A few Rules questions

[Clovenhoof]

I have a few questions concerning the various mechanisms for knocking a defender prone, and otherwise.

1. "prone": I looked and looked, but can't find the effects in my (pocket) core book. So just to be safe, is it equivalent to the SRD?
My interpretation would be: -4 to melee attack rolls, cannot use Ranged attack, -4 to Parry Defence, -4 to Dodge Defence in Melee, +4 to Ranged Defence;
getting up is a MEA that provokes an AoO.

2. are Prone characters (if knocked down in combat susceptible to Sneak attacks?

3. What is the best way to knock someone prone? I can see two options, either Trip or Overrun.

Overrun / Improved Overrun:
If I got it right, an Overrun attempt "always" provokes an AoO. But we know that always is not always. Under what circumstances does an Improved Overrun not provoke an AoO?
a) If the attacker starts on an adjacent square, he technically makes a 5-foot step, which IIRC should not provoke an AoO.
b) If the attacker starts from further away, he moves 10 feet, so if he has Improved Mobility, he should not provoke an AoO at any rate.
c) if starting on an adjacent square would not prevent an AoO in itself, a character with Improved Mobility might simply retreat a square or two, then advance again to make the Overrun attempt, thus moving more than 10 ft and negating any AoOs.

Trip / Improved Trip:
the text says you make an unarmed touch attack. If you have no hands free, because you are wielding a Two-handed weapon or two weapons, you should be able to make the attack as Off-hand attack with a kick or something.
In that case, do you add only half your Str modifier to either or both of the involved Trip checks?

BTW I think it should be possible to attempt a Trip with a Shield bash attack (just push him over), what do you think?

4. Are there any other (quick) ways to knock your opponent prone?
Note that I am not considering Grapple because it's complicated and also takes a long time in-game.
I'm thinking about a fighter that engages his opponents, knocks them prone and then wreaks havoc on them as they can't defend themselves properly.

D&D had this great feat in a supplement that grants you a free Trip attempt any time you deal a certain amount of damage (like 10HP or something). Is there anything like that in a Conan supplement?

And finally, on a totally unrelated note:

5. Do creatures of sizes other than Medium have different Massive Damage thresholds? Think about Large 10-ft, 1000-lbs monsters.

 

[Krushnak]

im assuming prone works the same as in the SRD as i only have the 1st ed of conan and its not in that book as far as i know. as for eing susceptible to sneak attacks, i would assume so.

trip with a bill is the best way to get some one on the ground.

for massive damage i increase the threshold by 10 for every size increase above medium so; 30 for large, 40 for huge etc. and i decrease the threshold by 5 for every size below medium.

BTW I think it should be possible to attempt a Trip with a Shield bash attack (just push him over), what do you think?

i agree.

 

[Valgrim Bragisson]

Hyboria's Feircest has two good feats for knocking people down and than beating the snot out of them. Bull Strike gives you a free melee attack after a successful Bull Rush, and the target is considered prone.
Drive Your Enemy Before You gives you +4 to hit and damage when Charging, and drives them back like a Bull Rush.
The Prereqs are Improved Bull Rush for Drive Your Enemy Before You, and Improved Bull Rush, STR 13+, and BAB 6+ for Bull Strike.
Happy Steamrolling!
MP

 

[Clovenhoof]

Damn, these sound good. Especially Bull Strike. Prereqs will certainly be Power Attack and Improved Bull Rush, I hazard. ^^

Looks like I really have to find a way to get the F books, at least the Fiercest one. =)

New question on top of that:
in what cases is the Blind Fight feat useful?
I.e., what ways are there to blind someone, and what invisible creatures are there?
In D&D the feat was pretty useful, but in Conan, I have my doubts.

 

[argo]

1. "prone": I looked and looked, but can't find the effects in my (pocket) core book. So just to be safe, is it equivalent to the SRD?
My interpretation would be: -4 to melee attack rolls, cannot use Ranged attack, -4 to Parry Defence, -4 to Dodge Defence in Melee, +4 to Ranged Defence;
getting up is a MEA that provokes an AoO.

I don't have my books at work but I am 99% certain that it is the equivalent to the SRD version of "prone". Note that while you canot use a bow while prone you can use a crossbow.

2. are Prone characters (if knocked down in combat susceptible to Sneak attacks?

You may sneak attack a target when the target is denied his dodge/parry bonuse to defense, or when you flank the target. Being prone does not deny the target his dodge/parry defense it simply applies a penalty to his defense. However if you flank the prone opponent (as well as him being prone) then you may sneak attack.

3. What is the best way to knock someone prone? I can see two options, either Trip or Overrun.

I believe the "Fling Aside" combat manuver drops the opponent prone. I can't recall any other manuvers off hand.

Overrun / Improved Overrun:
If I got it right, an Overrun attempt "always" provokes an AoO. But we know that always is not always. Under what circumstances does an Improved Overrun not provoke an AoO?
a) If the attacker starts on an adjacent square, he technically makes a 5-foot step, which IIRC should not provoke an AoO.

No, you are not making a 5-foot step as a free action but you are instead moving into your opponent's space as part of the Overrun action and that provokes an AoO. It is a subtle difference but it is a clear distinction.

b) If the attacker starts from further away, he moves 10 feet, so if he has Improved Mobility, he should not provoke an AoO at any rate.
c) if starting on an adjacent square would not prevent an AoO in itself, a character with Improved Mobility might simply retreat a square or two, then advance again to make the Overrun attempt, thus moving more than 10 ft and negating any AoOs.

Improved Movility is fun! :wink:

Trip / Improved Trip:
the text says you make an unarmed touch attack. If you have no hands free, because you are wielding a Two-handed weapon or two weapons, you should be able to make the attack as Off-hand attack with a kick or something.
In that case, do you add only half your Str modifier to either or both of the involved Trip checks?

Yes you may make an unarmed touch attack with your hands full. IIRC you do add your full Str mod in this case, 1/2 Str for off hand only applies to damage rolls.

BTW I think it should be possible to attempt a Trip with a Shield bash attack (just push him over), what do you think?

A shield is not a tripping weapon so you would still resolve this as an unarmed touch attack (including AoO). But feel free to describe it as a shield bash.

I'm thinking about a fighter that engages his opponents, knocks them prone and then wreaks havoc on them as they can't defend themselves properly.

Best way to do this is a Soldier with Improved Trip and Combat Reflexes. I do not recall off hand if there are any tripping weapons that are also reach weapons in Conan, but if there is you want that too.

Problem with this character build is MAD, he needs a good Str, decent Dex and minimum 13 Int. The feat cost is also prohibitive for most non-soldier builds. Plus it is extremely difficult to trip most non-human opponents. That said the trip-monkey is a classic powerbuild.

5. Do creatures of sizes other than Medium have different Massive Damage thresholds? Think about Large 10-ft, 1000-lbs monsters.

No, and considering the source material they probably should not. Conan frequently deals massive damage to all sorts of big nasty creatures (good example in Frost Giant's Daughter). Plus "big monsters" typically have some natural DR and very good Fort saves which help with the massive damage, so they should still be tougher than a "normal" human.

Hope that helps.

 

[argo]

New question on top of that:
in what cases is the Blind Fight feat useful?

Any time your opponent has concealment miss chance (but not cover). Darkness/shadowy light, fog, smoke, heavy folege that does not provide cover, sandstorm, etc.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Thanks argo, I didn't think of that.

Now I have two questions about the Web of Death feat.

First, it has Weapon Focus as prereq, but doesn't specifically state that it's only usable with the chose weapon. I am _assuming_ that this is the case, but some clarification would be appreciated.

My second question is centered around contradicting rules or, more precisely, an override I consider unnecessary.

The book says that your AoO is resolved after the opponent's attack. However, the rules as per SRD specifically state that an AoO is resolved _before_ the action that triggered it. In the simplest case, when you leave a threatened square, you try to get out there, the AoO is resolved, and THEN you move to the adjacent square.

So why is Web of Death different? Are the designers afraid the feat would be too powerful if it stuck to the standard rules? IMHO, it is rather counter-intuitive: if I whirl a blade around so nobody can get near me, I'd expect to hit an attacker _before_ he gets through to me.

I am fully aware that WoD would be very powerful if it allowed you an AoO before you get hit. But then again, that's the idea. What do you think?

To be honest, I'm considering rewriting this feat, so it doesn't need Weapon Focus anymore, and AoOs are resolved in a normal manner. Of course that feat would require other Prereqs then, since it is so powerful.

 

[argo]

TNow I have two questions about the Web of Death feat.

First, it has Weapon Focus as prereq, but doesn't specifically state that it's only usable with the chose weapon. I am _assuming_ that this is the case, but some clarification would be appreciated.

By strict RAW there is no requirement to use the weapon that you have weapon focus with. However I do believe that was the intent and I play it that way IMC.

My second question is centered around contradicting rules or, more precisely, an override I consider unnecessary.

The book says that your AoO is resolved after the opponent's attack. However, the rules as per SRD specifically state that an AoO is resolved _before_ the action that triggered it. In the simplest case, when you leave a threatened square, you try to get out there, the AoO is resolved, and THEN you move to the adjacent square.

So why is Web of Death different? Are the designers afraid the feat would be too powerful if it stuck to the standard rules? IMHO, it is rather counter-intuitive: if I whirl a blade around so nobody can get near me, I'd expect to hit an attacker _before_ he gets through to me.

It's not a contradiction, the specific case of Web of Death overrides the general rule that AoO's resolve before the action that triggers them without invalidating the general rule.

As for why... yes I do believe that it is to keep Web of Death from being too powerful, I think that you already realize the possible ramifications of resolving the AoO first in this case. Considering other similar d20 abilities, such as the Karmic Strike feat (not conan but still d20) this appears to be a widely held design philosophy (or maybe the Mongoose designers just followed the lead of the WotC designers on this one, who knows? :shrug: ).

I have a player (soldier character) with Web of Death and he is quite the effective mook-killer. He gets a bonus to defense and gets to make an attack at his highest BAB against each mook who takes a swing at him, a good combo when surrounded by a horde of low-level types.

Later.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Maybe if there were Epic levels in Conan, there could be an Improved Web of Death resolving the AoO first. ^^

As we're about it: although Conan characters are supposed to be Epic anyway, did anyone here try out counting levels beyond 20?

I am aware that allowing an Epic Level game as in D&D would break the game balance, because instead of choosing what class features to gain at all, you can have everything you want if you play long enough.

However, I am considering the following (plenty of time to decide, since my group is currently lowlevel):
Characters beyond level 20 keep gaining levels as they gather XP in the usual intervals. However, they do not advance any character levels anymore. Instead, they would gain an "Epic class" that's identical for all characters.

What this "Epic" class includes is another question, probably a few hitpoints, maybe a reduced BAB/Saves progression, and/or Ability increases and feats in the usual progression.

What I'm getting at is this: no significant power increase after level 20, but an incentive to keep playing. Some kind of carrot dangling before the players' noses. Otherwise, I'm afraid the players lose interestin their characters if these appear to stagnate.

What are your experiences?

 

[Clovenhoof]

Questions about natural DR, as for example the Barbarian's inherent DR or the DR that some creatures get.

Finesse: I suppose it cannot be bypassed with Finesse attacks, right?
Piercing: can natural DR be halved by the usual Armour Piercing rules?

Stacking: how does natural DR stack with armour worn?
I'd assume that for Finesse attacks, it does not stack with armour when you determine if the attack bypasses the armour, and the full natural DR is deducted from damage.
How is it for normal attacks?

 

[slaughterj]

Questions about natural DR, as for example the Barbarian's inherent DR or the DR that some creatures get.

Finesse: I suppose it cannot be bypassed with Finesse attacks, right?

Why not? Every animal has it's weaker points, e.g., joints, etc., where a weapon could be jammed in with relative ease compared to its general thick hide.

 

[argo]

Re: natural armor

Natural Armor can be penetrated and bypassed with finesse as normal.

Natural Armor stacks with regular Armor (different named bonuses).

 

[Clovenhoof]

New question:
What happens if a Barbarian with the "Unconquerable" class feature fails a Massive Damage save?

Why I ask:
_normal_ beings are dead at -10HP. Massive Damage brings you down to 10HP.
An unconquerable Barb, however, is far from dead at -10HP. With CON18, for example, he can keep fighting down to and including -17HP.

Well?

 

[bjorntfh]

Well... massive damage offically (3.5 D&D) scales at a rate of 10 points per size shift upwards. (Large = 30, Huge = 40, etc.)

 

[argo]

New question:
What happens if a Barbarian with the "Unconquerable" class feature fails a Massive Damage save?

Why I ask:
_normal_ beings are dead at -10HP. Massive Damage brings you down to 10HP.
An unconquerable Barb, however, is far from dead at -10HP. With CON18, for example, he can keep fighting down to and including -17HP.

Well?

The Barbarian is at -10 HP and stable as per Unconquerable.

Aside: I still use the first-edition version of Massive Damage. On a failed save you go to -1 HP.

 

[Soulmage]

Aside: I still use the first-edition version of Massive Damage. On a failed save you go to -1 HP.

You talking about 1st edition D&D? 1st edition D&D was the same way. . . on a failed save you died.

Sometimes I miss saves vs. Spell, RSW, BW, P/P, Pet, and DM. . . . then I come to my senses! LOL!!!

 

[Clovenhoof]

He means the first printing of Conan (page 171). There it says "-1HP and dying". In the AE they changed to to "-10HP and dead". And now that he mentioned it, I finally know why I always think "unconscious and dying" when I hear "Massive Damage" although the current rules say "dead".

I like the 1st printing version better. I guess I'll also use it for our group, goes easier on the PCs' Fate points.

 

[Soulmage]

Ahhhhh OK. I wasn't thinking about AE as "2nd edition" Conan.

 

[Clovenhoof]

AE is sort of "1.5", or well, considering it's mostly bugfixes, maybe "1.1" =)

 

[Trodax]

I like the 1st printing version better. I guess I'll also use it for our group, goes easier on the PCs' Fate points.

Yes, and, as argo once pointed out to me, it also makes the Die Hard feat a bit more useful. I like this version as well.