Deflect Arrows

[Storyteller01]

We house ruled it. For individual arrows you use an AoO with a Ref save (DC = attack roll; a bare hand can only do so much). If you take the Full Defense option, you gain cover against ranged attacks.

 

[c0mA]

We house ruled it. For individual arrows you use an AoO with a Ref save (DC = attack roll; a bare hand can only do so much). If you take the Full Defense option, you gain cover against ranged attacks.

Gaining cover seams a bit too strong to me, but can you explain why your group does this?

 

[Storyteller01]

Gaining cover seams a bit too strong to me, but can you explain why your group does this?

Our setting is EXTREMELY rich in ranged weapons. This makes the monk a viable option (they can dodge as well as deflect). The cover is only 20%, so it isn't any kind of guarantee.

That, and all the kung-fu movies where the hero blocks multiple arrows in less that 6 seconds. It is a fantasy game.

 

[Corsair]

Let me just say I never ever expected someone to think Deflect Arrows was overpowered.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

No I don't, because the scenario above shows the inequality of the two feats you mention.

How? How does the scenario show any inequality at all between the two feats I mention? They are exactly equal. Both feats are available at level 1. One feat adds one ranged attack per round, one feat subtracts one ranged attack per round. Where is the inequality?

like deflecting an arrow coming in at you @ 300'/sec (200mph av.) when you are in melee with three orcs, two of which are flanking you. sure its a feat, but for a first level character to be able to accomplish this is unbalancing using RAW.

You may think it's unbelievable. But you have yet to show any basis at all for claiming that it's unbalanced.

Fighters don't choose 'roleplaying' feats, players do, so no, the feat selection of said fighter has nothing to do with Deflect Arrows in the RAW being overpowered. I believe it is overpowered because of the scenario above.

Okay, so you're conceding that as written Deflect Arrows is fine, since Rapid Shot--or being above sixth-level--prevents it from completely protecting a character from ranged attacks, as you argued earlier. Your only objection at this point is the scenario above, namely that a 1st-level character can be fighting 3 orcs and deflect an arrow at the same time.

I'm curious. What makes this so much more unbelievable than, say, a fourth orc? Isn't it just as unbelievable that a 1st-level character can be facing in all directions simultaneously, defending himself equally well from all 4?

Your objection to Deflect Arrows seems to be entirely based on your personal believability threshold. That's fine. In that case I guess we can just agree to disagree. I don't have a problem with Deflect Arrows on a believability level, because it doesn't seem any more outlandish than many of the other feats and abiliities in the game. But obviously YMMV, and does.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Our setting is EXTREMELY rich in ranged weapons. This makes the monk a viable option (they can dodge as well as deflect). The cover is only 20%, so it isn't any kind of guarantee.

So it's not cover at all, it's concealment. Cover would give a bonus to AC.

So - do you not have a limit on the number of deflected arrows per round? If so, possibly a good change (except for all that extra dice rolling). If not... you've probably made deflect arrows one of the lamest feats out there.

 

[Shadowdweller]

So - do you not have a limit on the number of deflected arrows per round? If so, possibly a good change (except for all that extra dice rolling). If not... you've probably made deflect arrows one of the lamest feats out there.

Even as worded in this House Rule, that's STILL pretty damn lame. Count it out...monk now needs on average to be attacked by FIVE missiles to notice any effect (20% improved defense).

Actually, the automatic deflection really is a FANTASTIC mechanic. Low level archers suffer quite a bit (one of few attacks). While high level ones can get around it by using greater numbers of attacks (shooting more rapidly so the monk doesn't have time to block), or by sniping.

 

[c0mA]

How? How does the scenario show any inequality at all between the two feats I mention? They are exactly equal. Both feats are available at level 1. One feat adds one ranged attack per round, one feat subtracts one ranged attack per round. Where is the inequality?You may think it's unbelievable. But you have yet to show any basis at all for claiming that it's unbalanced.Okay, so you're conceding that as written Deflect Arrows is fine, since Rapid Shot--or being above sixth-level--prevents it from completely protecting a character from ranged attacks, as you argued earlier. Your only objection at this point is the scenario above, namely that a 1st-level character can be fighting 3 orcs and deflect an arrow at the same time.

How you see this as conceding that Deflect Arrows is fine in my eyes is beyond me.
There are Feats a 1st level character can take that are much more powerful than others...

We've decided that Deflect Arrows as written needed a change, a random factor, rather than black and white; again, our house rule, so why the indigestion?

You may think it's unbelievable. But you have yet to show any basis at all for claiming that it's unbalanced.

I liken this to saying your S/N isn't Lord Pendragon. See my scenario above *sigh*. And as I've stated before, the scenario is nothing more than that, a scenario. It shows one extreme that brought on the need for a House Rule in my group; not to go the other way completely (which is the problem of so many other House Rules that are created by groups that only see in black and white) but to give that PC archer a chance to have his ONE special arrow possibly hit the BBEG when that ONE arrow is the party's best chance at beating him (again, a scenario....so treat it as such).

I'm curious. What makes this so much more unbelievable than, say, a fourth orc? Isn't it just as unbelievable that a 1st-level character can be facing in all directions simultaneously, defending himself equally well from all 4?

I'm with you. Add a fourth orc to the frey and Deflecting Arrows is even that much more hard to fathom in the RAW. Yet you seem to think deflecting/dodging an incoming sword swing at X speed is the same as deflecting an arrow coming in at X*10 speed with your hand while flanked. Hey the RAW supports it, why shouldn't you?

Your objection to Deflect Arrows seems to be entirely based on your personal believability threshold.

You really think I'm the only one who thought Deflect Arrows should have some kind of an opposed roll or DC, don't you?

That's fine. In that case I guess we can just agree to disagree. I don't have a problem with Deflect Arrows on a believability level, because it doesn't seem any more outlandish than many of the other feats and abiliities in the game. But obviously YMMV, and does.

I guess if you think Deflect Arrows is no more difficult to master than Shield Proficiency our milage does vary.

 

[Shadowdweller]

Actually, the automatic deflection really is a FANTASTIC mechanic. Low level archers suffer quite a bit (one of few attacks). While high level ones can get around it by using greater numbers of attacks (shooting more rapidly so the monk doesn't have time to block), or by sniping.

To further explain: An attack bonus is an abstract number that can represent any number of factors. The Deflect Arrows feat as written ignores simple accuracy (as from a High Dex) and favors combat training/ learned tricks (high BAB / Rapid Shot) or stealth (high hide skill).

 

[Lord Pendragon]

How you see this as conceding that Deflect Arrows is fine in my eyes is beyond me.

It's like you're only skimming my posts. You see certain key words and just fill in the blanks... No, I never stated that you conceded Deflect Arrows is fine. I stated that your problem with Deflect Arrows is one of believability, rather than one of balance. You've dropped all your balance arguments and stuck only to the single scenario describing a single problem: you think it's unreasonable to be able to automatically deflect an arrow while engaged in melee with three or more assailants. Believability, not balance.

There are Feats a 1st level character can take that are much more powerful than others...

Yes, nobody is arguing against this point. I'm arguing that Deflect Arrows is not more powerful than Rapid Shot.

We've decided that Deflect Arrows as written needed a change, a random factor, rather than black and white; again, our house rule, so why the indigestion?

Indigestion? There's no indigestion. We're discussing the Deflect Arrows feat, which you believe is unbalancing as written and I do not. The fact that it's your House Rule and not mine is obvious. We're discussing the merits of the RAW and the necessity (or lack thereof) of a House Rule. This should all be obvious. It's what we do here in the Rules forum.

I liken this to saying your S/N isn't Lord Pendragon.

Your argument is hardly the plain, indisputable fact that my screen name is.

See my scenario above *sigh*.

I've seen your scenario and responded to it. See my post above. *sigh* You seem intent on ignoring my responses to your scenario and sighing a lot in exasperation.

It shows one extreme that brought on the need for a House Rule in my group; not to go the other way completely (which is the problem of so many other House Rules that are created by groups that only see in black and white) but to give that PC archer a chance to have his ONE special arrow possibly hit the BBEG when that ONE arrow is the party's best chance at beating him

The only scenario I can envision in which this would be true is a party facing a dragon with an arrow of slaying. And if a party goes up against a dragon with an arrow of slaying as their best chance of beating him, they need to rethink their strategy. Nerfing a balanced feat in order to make this extreme example more likely is inappropriate, IMO.

I'm with you. Add a fourth orc to the frey and Deflecting Arrows is even that much more hard to fathom in the RAW. Yet you seem to think deflecting/dodging an incoming sword swing at X speed is the same as deflecting an arrow coming in at X*10 speed with your hand while flanked. Hey the RAW supports it, why shouldn't you?

No, my point was to compare the 4th orc to the incoming arrow. i.e. in both cases there are three distracting orcs. What makes an incoming arrow being dodged more difficult to believe than that fourth orc being defended against? I wasn't suggesting a scenario in which there are 4 orcs and an incoming arrow.

You really think I'm the only one who thought Deflect Arrows should have some kind of an opposed roll or DC, don't you?

Um...no. Where in the world are you getting this? Seriously. Where have I suggested that you're the only one who dislikes Deflect Arrows? This thread alone shows that there are more folks that just you who feel it needs to be changed. What bearing does that have on anything?

I guess if you think Deflect Arrows is no more difficult to master than Shield Proficiency our milage does vary.

*shrug* If the guy from The Last Dragon can do it, I'm going to assume it's doable.