D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] check my logic: a way to stand up from prone without being tripped again
CyberSpyder
First Post
Snipehunt said:
Kind of silly, when you think about it. One would presume that being sprawled on the ground would at least put some dampener on your ability to dodge attacks...
Malin Genie
First Post
I have been ruling it that an AoO on someone trying to stand up takes place as they start to stand. Therefore the attacker gets the +4 attack bonus for a prone opponent, but as the opponent is not (yet) standing, she cannot be tripped.
I plan to allow the trip chain -- I don't see it coming up as a real problem that often, and there's an issue that I haven't noticed here (although I could have missed it). Tripping is risky. Our Spiked Chain dude is gonna roll lousy at least once, and when he does, his opponent gets to try and trip him for free. If Spiked Chain Dude is doing this multiple times, there's a good chance that he'll be tripped himself -- or that he'll have to ditch his weapon to avoid being tripped. The problem people are seeing is really self-correcting, in my opinion.
Snipehunt
First Post
Tripping is a risk, but the +4 from Improved Trip, plus the monstrous str. your trip fighter is going to have, make it very likely that, everything else equal, the tripper makes the trip extremely often. Plus, you can drop your chain, pick it up next round, and start the tripping again.
Even then, it's probably roughly 50-50 that the tripper actualy gets counter-tripped. The +4, IIRC, applies to all trip checks - but it might just be attacks, I can't remember, so I didn't factor that in.
Even then, it's probably roughly 50-50 that the tripper actualy gets counter-tripped. The +4, IIRC, applies to all trip checks - but it might just be attacks, I can't remember, so I didn't factor that in.
According to the SRD, it's only on trip attacks, not on defenses against trip attacks. I agree -- it's a good chain. But still, I don't think it's unbeatable.
Eventually, he's gonna roll poorly, and then there's a good chance that he loses his weapon. And if he DOES lose his weapon, as the opponent, my next move is to either grab the weapon myself or throw it over the nearest cliff -- assuming that I don't have Sunder as a feat. Heck, if I'm a mage, I'll just cast Grease on the now unattended item.
Heck, if I see a guy with a spiked chain, my very first move is a Sunder attempt. After all, anyone with one of those things probably specializes in it, and I doubt he's got another one in his backpack.
Eventually, he's gonna roll poorly, and then there's a good chance that he loses his weapon. And if he DOES lose his weapon, as the opponent, my next move is to either grab the weapon myself or throw it over the nearest cliff -- assuming that I don't have Sunder as a feat. Heck, if I'm a mage, I'll just cast Grease on the now unattended item.
Heck, if I see a guy with a spiked chain, my very first move is a Sunder attempt. After all, anyone with one of those things probably specializes in it, and I doubt he's got another one in his backpack.
Snipehunt
First Post
Oh, I agree, it's definitely beatable - it's nothing like Gate, for instance. But IMO the trip fighter is now overly powerful. The combination of reach (w/ chain), AoO (for standing), and improved trip (+4, free attack) is overpowering. For large characters, give them another +4, for a total of +8 to the trip check. The chances of failing the trip, and also failing the counter-trip, are not very high.
Sunder's cool, in fact a must-have against a chain wielder. But the "I'll just sunder the weapon" defense works against every fighter, and is hard to pull off, esp. with the 3.5 adamantium +5 weapons.
Also, it'll be hard to sunder the chain b/c of reach. Particularly for large characters. My guess is a melee fighter will be hard-pressed to get within reach of a large, chain-wielding trip-fighter.
Sunder's cool, in fact a must-have against a chain wielder. But the "I'll just sunder the weapon" defense works against every fighter, and is hard to pull off, esp. with the 3.5 adamantium +5 weapons.
Also, it'll be hard to sunder the chain b/c of reach. Particularly for large characters. My guess is a melee fighter will be hard-pressed to get within reach of a large, chain-wielding trip-fighter.
Yo Snipe,
You make some good points. I'm not sure why you're bringing size into the equation -- in general, being large is almost always better than being small, and most PCs are going to be small or medium-sized. (At least, in core campaigns. I personally don't dig on non-standard-race PCs, and if playing a large PC messes up game balance, then all the more reason not to allow large PCs except when they're polymorphed.)
Let's look at what Chainy needs:
1) Exotic Weapon Prof: Spiked Chain
2) Expertise (Int13+)
3) Combat Reflexes (say Dex13+ to make real use out of it)
4) Improved Trip
Now, I don't see a ton of people NOT having a Dex of 13+ if they're playing a combat character. The Int13+, though, costs a bit. If you're going with Point Buy, that means fewer points left to get the Strength higher and up that Dex into nastyland.
You're giving up damage and/or defense (using a greatsword or using a bastard sword and shield) for a cute trick -- the reach and trip deal. And you're buying feats that make that combo worthwhile -- which, in my book, is fine. Heck, I could trip you with a heavy flail, then quick draw a greatsword next round and go all Power Attacky, and that would be pretty nasty, but we don't hear complaints about it.
The other factor here is the sheer mathematics of it. I'm definitely out of my league, here, but from unscientific anecdotal evidence, I always found that having to make two rolls really lowered my chances of success -- and with the trip dude, you have to make THREE rolls to get this right:
1) The touch attack to hit
2) The opposed Str/Str or Dex check
3) The attack roll on prone-boy
Touch attacks aren't guaranteed hits, not with Blur and Displacement and all that fun stuff. It's still a LIKELY hit in most cases, but our average guy probably needs more than a 1 to touch-hit the single, equal-CR opponent he's using this against.
The opposed check allows the opponent to use whichever score is better. Now, our attacker gets a +4, so he's got a slightly better chance -- but if it's two fighters of equal level, and one fighter has the chain while the other fighter has a greatsword, and they're both Point Buy... who do you think has the higher Strength? The attacker has a DECENT chance of tripping the person, assuming his first roll works.
Finally, the prone attack, upon which he gets a +4 to hit. Again, probably a good chance of hitting.
So, for all that, we've got LIKELY times DECENT times PROBABLY... which adds up to MAYBE, in my book. And since I'm at work, that's as scientific as I'm getting. I'd love to see somebody do the math on it.
Our attacker is doing that instead of making one simple attack roll that, most likely, could have hit for damage right there and saved time. Yeah, his target's prone, now, and that's good -- and when the guy tries to get up, we can try to make another three rolls. But in my experience (purely anecdotal), you're gonna botch one of those rolls somewhere eventually.
I'm not saying it's a bad strategy against one single opponent, but I can't say that I'm losing sleep over it, either. When I DM'd a 3.0 dwarven fighter with improved trip, he used it to great effect on every squib we encountered, but he always settled in for power attacking when he faced something challenging.
You make some good points. I'm not sure why you're bringing size into the equation -- in general, being large is almost always better than being small, and most PCs are going to be small or medium-sized. (At least, in core campaigns. I personally don't dig on non-standard-race PCs, and if playing a large PC messes up game balance, then all the more reason not to allow large PCs except when they're polymorphed.)
Let's look at what Chainy needs:
1) Exotic Weapon Prof: Spiked Chain
2) Expertise (Int13+)
3) Combat Reflexes (say Dex13+ to make real use out of it)
4) Improved Trip
Now, I don't see a ton of people NOT having a Dex of 13+ if they're playing a combat character. The Int13+, though, costs a bit. If you're going with Point Buy, that means fewer points left to get the Strength higher and up that Dex into nastyland.
You're giving up damage and/or defense (using a greatsword or using a bastard sword and shield) for a cute trick -- the reach and trip deal. And you're buying feats that make that combo worthwhile -- which, in my book, is fine. Heck, I could trip you with a heavy flail, then quick draw a greatsword next round and go all Power Attacky, and that would be pretty nasty, but we don't hear complaints about it.
The other factor here is the sheer mathematics of it. I'm definitely out of my league, here, but from unscientific anecdotal evidence, I always found that having to make two rolls really lowered my chances of success -- and with the trip dude, you have to make THREE rolls to get this right:
1) The touch attack to hit
2) The opposed Str/Str or Dex check
3) The attack roll on prone-boy
Touch attacks aren't guaranteed hits, not with Blur and Displacement and all that fun stuff. It's still a LIKELY hit in most cases, but our average guy probably needs more than a 1 to touch-hit the single, equal-CR opponent he's using this against.
The opposed check allows the opponent to use whichever score is better. Now, our attacker gets a +4, so he's got a slightly better chance -- but if it's two fighters of equal level, and one fighter has the chain while the other fighter has a greatsword, and they're both Point Buy... who do you think has the higher Strength? The attacker has a DECENT chance of tripping the person, assuming his first roll works.
Finally, the prone attack, upon which he gets a +4 to hit. Again, probably a good chance of hitting.
So, for all that, we've got LIKELY times DECENT times PROBABLY... which adds up to MAYBE, in my book. And since I'm at work, that's as scientific as I'm getting. I'd love to see somebody do the math on it.
Our attacker is doing that instead of making one simple attack roll that, most likely, could have hit for damage right there and saved time. Yeah, his target's prone, now, and that's good -- and when the guy tries to get up, we can try to make another three rolls. But in my experience (purely anecdotal), you're gonna botch one of those rolls somewhere eventually.
I'm not saying it's a bad strategy against one single opponent, but I can't say that I'm losing sleep over it, either. When I DM'd a 3.0 dwarven fighter with improved trip, he used it to great effect on every squib we encountered, but he always settled in for power attacking when he faced something challenging.
The more you guys have gone round and round about this the more I feel it isn't as broken as it appears to some, and myself at first. I still am going to think about a standard action to get up that doesn't provoke an AoO.
In the meantime, I agree with Kid that you should just bust out a trip attack of your own, or beat on him with your weapon or whatever.
I guess in closing, yeah, being tripped is bad, but in a real fight, it typically is a really bad idea to be on the ground. *shrugs* maybe they are going for a grittier Dnd system.
Tellerve
In the meantime, I agree with Kid that you should just bust out a trip attack of your own, or beat on him with your weapon or whatever.
I guess in closing, yeah, being tripped is bad, but in a real fight, it typically is a really bad idea to be on the ground. *shrugs* maybe they are going for a grittier Dnd system.
Tellerve
