Combat Expertise thingies.

[DM-Rocco]

Total defence is for the mooks.

Not for mooks, just for people that don't enjoy making a new character every session. Big difference between playing smart and playing like a noob.

That's because CE have a trade-off, to increase your AC bonus you gotta give up some or all of your BAB so to feel that effect of the penalty, you must either make a standard attack or a full attack.

It can be abusive at higher level, especially if one has Superior Expertise feat. A 10th-level fighter can pretty much stroll around in battle without fear of getting hit by lesser opponents if TD and CE stack. He can manuever himself to bypass them and attack the big boss.

Well, I good rogue with a high tumble can pretty much do that anyway.

It makes no sense that a person with combat expertise who decides he is to close to death to fight and goes into total defensive mode to avoid death, would have a lower armor class than if he just chose to attack.

The logic doesn't work there.

I can understand from a game point of view that it could be abused, but it still makes no sense.

 

[Ranger REG]

So would you allow them because they are giving up their attack(s) on their turn as a trade-off? If so, should a character in Total Defense mode be allowed to make AoO outside their turn?

 

[ARandomGod]

So would you allow them because they are giving up their attack(s) on their turn as a trade-off? If so, should a character in Total Defense mode be allowed to make AoO outside their turn?

I allow the stacking, although RAW contradicts it (I'm not afraid of correcting silly RAW readings), but I wouldn't allow an AoO outside of their turn while fighting in total defense...

 

[Hypersmurf]

If so, should a character in Total Defense mode be allowed to make AoO outside their turn?

No.

Total Defense
You can defend yourself as a standard action. You get a +4 dodge bonus to your AC for 1 round. Your AC improves at the start of this action. You can’t combine total defense with fighting defensively or with the benefit of the Combat Expertise feat (since both of those require you to declare an attack or full attack). You can’t make attacks of opportunity while using total defense.

-Hyp.

 

[FireLance]

I personally think the "trade-off" feats like Combat Expertise and Power Attack slow down gameplay because of the calculations involed. Yes, I can do the math quickly in my head, but the extra effort annoys me sometimes.

So, I'm thinking the Combat Expertise feat should work off the fight defensively option, perhaps as follows:

Combat Expertise [Fighter]

Prerequisite: Int 13.

Benefit: The penalty to your attack rolls for fighting defensively is -2 instead of -4. When fighting defensively, you gain an additional +1 dodge bonus to AC for every six fighter feats you possess. When using the total defense action, you gain an additional +1 dodge bonus to AC for every three fighter feats that you possess.

For what I mean by a fighter feat, and other examples of changes I would make, have a look at my post (#14) in this thread.

 

[DM-Rocco]

So would you allow them because they are giving up their attack(s) on their turn as a trade-off? If so, should a character in Total Defense mode be allowed to make AoO outside their turn?

I would not allow AoO, you are would be gaining more defense.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I personally think the "trade-off" feats like Combat Expertise and Power Attack slow down gameplay because of the calculations involed.

Ah, see, that's why you just do all the calculations ahead of time.

I've got a CE-using character. On his character sheet, near the AC line, I've got a notation for "Total Defensive": +8 AC, -9 AB. This is the result of him both Fighting Defensively and pumping all available BAB into CE.

I've also got a d6 I leave near his character sheet. If I put it on his character sheet near the AC or weapons blocks, that's how much I'm using CE for. It's a quick, easy reminder.

For Power Attack, I generally work up a table that shows my damage at each level (that I'll conceivably use): +/- 2, 3, 4, 5, and APAATT.

Then, I don't need to worry about calculating things on the fly.

EDIT:

I also really don't like your house rule. It makes CE pretty useless for anyone other than a Fighter, and it should at least be a viable choice for a non-Fighter-focused character.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Ah, see, that's why you just do all the calculations ahead of time.

I've got a CE-using character. On his character sheet, near the AC line, I've got a notation for "Total Defensive": +8 AC, -9 AB. This is the result of him both Fighting Defensively and pumping all available BAB into CE.

I've also got a d6 I leave near his character sheet. If I put it on his character sheet near the AC or weapons blocks, that's how much I'm using CE for. It's a quick, easy reminder.

For Power Attack, I generally work up a table that shows my damage at each level (that I'll conceivably use): +/- 2, 3, 4, 5, and APAATT.

Then, I don't need to worry about calculating things on the fly.

EDIT:

I also really don't like your house rule. It makes CE pretty useless for anyone other than a Fighter, and it should at least be a viable choice for a non-Fighter-focused character.

Sometimes I think Wizards should try to get it - it´s one of the few combat feats they have a chance to use, and if they add Improved Trip and later get Polymorph, they have a few extra combat options (especially considered that their low BAB isn´t that bad when trying to trip an opponent)

 

[Ranger REG]

No.

Total Defense
You can defend yourself as a standard action. You get a +4 dodge bonus to your AC for 1 round. Your AC improves at the start of this action. You can’t combine total defense with fighting defensively or with the benefit of the Combat Expertise feat (since both of those require you to declare an attack or full attack). You can’t make attacks of opportunity while using total defense.

Sorry, I miss that. So, you can't attack anyway in TD, inside and outside your turn, for a full round. But setting aside the letter of the rules for the moment, is that enough of a trade-off to allow stacking CE with TD? Opinion, Hyp?

 

[Jhulae]

Well, there are a few ways to look at it.

If you have tumble of 5+ ranks, your total defense is better than CE (+6 to AC versus +5). Without the tumble, though, you might as well just go with a full CE and get an attack, plus AoOs.

Also, a case can almost be made to keep CE and Fighting Defensively as separate and not combinable actions. This is from the Combat Expertise description:

Normal

A character without the Combat Expertise feat can fight defensively while using the attack or full attack action to take a -4 penalty on attack rolls and gain a +2 dodge bonus to Armor Class.

If the 'normal' way is by using fighting defensively, Combat Expertise feat now allows you to use up to -5 to attack for a +5 AC bonus, thereby replacing Fighting Defensively. This is the same as other feats such as Improved Trip, Improved Unarmed combat, etc., where the normal penalty is replaced by the feat.

In this case, the normal penalty is a -4 to attack with only a +2 to AC and no way of varying it. The 'upgrade' gives a 1 to 1, and allows up to 5 points to be traded.

So, if a DM didn't allow both CE and Fighting Defensively to stack, the wording of the feat can support such a ruling.

Either way, if a player is going to spend a feat to take Combat Expertise, the player is spending a feat to get a good defense. It should be better than what characters without spending a feat can do.