NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Majoru Oakheart" data-source="post: 5855376" data-attributes="member: 5143">Extremely hard.  I know a lot of people like to think it's easy.  But I can tell you that nearly every one of these actions in 3e was a waste of time.  Because the problem with combat maneuvers like this is that you want to make each a valid option without making it the ONLY option.I can tell you that I've seen many such systems where the creator said they were interesting and viable.  Until I pointed out the math involved was horrible.As an example: A monster had 50 hitpoints.  You do 1d8+22 damage with an attack.  You could do any of the above listed actions...however, the vast majority of them didn't do damage.  You can defeat the monster in 2 rounds of "I attack" on average.  Each round spent doing something that doesn't do damage is another round the combat lasts for and another round the enemy could be doing damage to you.  I attack is a better option in 95% of situations.The couple of the options that do damage are issues because it's hard to balance the fact that they give you extra damage.  Power Attack, for instance, there is always a perfect number where the damage it gives you is worth the penalty you take to attacks.  Any more or less than that and it's useless.The same sort of thing applies to many other "take a penalty to attacks to do more damage" abilities.  Depending on the AC of the target it is either a really bad idea to use them or a much better idea than using "I attack".</blockquote>

Verification