Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Trip Attack using opposed Dex rolls instead of opposed Str
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Elder-Basilisk" data-source="post: 821050" data-attributes="member: 3146"><p>If you adopt the suggestion, only a moron would ever wear any armor other than mithral chain shirts in your campaign. Why?</p><p></p><p>Because the only reasons to wear armor other than Mithral chain shirt, Breastplate, mithral breastplate, mithral fullplate, or fullplate in the current system are cost and availability (both of which cease to be factors by level 6-8). The total armor class bonus of any of these armors is within a few points:</p><p>Type Armor Dex Total</p><p>None 0 no limit</p><p>Breastplate 5 3 8</p><p>Mithral Chain 4 6 10</p><p>Mithral breastplate 5 5 10</p><p>Fullplate 8 1 9</p><p>Mithral Fullplate 8 3 11</p><p></p><p>Obviously, the choice will depend upon the character's dexterity, how much they invest in dexterity enhancements, and how much they value mobility. So, characters with low dex usually opt for fullplate (occasionally choosing a breastplate or chain shirt if they want manueverability). Characters with high dex usually go for the mithral chain shirt--occasionally opting for a mithral breastplate if they have a 14-16 dex. Mithral fullplate is too expensive for most characters but would be chosen by high level characters who could afford gloves of dex to boost their dex to 16. Most other characters are better off opting for the mithral breastplate.</p><p></p><p>Under your proposed system, the low dexterity fighter is shafted in two signficant ways:</p><p>1. Since his armor check penalty is applied to the opposed dex check, he will usually end up rolling at -4 to -6 in attempt to beat a dextrous character rolling at +4 to +6. He will usually fail. This will deprive him of attacks and, in particular, deprive him of the opportunity to respond to the spring attack+improved trip combo.</p><p></p><p>2. Improved trip is a valuable option already. This change, however, will make it more attractive. As a result, it will usually be easier to hit a character in fullplate (after tripping him) than a character in a chain shirt. (AC 19 for the fullplate warrior at +4 to hit is easier than AC 17-20 for the chain shirt (or mithral chain shirt) warrior who you know better than to try tripping).</p><p></p><p>A few other effects:</p><p>1. At the moment, trip attacks are one of the better ways to counter archers and rogues who actually (I've seen this happen once or twice) fail their tumble checks. It's not easy but at least characters aren't too likely to be tripped in return if they fail. This change makes characters very likely to be tripped in return. Thus, it increases the effectiveness of Tumble (by making it almost absolutely impossible instead of simply impractical to stop the movement) and increase the effectiveness of archers (who are plenty effective enough in my experience).</p><p></p><p>2. It will decrease the options for the type of fighter with the least options while increasing options for the type of fighter with the most options. Light fighters and rogue/duellist types already have the most combat options of any fighter type. Spring attack only works in light or medium armor. Tumble only works in light armor. Whirlwind attack only works in light or medium armor. Multiclassing with monk only works for a light fighter. Fighting defensively is a much better option if you've ranks of tumble (and duellists get bonusses while doing it already). Ranger TWF works only in light armor, etc. And few if any of the strength based options (power attack, cleave, improved critical, sunder, etc) are denied to the light fighter (who usually has a 13+ strength).</p><p></p><p>The tank type fighters who wear heavy armor are the ones whose low movement, inability to run or tumble, etc and typical sub 13 dex (if they had more dex, they'd be wearing lighter armor) precludes a multitude of options to.</p><p></p><p>I suppose there's one other effect this will likely have: instead of being a tactic like sunder or disarm which are occasionally useful but rarely so obviously advantageous as to be automatic, trip will become advantageous enough to be automatic for most rogues. Thus, in an attempt to make combat more diverse, you will actually make it less diverse as the pattern becomes less situation dependent (because trip is now useful in most situations instead of only a few).</p><p></p><p>The trip mechanics do need work, but I think this change would be a change for the worse rather than a change for the better. The fact that it's as easy to trip a 20th level monk or fighter as it is to trip a 1st level wizard with the same stats (and, even if the wizard has a 10 strength, it's not too much harder) is what needs changing--not the stats. A mechanic that involved BAB or the number of iterative attacks would be a much better idea than basing it entirely off of dex.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Elder-Basilisk, post: 821050, member: 3146"] If you adopt the suggestion, only a moron would ever wear any armor other than mithral chain shirts in your campaign. Why? Because the only reasons to wear armor other than Mithral chain shirt, Breastplate, mithral breastplate, mithral fullplate, or fullplate in the current system are cost and availability (both of which cease to be factors by level 6-8). The total armor class bonus of any of these armors is within a few points: Type Armor Dex Total None 0 no limit Breastplate 5 3 8 Mithral Chain 4 6 10 Mithral breastplate 5 5 10 Fullplate 8 1 9 Mithral Fullplate 8 3 11 Obviously, the choice will depend upon the character's dexterity, how much they invest in dexterity enhancements, and how much they value mobility. So, characters with low dex usually opt for fullplate (occasionally choosing a breastplate or chain shirt if they want manueverability). Characters with high dex usually go for the mithral chain shirt--occasionally opting for a mithral breastplate if they have a 14-16 dex. Mithral fullplate is too expensive for most characters but would be chosen by high level characters who could afford gloves of dex to boost their dex to 16. Most other characters are better off opting for the mithral breastplate. Under your proposed system, the low dexterity fighter is shafted in two signficant ways: 1. Since his armor check penalty is applied to the opposed dex check, he will usually end up rolling at -4 to -6 in attempt to beat a dextrous character rolling at +4 to +6. He will usually fail. This will deprive him of attacks and, in particular, deprive him of the opportunity to respond to the spring attack+improved trip combo. 2. Improved trip is a valuable option already. This change, however, will make it more attractive. As a result, it will usually be easier to hit a character in fullplate (after tripping him) than a character in a chain shirt. (AC 19 for the fullplate warrior at +4 to hit is easier than AC 17-20 for the chain shirt (or mithral chain shirt) warrior who you know better than to try tripping). A few other effects: 1. At the moment, trip attacks are one of the better ways to counter archers and rogues who actually (I've seen this happen once or twice) fail their tumble checks. It's not easy but at least characters aren't too likely to be tripped in return if they fail. This change makes characters very likely to be tripped in return. Thus, it increases the effectiveness of Tumble (by making it almost absolutely impossible instead of simply impractical to stop the movement) and increase the effectiveness of archers (who are plenty effective enough in my experience). 2. It will decrease the options for the type of fighter with the least options while increasing options for the type of fighter with the most options. Light fighters and rogue/duellist types already have the most combat options of any fighter type. Spring attack only works in light or medium armor. Tumble only works in light armor. Whirlwind attack only works in light or medium armor. Multiclassing with monk only works for a light fighter. Fighting defensively is a much better option if you've ranks of tumble (and duellists get bonusses while doing it already). Ranger TWF works only in light armor, etc. And few if any of the strength based options (power attack, cleave, improved critical, sunder, etc) are denied to the light fighter (who usually has a 13+ strength). The tank type fighters who wear heavy armor are the ones whose low movement, inability to run or tumble, etc and typical sub 13 dex (if they had more dex, they'd be wearing lighter armor) precludes a multitude of options to. I suppose there's one other effect this will likely have: instead of being a tactic like sunder or disarm which are occasionally useful but rarely so obviously advantageous as to be automatic, trip will become advantageous enough to be automatic for most rogues. Thus, in an attempt to make combat more diverse, you will actually make it less diverse as the pattern becomes less situation dependent (because trip is now useful in most situations instead of only a few). The trip mechanics do need work, but I think this change would be a change for the worse rather than a change for the better. The fact that it's as easy to trip a 20th level monk or fighter as it is to trip a 1st level wizard with the same stats (and, even if the wizard has a 10 strength, it's not too much harder) is what needs changing--not the stats. A mechanic that involved BAB or the number of iterative attacks would be a much better idea than basing it entirely off of dex. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Trip Attack using opposed Dex rolls instead of opposed Str
Top