D&D 3E/3.5 Good news, everyone, I found a system that replaces the combat maneuver system in 3e/Pathfinder.

[N'raac]

Ignoring the complete uselessness of maneuvers if the target gets to choose between taking the results or taking damage instead, based on this system, having a thick, scaly hide makes the target harder to push back, grapple or disarm, but being Huge in size makes all of those easier to accomplish. That makes pretty much no sense whatsoever, thanks.

 

[Viking Bastard]

What about the effect simply requiring a slightly better roll?

Beat the DC to hit = Damage.
Beat the DC to hit by X* = Damage + Effect.

* (5 or 3 or 10 or whatever comes out best math-wise.)

 

[N'raac]

Just saying "beat the creatures' AC" ignores the issue that some things that don't affect AC should affect some of these maneuvers, and other things should impact each differently. Why does having a shield make you harder to Disarm?

As well, some of the maneuvers are presently tactical choices against targets who are very difficult to hit, and this approach would eliminate that tactical aspect.

 

[Empirate]

What about the effect simply requiring a slightly better roll?

Beat the DC to hit = Damage.
Beat the DC to hit by X* = Damage + Effect.

* (5 or 3 or 10 or whatever comes out best math-wise.)

This does nothing about the problems, and actually makes it even more unlikely that combat maneuvers will ever be seen as a viable option by the attacker.

 

[Greenfield]

Just saying "beat the creatures' AC" ignores the issue that some things that don't affect AC should affect some of these maneuvers, and other things should impact each differently. Why does having a shield make you harder to Disarm?

As well, some of the maneuvers are presently tactical choices against targets who are very difficult to hit, and this approach would eliminate that tactical aspect.

A better question: Why does good plate make your weapon harder to sunder?

 

[N'raac]

A better question: Why does good plate make your weapon harder to sunder?

Why, for the same reason being caught with no shield makes it easier! [No good one, that is...]

 

[Greenfield]

The shield might help protect the weapon. The plate armor won't.

 

[MichaelSomething]

If I wanted a new combat system I would use the Codex Martialis!
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/75133/Codex-Martialis-CORE-RULES-V-23
http://www.codexmartialis.com/

 

[Sunseeker]

What about the effect simply requiring a slightly better roll?

Beat the DC to hit = Damage.
Beat the DC to hit by X* = Damage + Effect.

* (5 or 3 or 10 or whatever comes out best math-wise.)

I like this idea, though I would want to assign each maneuver its own DC, ie: attempting a sunder would be a +5 to the target DC(or perhaps a -5 to your attack, depending on how you want to phrase it). The disadvantage to it reducing your attack roll is obvious, though I might favor a flexible maneuver DC system where you can determine which maneuver you use after you see how well you hit. Its got good RP potential in letting players say "when my blow connects so perfectly I follow up with *maneuver*!" And a nice element of surprise that declaring beforehand eliminates.

This does nothing about the problems, and actually makes it even more unlikely that combat maneuvers will ever be seen as a viable option by the attacker.

I disagree. For starters it improves the action economy. You don't need to waste a full action on a maneuver, which often wore off as soon as you used it.

A better question: Why does good plate make your weapon harder to sunder?

For the simple reason that it is attempting to represent targetable "zones", which D&D lacks. I have no doubt that the specific DC for attempting to sunder a wepon would be quite high, given that it is a small, highly mobile object.

 

[N'raac]

For the simple reason that it is attempting to represent targetable "zones", which D&D lacks. I have no doubt that the specific DC for attempting to sunder a wepon would be quite high, given that it is a small, highly mobile object.

OK - then:

- why would the penalty be the same for targetting dagger or a maul? A bigger weapon should be easier to hit, shouldn't it?

- why would it be harder to disarm a dagger held by a target with an 18 DEX and wearing Plate Mail than if the same target is in a loincloth? Shouldn't the latter be harder - he can react better with his full DEX than when encumbered by that metal suit, pulling his dagger out of the way, right?

Really, it should be harder to disarm a skilled warrior than a novice - and the CMD's use of BAB makes that happen quite nicely. Replacing it with AC? Not (nearly) so much.