Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tessarael" data-source="post: 1517414" data-attributes="member: 12909">When I suggested removing Improved Grapple, I was  advocating that everyone initiating a grapple would provoke an attack of opportunity. Then the damage done on that attack of opportunity would penalize the grapple attempt.My problem with Improved Grapple is this: if I don't have Close Quarters Fighting and you're a grapple specialist with Improved Grapple, then you will definitely beat me. The possibility of other combatants having Improved Grapple forces a primary combatant to take Close Quarters Fighting as one of their feats (either that or a Ring of Freedom - way more expensive).I really don't like feats that require counter feats. That breaks core mechanics. This is actually one of the problems with the 3.5E addition of Improved Grapple as a core feat in the PHB - they haven't included the counter feat in the PHB.I wouldn't mind if Improved Grapple gave say a +4 bonus to grappling and no other benefits. That wouldn't force people to take the Close Quarters Fighting feat.On a similar note, I would argue that Sneak Attack in Arcana Unearthed makes it very useful for primary combatants who aren't immune to criticals to take the Intuitive Sense and Improved Intuitive Sense feats (Uncanny Dodge and Improved Uncanny Dodge). In the PHB, there are no such counter feats except for Rogues and Barbarians with the relevant class feature ... this too is a problem.In a more general sense, I don't like abilities that are all or nothing. Either you can Sneak Attack or your opponent is immune to criticals/has Improved Uncanny Dodge. Either you can Improved Grapple (and either your opponent has Close Quarters Fighting or not) or your grapple attempts are much weaker.   Along these lines, I'd prefer to see Rogues get BAB +1/level and reduce their Sneak Attack by 5d6.Just my thoughts ...</blockquote>

Verification