The Veteran's Tavern (combat discussion)

[Clovenhoof]

But this makes me think that there should be no penalty when the targets moves towards you.

To quote a WW2 fighter pilot, "you need to shoot an empty spot in the sky that will be full of airplane when the bullet arrives".

Here we have to define what level of detail we want and, accordingly, how complicated we allow the mechanism to get. Of course "leading" a target is much more difficult for lateral movement. I wouldn't want to figure out at what angle a target is moving any time an arrow is fired.

Moreover, keep in mind that a bow is not a rifle. You can shoot about 200 metres/yards without taking elevation into account, BUT arrows travel much slower, more like 1/20 the speed of a bullet. At short distances, it's enough to shoot straight at the target, but at longer distances, you need to shoot a considerable arc, and the arrow has to come down at a certain point in the enemy's parth at the exact time when he is there (so it's more difficult than shooting a stationary target at long distance).

Normal human movement is 30ft/round, full movement is 60ft; run is 120ft, not counting Fleet Footed and Run feats. Horses have a base speed of 50 or up to 70ft, and all have the Run feat, so the fastest ones run at 350ft/round (around 40mph).

You'll agree with me that hitting a target that runs at 40mph is no piece of cake. Though of course it's easier if it comes charging head on.

Anyway, before I try to come up with a new mechanism, I'd still like to hear if there is an official ruling.

 

[rgrove0172]

I dont have my book with me right now but I believe you';ll find the note on range modifiers with the weapons, explaining the "range factor" - and I believe -2 per is correct.

As to moving targets, its extremely subjective. I include them but on a "GM declaration" only, not even trying to work out a rule. The target's size, speed, angle to the shooter, time in line of sight, relative hieght etc. all could effect the shot.

I normally just levy a -1 to -5 or so target movement modifier and let it ride.

 

[Axerules]

If I interpret the rules correctly, even a charging rider with set lance has a right to a Ride check (if he has the Mounted Combat feat) to avoid the spear you set against his charge. So I'd still rather place a bet on the rider.
(...)
In real life, it's probably far easier to hit the horse. In Conan, thanks to the Mounted Combat feat, the mount can easily have a higher DV than the rider (although the rider gets the Higher Ground bonus).

Don't forget that the Mounted Combat feat can't be used more than once per round. It can only negate one attack. So the tactic would be very different against a rider if you are alone or if several characters are on foot fighting him.

By the way: are mounts like horses, especially warhorses, also affected by Terror?

Of course, a horse should not be braver than his rider. Note that there's an action describded under the "Ride" skill : control a frightened mount.

 

[Kargush]

Well, you can always try the "conga-line": form up in a line "pointing" towards the rider. Any party tanks go in front. Everyone then readies actions to attack the mount(remove the mount, and the rider has to run...). If the rider attacks the front man and stops there, the party can gang up on him, and potentially drag him from the saddle. If he does a ride-by-attack, the entire(potentially) party gets to hammer the mount. With some luck the rider looses. This tactic only works when you have a tank and are facing a single rider.

Another good tactic is the ambush.This requires some for of cover or a very good hide check. Hide(in cover if you have it), and take the rider by surprise when he comes near.

A third option is to trip the mount. This can be combined with the aforementioned tactics. The rider can take damage, and will have to spend an action to mount the mount, and whilst he is down on the ground, he can be attacked at will. If combined with the ambush, some rope can do it nicely.

And, finally, unhorse the rider. IIRC, DnD has rules for "tripping" the rider off the mount. If you have access to DnD, use it. A little fixing is all that is needed.

My 2 copper pieces.

 

[Clovenhoof]

"Conga line" *rofl*

@Axerules: oh, only once per round, I see. I somehow recalled as the Ride check being the horse's new AC for the remainder of the round. Either that was D&D, or I am mixing that up with some other game.

As for the fear check, I was asking because it could be that the mount does not even realize there is a reason for fear. But fair enough. Thanks. ^^

 

[argo]

Ok, on to Mounted Combat then.

As mentioned, using a ready action to set a reach weapon is the best tactic to counter a charging knight. If the weapon is one which specifies you can "set" it against a charge then the ready action deals double damage! Also, you may want to see if your GM will port in the "Stand the Line" feat from DnD which gives you an AoO when a charging opponent enters your threatened space - that's three attacks on the charging knight!

And don't forget to power attack either, the knight is at a -2 DV penalty for charging and your pike is a two handed weapon.

Your other option is to try and turtle up. Heavy armor, big shield and full defense. Without ride-by attack the knight stops when his charge hits you, with it he will have to Overrun (trample) you to keep going but if you have a formation behind you he has a good chance of bogging down in the melee. As in the real world a knight who is surrounded in melee has lost his best offense (the charge) and is in real danger. Tough out that first onslaught without breaking and you can win.

Speaking of formations, that is another key for infantry looking to defeat a charge, pack 'em in tight. Imagine a shield-man using full defense. Behind him is an empty 5' square for him to retreat into. Behind that is a readied pikeman who threatens the two squares in front of the shield man, behind that another readied pikeman who threatens the suare in front of the shield man and the square he stands in so that when the shield man falls back the second pike man threatens the two squares in front of him again. Note the two pike men also overlap a square of threatened area. Behind that you have a reserve of men at arms to move forward once the charge bogs down. Behind that you have a support of cross/bowmen who will plink at the knights from extreme range for harrasment effect.

On a more strategic scale, if you can choose your ground or prepare your ground before the fight then you can set traps for the knights. You can also place obstacles in their way - you can't charge without a straight line to the target. Likewise you can't run or charge on very bad terrain - I don't recall the exact rule for this offhand and don't have my books at work, will look it up later.

If I interpret the rules correctly, even a charging rider with set lance has a right to a Ride check (if he has the Mounted Combat feat) to avoid the spear you set against his charge. So I'd still rather place a bet on the rider.

The knight can't use Mounted Combat to defend himslef, only his mount. He can however make a ride check to use his mount as cover (and gain a cover bonus to DV). If he does so and if you miss him but rolled well enough to hit if he didn't have cover, that is if you rolled over his normal DV but his cover bonus is what saved him, then the rule for soft cover appllies and your attack resolves itself against the mount. However then the knight can use Mounted Combat to save his mount. So it is all good.

Note that you can only use Mounted Combat one time per round. So with multiple attacks as discussed above the mount can still be in trouble.

However, here's a matter for discussion: do you attack the mount, or the rider?

At low levels the mount may have more HP than it's rider! However once you hit mid-to-upper level horses become very soft targets (mounted combat notwithstanding) and most mid-level PC's can drop a horse in one full-round attack sequence. Once the knight hits the ground he looses many of his advantages as you detailed. However horses are valuable so it is up to the players how much they want to risk for the loot :wink:

You can also use a trip attack to pull the knight off of his mount. Though the rules don't say it I'd think its not too much of a stretch to use the grapple rules to unmount the knight either, just pin the knight then use the option to move your opponent after pinning him.

Do not try to trip the horse as Kragush suggested. Horses get bonuses to defend against trip for having four legs and more bonuses for being size large and that is on top of having a decent strength to begin with. Even for someone with Improved Trip trying to take down a large-sized quadrueped is a fool's errand.

Hope that helps.

 

[argo]

Which reminds me of another question, what are the penalties for Ranged Attacks?

I think there is a range penalty of -2 for every range increment beyond the first, but atm I can't even find that in the book. Anyway I'm quite sure I remember that.

-2 for each full range increment. So that is no penalty up to the first range increment, -2 within the second, -4 within the third, etc.

Also you take a -1 penalty to AP for each full range increment! That quickly puts most ranged weapons out of the running at extreme range vs. heavy armor.

Which point out - the best defense against ranged attacks is good armor, it is very hard to increase damage-per-attack for ranged weapons so good DR will really have those arrows bouncing off you. The second best defense is cover, anything to break line-of-sight while you move close enough to stab the archer in the face!

The best offensive tactic for archers is to try and trap your opponents at range and don't spare the ammo. The advantage of archery is that you get to make more full-round attacks than melee. Use it! Even if you can only hit on a 20 because of range penalties and if you have to roll well on damage because of DR just open up on the other guy and wear him down 1 HP at a time. Every round you can roll an attack on him that he can't respond in kind is a good round. Just keep an eye on your ammo.

But what is the penalty for shooting a moving target? There has to be _some_. And it should depend on the target's speed. Again, that doesn't seem to be covered by the rules.

Ugh, I vaguely remember a bonuse to ranged defense for moving but I'm not sure if that was SRD or some variant d20 game, I'll have to look later.

Howerver, and this is a point many people miss, unless you have the Run feat you loose your Dex bonus while running, IOW you are flat footed while running and have DV of 10 :shock:

If you want to cover ground against a ranged opponent (and do not have the Run feat) you have two options:
- start prone, use a move action to stand up, use a move action to move your speed, drop prone as a free action. You do not become flat-footed and you have a +4 bonus to DV against ranged attacks for prone
- if there is total cover available you can use a full-round action to run in a straight line up to 4x your speed. End your move behind full cover and your ranged attacker cannot hit you when his turn comes up. This represents the "darting from cover to cover" move. Of course then the attacker readies an action to shoot when you pop out again, which if you are running at the time means you have DV 10. Better hope those range penalties are working in your favor now!

Hope that helps!

 

[Axerules]

@Axerules: oh, only once per round, I see. I somehow recalled as the Ride check being the horse's new AC for the remainder of the round. Either that was D&D, or I am mixing that up with some other game.

Perhaps in D&D or in another game, but in the SRD there's nothing about the new AC lasting the whole round:

MOUNTED COMBAT [GENERAL]
Prerequisite: Ride 1 rank.
Benefit: Once per round when your mount is hit in combat, you may attempt a Ride check (as a reaction) to negate the hit. The hit is negated if your Ride check result is greater than the opponent’s attack roll. (Essentially, the Ride check result becomes the mount’s Armor Class if it’s higher than the mount’s regular AC.)
Special: A fighter may select Mounted Combat as one of his fighter bonus feats.

As for the fear check, I was asking because it could be that the mount does not even realize there is a reason for fear. But fair enough. Thanks.

I think that an animal will, on the contrary, be more sensitive to unnatural things. Note that it is only my opinion and I don't remember if something was written about this in the books.

 

[Clovenhoof]

@argo: great job writing those treatises, as usual. =) Thanks for that.

I can't even think of any further questions. That probably covers the essentials of mounted attacks, defense against these, and ranged combat.

Alright, new topic, anyone?

In the meantime:
How frequent are special manoevres like Bull Rush, Trip and suchlike in your groups? How many characters have the appropriate "Improved" Feats?

And as we're at feats, how important do you deem Improved Initiative?
I imagine it's a must-have for Soldiers since they have bad Ref saves. And how about classes with good Reflex saves? After all, there are relatively many of them, and so is the likelyhood of encountering enemies with good Ref and, accordingly, high Ini.

 

[Axerules]

And as we're at feats, how important do you deem Improved Initiative?
I imagine it's a must-have for Soldiers since they have bad Ref saves.

• I have the same opinion. Improved initiative and, if your Soldier has a positive Intelligence modifier, 5 ranks in Knowledge (War) (from Free Companies) to gain the +2 synergy bonus to Initiative. Note that in my campaign, they don't have to be so intelligent, I added Knowledge (War) to the Soldier clas skill list.

And how about classes with good Reflex saves? After all, there are relatively many of them, and so is the likelyhood of encountering enemies with good Ref and, accordingly, high Ini.

• IMO classes that have access to Sneak Attack will find this feat very useful, because the thief will always want to act first and as you noticed it, there are a lot of classes with good reflex saves. If the Thief is not able to use his Sneack Attack during the first round of most fight scenes, because he cannot win Initiative against Borderers or Nomads, he sucks.

• It's not important if your character is multiclassed in two classes having good Reflex saves, except for a Thief/Pirate or a Thief/Temptress who will still need a high Initiative for using his Sneak Attack.

• I have also experienced that when the charaters become powerful, they are very lethal and have the ability to inflict high damages with almost every hit. A fight between two high-level opponents is mostly resolved with winning initiative and killing your opponent first so it becomes useful for all the classes when you are around 10th level.

 

[Valgrim Bragisson]

Hi Clovenhoof,

IMO, Improved Initiative is too good for anyone NOT to take. He who hits first lives longest! Lightning Reflexes is almost as vital. As for classes with good ref saves: If quick is good, than quicker is better.

Combat Manoevers haven't come up much in our game. I think I've used To The Hilt once, and I remember another guy Bull Rushing one time. They are mostly stepping stones to related Feats. BTW, two manoevers are missing from the official Character Sheet. To The Hilt and Sundering Parry. Are there any Homebrew sheets with these included?

MP

 

[Kargush]

Well, a barbarian with improved sunder and a large weapon can seriously mess up enemies, especially if enraged. He'll also have power attack, thus adding to the havoc.

Other than that I see little "improved" feats aside from initiative and the aforementioned sunder.

 

[Clovenhoof]

In the old days, there was the saying "Going first is good, going last is better". But that was before Massive Damage. ^_^

So Improved Initiative is a good deal, but so far I've recommonded Lightning Reflexes only for characters with bad Ref saves. Concerning Initiative, burning a feat slot for a measly +2 doesn't seem very cost-effective.
And as for actual saving throws, any Ref save is only half as good without Evasion to go with it. Besides, I expect significantly fewer Ref saves in Conan than in D&D, due to the lack of dragons and all those attack spells.

As for combat manoeuvres, from what I've read so far it's simply more effective in Conan to just go in and strike for damage.

I'm not a big fan of Sunder, and in my game I have changed it so that a successful Sunder deals damage to _both_ weapons. It's just realistic. You can't hit a blade with a blade, and expect the other blade to break without yours even taking a nick. So I changed that and I don't it will ever be very popular in my game.

When I played Neverwinter Nights, a very effective tactics was Knockdown. Note that NWN is somewhat different from 3E in certain aspects. But effectively, Knockdown (a feat) meant you could take a -4 penalty to an attack, and on a hit, deal the usual damage _and_ force the target to resist being knocked prone (usually they fell). Then there was also Improved Knockdown, which made you count one size category larger, so your penalty was reduced by 4 and effectively you could even knock down Huge creatures (this worked very often).
So of course it would be nice to have something like that in Conan -- not just the wussy Trip that doesn't deal damage on the Trip attempt.

 

[argo]

RE: Improved Initiative
It is certainly one of the best feats out there. Not because it is the most powerful feat, but because you get to use it every fight and because it is a good choice for any character build. Everybody benefits from being able to do whatever it is that they do before the other guy does it to them. For a Thief this feat is practically manditory. But because your flat-footed DV is 10 it is good for anybody - power attacking Barbarians can charge and kill you in one hit if you are flat-footed. Even if your character doesn't have a one-hit-kill strategy it may still be worthwhile as a defensive investment, acting before the other guy means you aren't flat-footed and have the opportunity to go full defense or get out of harms' way.

RE: the "Improved" feats
The Improved feats reward specilization, as a general rule. They are without a doubt the Soldier's best friend as the entrance requirements make them expensive for classes without bonus feats. Conversely the Soldier is not penalized too much for blowing feats on a "trick" that he only uses some of the time, he can afford to keep up whatever his main strategy is and have some of these to use when he can.

RE: Bull Rush
Obviously knicking people off cliffs, etc provides for endless fun. However not all combats end up that way. Generally the usefulness of this depends on how creative your GM is in setting up intresting enviroments for fights. However with creative team-work this can be very effective. If you bull rush an opponent past your allies they can take AoO's on them, likewise if you bull rush them into a corner you can set them up for a world of hurt the following round. It it also usefull to keep the enemy off your "soft" targets, a good meatshield should be able to push the enemy away from a VIP or push a hole in the enemy line for an ally to move through and exploit. Note that this stunt is usefull for fighting opponent's who are tweaked to avoid normal damage or who are higher level - no attack roll is required to hit and an opposed Str check goes to the guy with the better attribute, regardless of level. Charging provides a +2 bonus to the Str check which is huge for an ability check. The Improved feat practically guarantees a win but may not be worth it otherwise unless you use this stunt a lot.

RE: Overrun
Much of the same advice that applies to Bull Rush applies to Overrun. This is good for blitzing past enemy defenses (if you don't have the tumble skill). Want to sack the enemy sorcorer? Overrun his meatshields and his ass is yours. Much like Bull Rush it is good to use against otherwise hard-to-hit opponents - no attack roll and an opposed ability check. Note that the enemy winds up prone after you finish, and although the stunt lets you continue past the enemy up to the limit of your move nothing says you can't stop in the square adjacent to him. This has led me to start calling Improved Overrun "The Improved Trip feat for stupid fighters". If you don't have the Int for Imp Trip you can take Imp Overrun and have much of the same effect.

Actual Play: for an arena fight I put together three low-level Soldier NPC's (they were triplets) and gave them all Imp Overrun and Combat Reflexes. The strategy was they would gang up on 1 PC and start overruning until one of them was successful. This left them in a triangle formation (flanking bonuses!) surrounding a single prone PC (-4 to DV for prone). Things got nasty after that point, what with provoking 3 AoO's just to stand up (and maybe more to try and escape). They were amazingly effective against my PC scholar with Oriental Magic who normally has a Dodge DV of about 27 or so. These guys wouldn't be able to hit him on aything but a 20 normally but with this strategy and use of Aid Another (and flanking... and prone...) they really frustrated the player.

RE: Sunder
I play sunder by the RAW. Again it gets used rarely as PC's have an instinctive aversion to destroying their own loot however that problem is not as bad in Conan where there is less magical treasure. If you encounter an enemy using special equipment sunder can really help you out - tired of taking hits from that greatsword, then break it! Also you can sunder an opponent's shield which could be just the thing to give you the edge (no more +4 parry bonus for you mister! ). It does require an opposed attack roll though, which means it works best against equall or lower level opponents, and those are the ones you are most likely to take down with straight HP damage anyway. Improved Sunder helps a lot with this though. Greater Sunder however rocks, matter of fact I will go so far as to say it rocks on toast. Espically when you combine it with the Cat's Parry manuver. That is a nasty combo right there.


This post is too long already, more to come.

 

[argo]

RE: Trip
Do not understimate the "wussy trip" stunt. Getting laid out on your back is bad news in d20 combat. -4 to DV and -4 to your melee attacks make it hard to do anything. Standing up is a move action which provokes an AoO, that means you don't get to full attack, it also means you have to choose between attacking and running away once you do stand up. If you can trip your opponent near your allies then they can gang up on him, putting some extra into Power attack for your prone DV and getting their AoO's as well (see my last post, the Overrun Triplets). Improved Trip is an awsome feat in the hands of a warrior tweaked to exploit it, trip them, get your free attack when they have -4 to DV, then use your itteratives like normal, then when they stand up take your AoO still at -4 DV. Nasty. Note that this build suffers from MAD - you need a good Str to trip, a 13+ Int for Combat Expertise and probably a decent Dex and Combat Reflexes to make the most out of your AoO's. If you can do this with a reach weapon you can trip them as they approach you using your AoO, take the free hit from Imp Trip, full attack them, then take more AoO's when their turn comes back again. Super Nasty.

Note that this is not as usefull against opponents with a good Dodge DV. In DnD touch attacks are super good against fighters because it ignores AC bonus from armor. In Conan touch attacks are still good against tank characters who neglect their Dodge DV but is less usefull against Dex-monkeys (and barbarians).

RE: Feint
This is good because your opponent winds up with DV 10 if you are successful (and open to sneak attack). This is bad because it takes one round to activate, so you get one hit every other round. It also requires a significant investment in skill points (luckily Bluff is one of the best skills to have). The Improved Feint feat is almost required to use this, by feinting as a move action it just means you give up your iterative attacks to feint. IOW you trade many hits for one big one. Which can backfire if you roll a nat 1. REMEMBER, this is good for more than just a thief. DV 10 means you power attackers can go to town, it also means you finesse fighters can slip past their armor. Expertise has a prereq of Int 13, that means you are getting bonus skill points. Even a soldier can use the bonus skill points from Int to put max ranks in Bluff and power attack the opponent's DV 10 :shock: The downside is your opponent gets to add his BAB as a special bonus to his sense motive check. This means it works best against opponents of a lower level than you, once again the opponents you are most likely to kill with plain HP damage. It also means it is nearly useless against a full-BAB opponent of higher level than you, or any opponen who has mad even a minimal investment in Sense motive. Even a soldier with Int 13, who invests in a simple 3 points or 5 points of Sense Motvie will be mostly save from being feinted

Special note for Thieves. Improved Feint should NOT be your bread-and-butter combat strategy. Using it means you stand still for a full round. Standing still for a full round means that if you don't drop your opponent in one hit you risk getting crushed by his response of itterative attacks. It is still a good feat for those times when you find yourself seperated from your allies and with no choice but to fight, but don't think it is going to let you play with the big boys on a regular basis.

Actual Play: I had my players in a gladiator arena for a while, their arena trainer was supposed to be a mean old "dirty tricks" type fighter. He was a single class soldier with an Int 13 (needed for Combat Expertise). He had put max ranks in Bluff and took Skill Focus - Bluff (easy for him, he has plenty of bonus feats) and then Imp Feint. I had him call out the party barbarian in trainning for "using his muscles instead of his brain to fight". Challenged to 1-on-1 with padded war clubs. The Barb fails his sense motive, the NPC goes maximum power attack with a 2 two handed club, the Bab fails his massive damage fort save and is unconscious on the floor. All the players were trying to figgure out the NPC's build and how he had so many dice of sneak attack... heh heh.. :twisted:

RE: Disarm
Leaving your opponent empty-handed is just plain awsome. Plus they provoke an AoO when they try to pick up the dropped weapon. And do not forget that they take a penalty to parry DV without a weapon or shield to parry with (unless they have Improved Unarmed Strike). Also, you can use the disarm action to disarm other held objects such as wands or the like as well as to "disarm" loosely secured worn objects such as a pouch or something. Can be very handy in the right circumstances. Making a Unarmed Disarm is very cool because you have the option to be left holding the opponent's weapon! Stab the other guy with his own sword! Problem there is that unarmed strikes are light weapons and light weapons take a -4 penalty to disarm. Which means you aren't going to be yoinking the other guy's greatsword any time soon (+4 bonus for a two handed weapon). The main downside of this stunt is that it provokes an AoO and if they deal damage to you with the AoO then your disarm attempt automatically fails. This makes the Improved Disarm feat almost manditory. Also it has the same promblem as other opposed-attack-roll stunts, namely it works best against low-level mooks and not very well against the BBEG. Still if you are a player who favors style - then you can hardly go wrong here.

Grapple deserves to be a discussion unto itself, we should do that later.


Special note for Bull Rush, Overrun and Trip. These stunts are to be used against humanoid opponents of the same size as you ONLY. You get a +4 bonuse for each difference in size category and another bonus to resist for having more than 2 legs, this is murder for an opposed ability check.

Hope that helps.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Another note on Trip:
With the Improved Trip feat you don't provoke an AoO, get a +4 bonus to the check and get a free melee attack upon success. All very nice.
However, it has Combat Expertise as a Prereq. That feat combo is not an option for everyone, due to the Int prereq and simply because it eats up those feat slots.

It should be noted that, if C.E. is not an option, you can still avoid the AoO if you have Improved Unarmed Strike. The trip rule reads "This provokes an AoO from your target as normal for unarmed attacks" - hence, IUS should prevent this.
You don't get the +4 bonus, nor the free follow-up attack, but it's still better than nothing and you need only one feat without prereqs instead of two. And of course, IUS is also useful in other situations.

As argo wrote, Improved Overrun can also be used to emulate Improved Trip. Note that you are not only free to stop at an adjacent square, it says nowhere you can't start on an adjacent square, either. You don't provoke an AoO, you get a +4 bonus, but you don't get the free followup attack. So it's always a tradeoff.

And last not least, you also ignore the AoO if you simply have Improved Mobility and move 2 squares during your turn. You don't get a free attack nor a bonus, but if you have the right class(es) it costs no feat at all.

For all these ways to get an opponent on the ground, you always run the risk of being knocked prone yourself. So you should be pretty sure that's not going to happen, unless you are really desparate.

Here's a tricky question:
suppose you are cornered and surrounded, and you have Improved Mobility but none of the "Improved" feats. You try to trip or overrun one of your enemies to get the hell out of the corner. See what I'm getting at?
Normally you provoke an AoO. However, if you manage to knock an opponent prone, you can move out of there, thus fulfilling the 10-ft condition that triggers Improved Mobility, negating any AoOs. However, if you fail at getting out, you can't move and thus suffer the AoOs.
How can that be resolved?
The rules don't say you have to have moved 10ft first to ignore an AoO, it rather says you just have to move 10ft some time during that round, which you may well be able to if your getaway attempt isn't ruined by damage from an AoO.

The only solution I can think of right now would be to resolve the AoO as normal, but don't apply any damage until it's clear whether the character can move or not. If he can move, forget that AoO, and if he can't, deal the damage previously rolled. It's not realistic and hard to convey, but it's the only way I can think of that doesn't violate the Trip/Overrun and Improved Mobility rules.

Your opinion?

 

[argo]

It should be noted that, if C.E. is not an option, you can still avoid the AoO if you have Improved Unarmed Strike. The trip rule reads "This provokes an AoO from your target as normal for unarmed attacks" - hence, IUS should prevent this.

You are correct, also if you use a "triping" weapon you do not provoke the AoO (you used a weapon, not an unarmed touch attack) and if you fail the trip and are tripped in turn you may drop the weapon instead of being tripped. But you can only do this with a special "trip" weapon.

For all these ways to get an opponent on the ground, you always run the risk of being knocked prone yourself. So you should be pretty sure that's not going to happen, unless you are really desparate.

Very good point. Its a calculated risk. Note that Improved Trip does not make you immune to the counter-trip if you fail.

Here's a tricky question:
suppose you are cornered and surrounded, and you have Improved Mobility but none of the "Improved" feats. You try to trip or overrun one of your enemies to get the hell out of the corner. See what I'm getting at?
Normally you provoke an AoO. However, if you manage to knock an opponent prone, you can move out of there, thus fulfilling the 10-ft condition that triggers Improved Mobility, negating any AoOs. However, if you fail at getting out, you can't move and thus suffer the AoOs.
How can that be resolved?

This is a really tough one, and there is no good answer. On the one hand you are right that the rules simply say you have to move 10 ft over the course of the round, not just before you provoke the AoO. On the other hand your scenario is a good example of where this breaks down. Or even worse, imagine any scenario where the guy with Improved Mobility provokes an AoO, if the defender used his AoO to trip or grapple then that ends the barbarian's movement right there (asuming the defender is successful in the AoO) No 10ft of movement means no Improved Mobility and this can happen any time.

I think the best answer would be to house rule that you have to move at least 10ft before the AoO to activate Improved Mobility. Because quantum-state rules adjutications make my head hurt.

Note that in this case the character's regular Mobility ability would still apply before he moves 10ft. So he isn't totally nerfed.

Later.

 

[Axerules]

Hello Clovenhoof and Argo ! About Improved Mobility, I houseruled that only AoO because of movement are avoided. It is a little bit more restrictive but still a good class feature and it solves the kind of situation you talked about in the two lasts posts. It seems also more logical to me that Improved Mobility should not help to prevent AoO triggered by using Unarmed Strikes without the Feat or Trip attempts without the Improved Feat.

 

[argo]

@Axerules

Well, that still doesn't solve all the wierdness.

Say the barbarian begins his turn standing next to an opponent. He moves away from that opponent which would normally provoke an AoO. The barbarian has not yet moved 10 feet at the time he provokes the AoO (he has only moved 5 feet at that time).

Improved Mobility states that if the barbarian moves 10 feet in the round he never provokes an AoO. But if the defender uses his AoO to, lets say, grapple the barbarian then the barbarian's turn ends before he got to move 10 feet. So does the defender get the AoO or not?

Heck, the defender could even skip special stunts alltogether. He could attack normally and deal enough damage to kill the barbarian outright. The barbarian drops dead after moving 5 feet. Again the AoO prevented the barbarian from moving 10 feet but if the barbarian had moved 10 feet it would have negated the AoO.

It can drive you nuts if you try to play it by the straight RAW.


And as for your house-rule. Well, I say let them avoid all AoO's period if it encourages them to try more ourtageous stunts - and therefore make the game more interesting.

Later.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Or even worse, imagine any scenario where the guy with Improved Mobility provokes an AoO, if the defender used his AoO to trip or grapple then that ends the barbarian's movement right there (asuming the defender is successful in the AoO) No 10ft of movement means no Improved Mobility and this can happen any time.

Well, in cases like that I don't really see a problem with I.M. - that is, if you have a clear path, even if all the squares on your path are threatened. You announce a move that is possible, and thus the I.M. triggers and you don't provoke AoOs.
I really only see a problem when it only becomes apparent _after_ a possible AoO whether the character can move at all or not.

Well, I say let them avoid all AoO's period if it encourages them to try more ourtageous stunts