Full Defense versus Combat Expertise?

[pokedigimaniac]

One of my players had a question regarding the rules. Why would it ever be useful to use Total Defense after a certain point when you can just use Combat Expertise and Fighting Defensively to consistently get a higher bonus to AC AND still be able to attack? The player's question is that if you can get such a nice bonus, why not be able to get a similar bonus (or slightly higher) for forfeiting ALL offensive capability?

I leave the question to you. Is there a reason for Combat Expertise + Fighting Defensively being so much more useful than Total Defense, and if not, is there any reasonable way to modify the rules slightly so that Total Defense actually remains useful? The player's suggestion was thus:

“If a person can reach a bonus equal to or higher than their total defense modifier (as found in the PHB) using combat expertise and fighting defensively, that person can use the total defense action to add that number plus one more to their AC.”

Now, yes, I do see a problem with this - the AC gain could become pretty high. But I leave it up to the minds of EnWorld to help me figure this one out.

Relevant SRD quotes:

Fighting Defensively as a Standard Action

You can choose to fight defensively when attacking. If you do so, you take a -4 penalty on all attacks in a round to gain a +2 dodge bonus to AC for the same round. See also: Fighting Defensively as a Full-Round Action.

Combat Expertise [General]
Prerequisite

Int 13.
Benefit

When you use the attack action or the full attack action in melee, you can take a penalty of as much as -5 on your attack roll and add the same number (+5 or less) as a dodge bonus to your Armor Class. This number may not exceed your base attack bonus. The changes to attack rolls and Armor Class last until your next action.
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.
Special

A fighter may select Combat Expertise as one of his fighter bonus feats.

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.

 

[arwenarrowny]

Is there a reason for Combat Expertise + Fighting Defensively being so much more useful than Total Defense...

I'm not privy to the minds of the designers, mind you, but it seems to me that their intent is that you are harder to hit if you are providing some kind of threat to the person who is attacking you.

Why would it ever be useful to use Total Defense after a certain point...

By the reasoning above, using Total Defense when you have Combat Expertise will not be useful. Basically, the higher AC bonus is your reward for investing in a feat.

I, for one, would be interested to hear from those with experience in some form of melee combat as to whether what I gather to be the intent of the designers actually has any merit.

 

[Vrecknidj]

Anyone can take Total Defense. Combat Expertise is derived from a feat, so it's optional. Not everyone will want to take Combat Expertise, so it's fair that the benefits from expending a feat should be better than the benefits from not taking the feat.

Dave

 

[pokedigimaniac]

The question is, though, could you technically apply the 'training' from Combat Expertise to Total Defense? The point about still posing a threat is valid, though.

 

[ceratitis]

i'd house rule total defence simply improves your ac by 2-4 (pends on dm) more by giving up the attack. how ever from the enemy point of view as long as you dont attack he has nothing to lose and would continue to attack, at some point he will hit you know?
Z

 

[Hairfoot]

It's not explicit in the rules, but I'd always understood that fighting defensively and CE are an either/or. CE is fighting defensively, but with more...expertise.

 

[Particle_Man]

I let fighting defensively and CE stack. At a certain point, AC is so low anyhow compared to attack bonuses, that anything that can boost it is a good thing.

And note, that not only does CE cost a feat, but the prereq. is intelligence 13, which not everyone will have.

 

[pokedigimaniac]

It's not explicit in the rules, but I'd always understood that fighting defensively and CE are an either/or. CE is fighting defensively, but with more...expertise.

I let fighting defensively and CE stack.

Oddly enough, this sentence isn't reprinted in the SRD, but on page 140 of the PHB, under 'Fighting Defensively as a Standard Action,' it reads:

This bonus stacks with the AC bonus granted by the Combat Expertise feat (page 92).

Oddly enough, I can't find this sentence reprinted anywhere in the SRD, and it's not in the errata, either. But, by what the PHB says, they DO stack by the rules.

 

[Stalker0]

As stated, Combat Expertise is a feat, and a fairly exclusive feat in that a 13 int is often hard to come by for fighters who need good strength, con, and at least not a terrible dex and wisdom.

 

[boolean]

When you use the attack action or the full attack action in melee,

(Emphasis mine)

So, there are some situations where you can't use combat expertise. (Not in melee, INT drained below 13, don't have the feat)

Total defense can be useful in these situations.