Are special manuevers even harder than they were in the Beta?

[Stalker0]

I have just finished looking through the core rules on special maneuvers, and I noticed quite a few things. Much of this might have been in the beta and I never noticed it, but a few notes:

1) If an AOO hits you, you take the damage as a penalty to your CMB roll. So while the grappling manuever gets a tad bit easier (though not much), all the other manuevers are even harder without the right feat.

2) CMD is no longer 15+str+X, but now its 10+str+dex+X + dodge bonuses, insight bonuses, morale,sacred etc etc. At high levels players get tons of these bonuses, and I don't know how a PC is supposed to use combat manuevers against an npcs with any kind of normal AC boosters.

 

[Twowolves]

1) If an AOO hits you, you take the damage as a penalty to your CMB roll. So while the grappling manuever gets a tad bit easier (though not much), all the other manuevers are even harder without the right feat.

IF they hit you. I might have a problem with a high hp attacker just taking the AoO damage and getting the maneuver off without a hitch. This way you can't just burl your way into a maneuver without some training.

2) CMD is no longer 15+str+X, but now its 10+str+dex+X + dodge bonuses, insight bonuses, morale,sacred etc etc. At high levels players get tons of these bonuses, and I don't know how a PC is supposed to use combat manuevers against an npcs with any kind of normal AC boosters.

CMB also includes many of these same sorts of bonuses, so it's not like the CMD scales faster than CMB. At least not on first glance, but I'll admit I haven't run any numbers to confirm this.

 

[BryonD]

Jason stated somewhere that it is by design that special attacks are harder to pull off than simply smacking a target.

I think that works for me.

The specific context was talking more about things like grappling or disarming giants and how very high those CMDs can be.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Jason stated somewhere that it is by design that special attacks are harder to pull off than simply smacking a target.

What would be the design goal behind it? Are the special attacks seen as too powerful? Or, since they are more interesting than plain damage and provide more fun if they succeed, they should be harder and rarer?

 

[Imban]

I have just finished looking through the core rules on special maneuvers, and I noticed quite a few things.

It comes down to "yes, except on big bruisers, where it's easier". It's easier in every way to do them to giants or the Tarrasque (though you'll still never succeed against the Tarrasque, it's still easier in theory ) or dragons that haven't buffed themselves with magic.

It's harder against anyone who has high Dex and/or can buff themselves with things that affect touch AC.

 

[BryonD]

What would be the design goal behind it? Are the special attacks seen as too powerful? Or, since they are more interesting than plain damage and provide more fun if they succeed, they should be harder and rarer?

I think the design goal is that harder things to do should be harder to do.

No snark intended there.
But power of result and difficulty to perform need not be related.

As to fun, I personally think making it overly easy to disarm the frost giant makes it ho hum. Disarming a giant should be a heroic event and if you can pull it off then THAT is exciting and fun.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I think the design goal is that harder things to do should be harder to do.

No snark intended there.
But power of result and difficulty to perform need not be related.

As to fun, I personally think making it overly easy to disarm the frost giant makes it ho hum. Disarming a giant should be a heroic event and if you can pull it off then THAT is exciting and fun.

Surviving a fight against a Giant is also a heroic event. You are fighting against a creature twice as large or more than you, with considerably more strength. But still, it becomes common place fast to win such fights.

The problem with making maneuvers more difficult is that you quickly achieve a situation where no one attempts it anymore. The chances are just too slim and you lose out too much if you don't go for the "safe" option of dealing damage.

It might be a lot better if there were was a way to make the usage of maneuvers more "dynamic". 4E powers are the very... gamist approach to that, but there are other possibilities. For example, a particularly low result on the enemies attack (or naked die roll, like a natural 1) opens up the opportunity for a maneuver on your turn, greatly increasing the success chances. Or a critical hit, instead of dealing more damage, allows you to also try a combat maneuver.

That way it's still a rare and heroic moment, but you don't try to "spam" your maneuver attack until you accidentally get lucky. You know that, if the opportunity presents itself, you get a fair chance and have to decide to capitalize on it or not.

 

[BryonD]

Surviving a fight against a Giant is also a heroic event. You are fighting against a creature twice as large or more than you, with considerably more strength. But still, it becomes common place fast to win such fights.

Sure, and so does being able to disarm them.
If your character is at a level where it is common place to fight 4 or 5 giants, then that same character WILL be able to easily disarm the giant.

The problem with making maneuvers more difficult is that you quickly achieve a situation where no one attempts it anymore. The chances are just too slim and you lose out too much if you don't go for the "safe" option of dealing damage.

And some times that makes sense. If it should be too difficult, then it is absurd to make it easy just because. It takes the whole fun of the acheivement away when it is given away too cheaply.

I think saying "no one" will attempt these actions is not accurate. Certainly not for my players.

Between the fact that it does become easy quickly, and the fact that tactical situations will on ocassion make the gamble worthwhile, it will remain as a valid tactic.

Whereas if it is too easy, not only does it become completely non-heroic, it becomes a no-brainer first action and boring.

On what basis do you get from "is harder" to the chances are "too slim"?
Do you really think that disarming a giant should be no more difficult than striking it?

 

[James Jacobs]

The basic idea is that the "vanilla" attack, the one that should be the baseline move in combat, is to simply swing your weapon and hit a foe and do hit point damage. That should always be the standard, but it shouldn't be something that is an inferior choice. By making the combat maneuvers a bit tougher to pull off, we accomplish (I hope!) the following:

1) We don't ghettoize standard attacks. They're the things you'll be making most often, and since the BULK of combat is built around this type of action that makes sense. You can go through a combat making standard attacks and not feel like you're playing the game wrong and making sub-optimal choices.

2) We reward characters who specialize in combat maneuvers. If they take the right combinations of feats and skills and classes and all that in order to make combat maneuvers easy for them as opposed to someone who has no special training in them, it feels like they EARNED that skill.

3) We make fights against less powerful foes feel more exciting. If the typical character is making standard attacks against a scary foe because he doesn't want to risk failing on a harder maneuver, but then when he faces less powerful foes he can do maneuvers a lot easier, that really helps make a character feel like he's growing in power, I think, because a character KNOWS it's hard to do a maneuver but if it's easier to do against all the mooks, he feels tough.

4) Combat maneuvers are special. They're the stuff of legends. If you try to trip a dragon and get lucky and do it, that's a story you'll remember for a long time. If maneuvers were simple and dominated every combat, they'd get dull and rote and lose a lot of their appeal. By making them tougher, and therefore (I hope!) not as common sights in combats but instead sights you see specialists perform or desperate people perform, that makes them feel more exciting and climactic.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The basic idea is that the "vanilla" attack, the one that should be the baseline move in combat, is to simply swing your weapon and hit a foe and do hit point damage. That should always be the standard, but it shouldn't be something that is an inferior choice. By making the combat maneuvers a bit tougher to pull off, we accomplish (I hope!) the following:

1) We don't ghettoize standard attacks. They're the things you'll be making most often, and since the BULK of combat is built around this type of action that makes sense. You can go through a combat making standard attacks and not feel like you're playing the game wrong and making sub-optimal choices.

I think it is hard to avoid that dealing damage will become non-standard - you can't beat up your enemies without it. But I think there should be more incentive to think "smart" and use a tactical option like a combat maneuver in the right circumstance. But if that is too difficult to pull of, it will not be "smart" but "luck".

2) We reward characters who specialize in combat maneuvers. If they take the right combinations of feats and skills and classes and all that in order to make combat maneuvers easy for them as opposed to someone who has no special training in them, it feels like they EARNED that skill.

How are they rewarded? Do they just get better and significantly increase their odds? Doesn't this mean they replace the standard attack with their standard specialized combat maneuver, and you end up a boring character with his standard routine?

3) We make fights against less powerful foes feel more exciting. If the typical character is making standard attacks against a scary foe because he doesn't want to risk failing on a harder maneuver, but then when he faces less powerful foes he can do maneuvers a lot easier, that really helps make a character feel like he's growing in power, I think, because a character KNOWS it's hard to do a maneuver but if it's easier to do against all the mooks, he feels tough.

If using maneuvers is more easier, so is dealing damage - and the monsters will last shorter, too.

4) Combat maneuvers are special. They're the stuff of legends. If you try to trip a dragon and get lucky and do it, that's a story you'll remember for a long time. If maneuvers were simple and dominated every combat, they'd get dull and rote and lose a lot of their appeal. By making them tougher, and therefore (I hope!) not as common sights in combats but instead sights you see specialists perform or desperate people perform, that makes them feel more exciting and climactic.

Hmm. I agree that if it happens all the time it doesn't feel that special. But I also think it is important to reward players for making a good choice during play (and not just during character creation).
"Smart Play" - identifying the right move in the right situation. It's hard to do reward smart play if you have to rely mostly on luck, and it's also hard to reward smart play if the "smartness" was optimzing your chances to succeed. The reward is choosing the right combat maneuver at the right time. Disarming the Balor from his Vorpal Sword, bullrushing the Orc into the firepit.