Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder questions

[dm4hire]

CMD, which stands for Combat Maneuver Defense. This statistic is the DC for anyone else to perform a combat maneuver, such as bull rush, disarm, or grapple, against Valeros. This statistic is derived from his CMB +10 plus a number of other modifiers (Dexterity and deflection bonuses in this case). Note that Valeros adds his weapon training bonuses to his CMD whenever anyone tries to disarm or sunder weapons from those groups (he also adds these bonuses to combat maneuver checks made using weapons from those groups).

You improve CMD by improving your CMB. Essentially it is an oppose check but you're getting the advantage of automatically getting 10 or as he put it, taking 10. I personally would rather take the 10 than risk it. CMB is designed to favor the fighter types who will have higher scores and more likely better success at not being grappled and such.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

You improve CMD by improving your CMB. Essentially it is an oppose check but you're getting the advantage of automatically getting 10 or as he put it, taking 10. I personally would rather take the 10 than risk it. CMB is designed to favor the fighter types who will have higher scores and more likely better success at not being grappled and such.

As Wulf Ratbane noted, there are situations where you are guaranteed to fail by taking 10 while you had a chance if both sides rolled. And more importantly, the changes to the modifiers don't have the same impact as they could have, since the range of dice roll differences has been reduced together with the range of the modifiers.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

You can't take 10 in a combat.

Did Mustrum Ridcully clear this up for you?

Reading your subsequent post, I think so.

As Wulf Ratbane noted, there are situations where you are guaranteed to fail by taking 10 while you had a chance if both sides rolled. And more importantly, the changes to the modifiers don't have the same impact as they could have, since the range of dice roll differences has been reduced together with the range of the modifiers.

Opposed rolls have a possible variance of 19 points: roll of 20 vs. roll of 1.

Rolls against a fixed DC (built on a base 10) have a possible variance of 10 points: roll of 20 vs. fixed 10.

By moving away from the opposed roll format, Pathfinder made it harder for you to "get lucky" against purple worms and such. They kill 9 points of possible advantage.

Having said that, opposed rolls are a time suck at the table.

I'm glad it's gone-- but then I'm also the sort of guy who is glad when purple worms swallow my PCs whole.

Cutting my way out of the gizzard of a purple worm, armed with nothing but a dagger and an infinite supply of Grit, to emerge victorious from its body, covered in gristle and gore-- that's the stuff that Wulf Ratbane is made of.

 

[dm4hire]

The real problem with the discussion, which should be delayed, is we haven't seen a PF monster yet that uses the new CMB/CMD to know if the examples listed would be valid. There also might be spells that now affect CMB/CMD that would make up for the lack as well.

Edit: The nice thing is that we only have to wait till the 20th to find out. That being FreeRPG Day and the Bonus Bestiary will be a preview of the new monster format.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

The real problem with the discussion, which should be delayed.

Ok.

You just let me know when it's ok to talk to other gamers about things we're all interested in.

 

[dm4hire]

I'm not saying we can't talk about it, I'm just pointing out the fallacy of debating situational encounters with only partial information. We're assuming that CMB for monsters will be similar to their grapple they currently have in 3.5. How do we even know that the Purple Worm even stats out the same with the PF revision?

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I'm not saying we can't talk about it, I'm just pointing out the fallacy of debating situational encounters with only partial information. We're assuming that CMB for monsters will be similar to their grapple they currently have in 3.5.

You seem to be assuming that there is some point to the discussion other than simply to have a discussion.

How do we even know that the Purple Worm even stats out the same with the PF revision?

Ok, first of all, who cares? The discussion is the ends, not the means to some other end (such as, for example, "Criticize Pathfinder!" Not that I would ascribe motives to you or your attempt to delay the discussion.)

But to your point-- for the purposes of discussion only:

Are suggesting that there's going to be more changes to the purple worm-- or any other monster-- than the special size modifier?

Do you anticipate different hit dice, different BAB, different STR, different AC, and so forth?

The only change I anticipate is the combat maneuver mechanic (which includes the "Special Size Modifier.")

 

[DaveMage]

Cutting my way out of the gizzard of a purple worm, armed with nothing but a dagger and an infinite supply of Grit, to emerge victorious from its body, covered in gristle and gore-- that's the stuff that Wulf Ratbane is made of.

At which point, of course, "muscular action closes the hole".

Yeah, baby! *cue appropriate music*

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

At which point, of course, "muscular action closes the hole".

Yeah, baby!

I'm not the kind of guy to leave the hole before the job is done.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Cutting my way out of the gizzard of a purple worm, armed with nothing but a dagger and an infinite supply of Grit, to emerge victorious from its body, covered in gristle and gore-- that's the stuff that Wulf Ratbane is made of.

I did this once. With "I" meaning a character of mine and "Purle Worm" being a Shark. And I am not sure I cut my way out alone, the other PCs might have made the killing shot. But otherwise, exactly like that.