probably just a summerfag. He'll disappear if you ignore him

>> No.25440740

We are if you're able to think outside of 3.x mentaility.

>> No.25440756

I don't see it either. Would you give some examples why in PF martials can now do more than full attack all day?

>> No.25440766

I keep seeing you guys talking about dips. Are there any classes that you consider worthwhile to take a level or two in, and what are the benefits for the class you would dip into?

Also, is dipping a common practice, or is it forbidden/restricted in the rules? I remember reading that in 2e, humans couldn't multiclass, but could give up one class to become a dualclass character in something new.

>> No.25440785

Is your GM competent, or does he let you five-foot step, full attack most combats?

>> No.25440808

still waiting for an example

>> No.25440829

Come again brah?

>> No.25440851


>>25440756 here
No, really, I would like to see an example, too. If my GM shuts down full attacking for the most part of the combat, he is forcing me to play either outside of the rules and get creative or I have to rely on my magical gubbins to reveal the enemy to me.
That's not really being able to do more.

>> No.25440890

Now could you not be a ponpous asshole who doesn't answer my question long enough to tell me what kind of options there are?

>> No.25440918

Not for crafting purposes.

I've got a Paladin, who, by level 12 will be able to pull out *any* 5th level scroll and cast it without rolling a die. Adds a lot of versatility to a nonmagical character.

>> No.25440950

+1 anons keen to hear more "options" in PF combat

>> No.25440989

Full Attacking is still usually the best option. Spring Attacking Str-based Scout Rogues and Cavaliers are a couple notable exceptions. Magi do well with just a standard action too.

>> No.25441029


There is also a significant difference between skill focus in 3.5 and in PF. In 3.5 it's a straight +3.

In PF when you get ten ranks in said skill, it boosts skill focus to a +6 bonus, which is actually significant in a d20 based system.

Also, the feats which grant a +2 to two skills grants a +4 to those skills at ten ranks (separately).

>> No.25441030

>outside 3.5 mentality
>full attack
>str based spring attack
>cast a spell as a standard
how is that at all different?

>> No.25441034


>>25440485 here. well, PF does open up some new combat options with some of the new combat maneuver feats, like dirty trick, improved called shot, and some other options that build nicely off of the others, like the rage power knockback, or how greater sunder lets you sunder AND still deal damage. you gt options for some good melee status effects from those feats, and sometimes you can win/end a fight without having to just outpace the enemy's damage-per-round. then there's feats like Lunge, and some of the martial arts style feats, like the one that grants concealment when you move, that really change up a melee combatant's priorities from just "have the highest HP, AC, and attack/damage/CMB/CMD modifiers."

in the long run though, you're still beating things with a stick every round. its unlikely that the martials will get options like spellcasters in PF like they did in 3.5 with the Bo9S.

>> No.25441047

>Fuck you, Toughness is a decent Feat. Play some REAL campaigns and you'll learn to love those extra HP.
The extra three HP pale in comparison to the benefit of taking a good feat. The best healing in 3.5 is simply preventing incoming damage in the first place, and the best way to do that is to end your fights as fast as possible. For the cost of a precious feat slot, you gain 3HP, but you also stunt your progression into powerful feat trees that will help you drop enemies in fewer turns.

It gets even worse when you consider that the benefit from the feat is about a sixth to a quarter as good as just buying an eternal wand of Cure Light Wounds once you scrape together about 2k gold (regaining 1d8+1 hp twice a day vs. effectively gaining 3 hp a day).

In other words, in a "real campaign", taking toughness will drastically impair your character.

>> No.25441054

I play anima.
And I enjoy it.

>> No.25441056

Anyone have the Aristocrats screenie about?

>> No.25441060

Scout Rogue deals Sneak Attack after moving 10'. You hit hard in melee with Furious Focus from the backlines. Magus casts touch-range damage spells with a huge crit range or multiplier as he hits you in the face, and better than a wizard. Learn the fucking system.

>> No.25441093

The full attack is one of the war damaging options, obviously. Of your goal is to attack the enemy and win, obviously the full attack is the way to go, if it was any different that would just be silly.
However there is an enormous host of combat maneuvers to give you options. I hear a lot of people respond with combat maneuvers not being as good as a full attack, and as I said above it depends what you're trying I accomplish.
If you know you can't drop that caster in one hit, and he'll just 5ft-step back for another spell on his turn, sunder his component pouch or rod/wand, move to grapple and he won't be able to step out of your threat range, disarm the quest item and make a break for it even if your build doesn't favor one-on-one fighting.
If your goal is to kill them, you're going to have to make an attack against them, bitching about that is so nonsensical because of it was different it would be bonkers.

>> No.25441106

Not him, but there are the combat manuvers. Before you freak out and say they are useless, read the rules to them, then read the rules to the combat defense.

Every single CM gets every applicable attack bonus added to it, including magical weapon bonuses if the manuver is done with a weapon (and weapons with combat manuvers listed as special abilities get an additional bonus - per rules you can use any weapon for a combat manuver of the weapon would make sense to use the manuver with, it's just that some get an extra +2 bonus - MUCH different than 3.5). CMB gets a total of 7 bonuses added to it beyond dex and str. This means any melee class is going to nearly always succeed at any combat manuver regardless of takign the feats for them or not, because they get 90%of their attack bonuses to the manuver (and 100% to some of them) even without using feats to bolster their effectiveness.

While this may not seem very useful at first, being able to put your enemy exactly where you want them, take away action economy from them, take weapons, magic items, tools, and inflict status effects pretty much at will at any gives them more options in combat.

>> No.25441129

I played a CW samurai and didn't fall to become ronin.

>> No.25441156

Toughness is a good feat for certain character builds, such as melee capable sorcerers, wizards and witches, or many of the medium BAB combatants who gain extra feats in addition to their class abilities (Magus, Inquisitor, Monk) in PF. Not so much in 3.5 since you get so few feats.

>> No.25441184

so... dealing damage with full attacks and criting with spells just like a duskblade

how is this any different to 3.5?
this things are the same as in 3.5
you claimed I needed to "stop thinking with a 3.5 mentality" isn't that what dealing damage is?
Where are my options other than dealing damage?
where are my espoused options anon?

>> No.25441189

Combat maneuvers are still terrible.

>> No.25441214

>options other than dealing damage
If you want to bring your opponents HP total to 0 you're going to have to deal damage. Would you seriously have it any other way?
If you want to do something else, there are plenty of combat maneuvers and specialty actions to accommodate you.

>> No.25441227

PF toughness kind of Gestalts Toughness and Improved Toughness from 3.5's core and Libris Mortis, respectively. instead of a static 3, or 1 per HD, it front-end-loads the first 3 HP, and then +1 HP per HD after the 3rd. still works out to +1 HP per level though, in the long run. but as I pointed out, in PF society play, its almost a mandatory feat at low levels with the shitty "average HP/HD" rule and the even shittier 20 point stat-buy. with a human fighter getting 22 feats over their progression, it's not that hurtful an investment, especially considering how hard it can be to acquire items in society play. but your core argument isn't wrong, 3.5 toughness is shit amongst shit.

I seem to recall a really silly "toughness feat tree" from an old 3.0 splat, like sword and fist or something. it was just feat after feat of gaining incrementally larger amounts of HP.

yeah, what he said.

>> No.25441240

Not the same guy as the "stop with 3.5 mentality anon", but it sounds a bit like you're complaining that damage dealers deal damage. The difference is that they do it much more effectively in Pathfinder, in the scheme of things.

Look at what others have said about combat maneuvers, particularly >>25441106.

>> No.25441255

>details explanation about how combat maneuvers work and how melee characters are good at them, why they're used for and examples of how they can end an encounter as easily as a Grease spell.
Would you mind explaining? Or are you just trolling?

>> No.25441259

oh shit looks like i have to get 5 people to read the fucking encyclopedia of boring rules in order to find a non-updated, unbalanced, third party version of whatever game we were going to play in the first place

>> No.25441274

Toughness is good when you aren't using point buy and are rolling for hp for casters in low level (1-5, though 4 and 5 are stretching it) games. That is what it exists for. Those three extra hit points mean a lot if you fuck up a hp roll and have low con.

>> No.25441281

Not in my experience. Snatching away defensive items and snaking your opponent's weapons and hitting them with him has worked spectacularly for me, thank you. Dirty Trick is great for round or two of keeping something with spell like or supernatural abilities from fucking you up with them (can't target if blind), and that's without spending feats.

>> No.25441285


>> No.25441292

The fuck are you talking about?

GURPS 4e is balanced as fuck. There's also a thing called "GURPS Lite," which is 'core rules.' "GURPS Basic" is 'core rules+'

>> No.25441307

I haven't been a part of this particular discussion until now but, you guys know that toughness give you more than just 3hp, right?
It's give you 3 right away, and then at lvl4 and onward you get 1hp per level. Essentially you get 1hp/HD(min 3)
On top of that it is a prereq for other feats as well. It's not as if you're taking a dead end feat with no hope of progression.

>> No.25441342

That's only in PF.

3.5 toughness only gives you 3 HP. Improved toughness gives you 1 per level.

This is a lot of why this entire discussion is kind of stupid, there's no comparison between 3.5 and PF where feats are concerned. The OP's point may still stand, but discussing the feat differences is kind of self defeating.

>> No.25441387

I find skill focus to be kind of useless. It's one of those feat where if you have it then great, but if you don't, who cares? It's a perfect example of a good bonus feat.
Endurance is the same thing. It's great that rangers get it and all, it's useful when it comes up, but who in their right mind would spend a real feat on it?

>> No.25441433

Cleave. When you have two enemies adjacent to you, chances are they're flanking you or about to flank you. The only time you should see two enemies adjacent to each other and you are when the monster had the Swarming ability (extremely situational) or when you're completely surrounded (in which case you had been start trying I get out of there instead of just full attacking like an idiot.)

>> No.25441440


>>25441227 here. I didn't know it was a prerequisite of anything else in PF. tell me about it.

on a tangent, I played an Unbreakable Fighter once. they trade their first bonus feat for endurance and diehard. I always thought toughness and endurance, or endurance and diehard should be combined anyway. it was also disapointing that an "Unbreakable" fighter didn't get D12 HD. but then most of the archetypes aren't really that impressive to begin with anyway, so it comes as no surprise.

>> No.25441487

Dirty trick is the most useless combat maneuver out there. It only puts a condition on them for one round, so you never have time to take advantage of it. Even the Improved Dirty Trick feat doesn't help in that regard. You only hope is that someone else in your party will sacrifice their attacks to help you get your sneak attack, which is highly unlikely.
A better way to blind would be with a poison or a magic/alchemical item.

>> No.25441574

no way, bro. it happens a lot more than you'd think. my fighter regularly gets 3+ kills per session thanks to cleave. remember its also good for attacking formations and stomping lackeys while still damaging a "boss monster." if you're the fighter, you're going to frequently find yourself attacked by more than one opponent, but cleave adds a greater reward vs the risk, assuming you don't let them get behind you. I agree that the PF determination of them having to be adjacent to each-other AND you AND you take a -2 to AC is shitty in the extreme. I liked the 3.5 version, where you could cleave them as long as they were in reach. but I think Cleaving Finish does the same thing in PF now, doesn't it?

to PF Cleave's credit, its nice not having to drop the opponent every time to get the cleave, and it can really up your damage output at lower levels when you're rocking a greatsword and an 18 strength or something.

>> No.25441595

>telling people to focus on expanding crit chance

And what do you do when fighting constructs and undead?

>> No.25441639

I've completed a Cthulutech Published Campaign

>> No.25441646

Those have so many HP and ways to absorb weapon damage you're not going to one-shot them anyway, so my point stands. Weapon size rapidly becomes worthless.

>> No.25441722

they're not immune to crits in PF.

well, some are, but its no longer a type-specific thing anymore. so Crits actually are a really good option a lot of the time.

and the argument of "Undead/Construct, what do crit melee specialist?" is rendered entirely invalid once you subtract the assumption that those monsters will be used by the DM at all. as a DM, I avoided using a lot of them for years for just that reason. why? because I didn't want to invalidate a party member (or two, in the case of Golems) for an entire fight just for the sake of being difficult. if they were in a module, fine, they were in a module, but I don't like level/energy drain, I don't like death effects, and I don't like broad, sweeping immunities. I've always felt like hammering my party with those would just be... well, downright niggerish of me. I've used them, but very sparingly. in my games, critical fighters have a good range of versatility because of that, and they've seen broader utility in PF now, too.

>> No.25441793

Except the 3.5 version required you have to KILL one to cleave another. You can't just hit them both, like you can in PF.

Why do people not read the rules?

>> No.25441801

PF undead and constructs are not immune to crits.

>> No.25441955

well, weapon size can frequently spell the difference between overcoming DR or not, which is why greatswords are "Grrrrreat!" adamantine greatswords are "the shaz-nasty."

I still agree that Monkey Grip, as written, is a stupid feat. however, I've toyed with weapon modification mechanics for years now, and adjusted that feat (it reduces penalties for heavy/awkward/oversized weapons), the mithril property (also reduces oversize penalties) and introduced other things, like Elvencraft (can be used with weapon finesse, -25% weight, +1 threat range) Broad-bladed (+1 AC fighting defensively, +1 slashing damage, -1 attack rolls) Heavy (-2 attack, +1 size catagory to damage dice) Orc-forged (-1 attack, +2 damage) blade-weighted (-1 attack, +1 damage) or Pommel weighted (+1 attack, -1 damage), all of which are technically modifications to the weight and weildiness of a weapon... so monkey grip applies to reduce the penalty.

thats all homebrew shit anyway though, so its kind of invalid for the purposes of the discussion, but lemme tell ya, a raging orc barbarian with max natural strength BEFORE he rages swinging around a heavy, broad-bladed, blade-weighted orc-forged, masterwork mithral falchion is nothing to sneeze at. in fact, its probably nothing to be within charging distance of...

>> No.25441980

>that post
>in response to a post that clearly states "to PF Cleave's credit, its nice not having to drop the opponent every time to get the cleave..."

why do people not read the entire post before shitposting in response?

>> No.25442006

Nigga the plot for Abyss what awful. So much wandering around accomplishing nothing of note.

Symphonia is still the best I've played.
But not the second. That one was pure shit.

>> No.25442048

Stand Still (Combat)
You can stop foes that try to move past you.

Prerequisites: Combat Reflexes.

Benefit: When a foe provokes an attack of opportunity due to moving through your adjacent squares, you can make a combat maneuver check as your attack of opportunity. If successful, the enemy cannot move for the rest of his turn. An enemy can still take the rest of his action, but cannot move. This feat also applies to any creature that attempts to move from a square that is adjacent to you if such movement provokes an attack of opportunity.

Its not terrible, but It dosent come up enough to really warrent a feat.

>> No.25442057

Are you referring to Tales of Symphonia? Is there a tabletop setting for this? That would be incredible as that is my most favorite vidya.

>> No.25442077

Symphonia was just as bad.

>> No.25442096

Until you add it to combat patrol, at which point no one ever gets past you.

>> No.25442142

yeah, I was gonna say it's pretty useful for a ground control/lock-down fighter. especially when you've got a huge reach, like with a spiked chain, lunge, and Combat Patrol, as you pointed out. you hold your AoO until they're in the middle of your threatened area, then hit them, halt them, trip them, beat on them, etc., and leave them no way to respond without provoking more AoOs by either closing with you, withdrawing, or using a ranged weapon in a threatened square.

>> No.25442293

Is that supposed to be a fucking joke? That feat is GREAT for tanks.

>> No.25442673

Maybe it's because tripping will suffice in most cases?

>> No.25442748

Try tripping an ooze

>> No.25442812

>Not being able to trip oozes
It's like you don't have anti-acid boots or something.

>> No.25443447


Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.