Full Defense versus Combat Expertise?

[Sirea]

The phrase "in melee" is not really defined in D&D. You better interprete it as "wielding a melee weapon".
The purpose is just to say that you can't Combat Expertise wielding a bow or other purely ranged weapon.

 

[Azrael]

The phrase "in melee" is not really defined in D&D. You better interprete it as "wielding a melee weapon".
The purpose is just to say that you can't Combat Expertise wielding a bow or other purely ranged weapon.

To use CE, you need to make an atack or full attack action in melee. Which seems to get around this problem to me.

 

[Goolpsy]

Well

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.

look a the 2nd last paragraph here..
A fighter without combat expertice can use fight defensively... and so on....

Seems VERY much like CE is an upgraded version of Fighting defensively... hence they do not stack...

 

[Deadguy]

To clarify, Goolpsy, I can only reiterate the comment about the PHB page 140, where under Fighting Defensively as a Standard Action it states that "This bonus stacks with the AC bonus granted by the Combat Expertise feat (page 92)."

It may not say that in the SRD, but the Players Handbook has to trump the online text in this matter.

And practically it remains useful to be able to combine them, producing a defensive character able to fight beasties to a standstill.

 

[Derren]

You can use full defense when you are not attacking unlike fighting defensivly and combat expertise, so it is a good defense against archers when there is no enemy near to attack.

 

[Inigo Carmine]

You can use full defense when you are not attacking unlike fighting defensivly and combat expertise, so it is a good defense against archers when there is no enemy near to attack.

First off, fighting defensively does not require you to be fighting in melee. IE, you can fight defensively with a bow and arrow.

Expertise requires you to attack "in melee". Such a term is not defined in D&D. The nearest explanation one can derive is that the attack itself must be melee (ie, you can't do it while shooting a bow and arrow). This doesn't mean you have to be attacking an enemy 5ft from you. You can make an unarmed attack at the ground in your square and still get the benefits of it. The two important things are that you spend the action to do it (ie using at least the standard action of a melee attack, if not a full attack), and you must do it with a melee weapon.
=================
Back to the original topic at hand
=================

The total possible AC boost of combining Fighting Defensive (FD) with Coimbat Expertise (CE) can be greater than the action Total Defense (TD). True. Remember this is at the expense of a feat though, and requires the practioner to have at least a +3 BAB.

Keep in mind though that using full CE and FD together nets you a -9 to your attack rolls. TD never mentions anything about a penalty to attack rolls (expect that you can't make attacks, even AoOs if IIRC). This is important if someone tries to disarm you or sunder your weapon. Therefore, TD still has its uses, even if you have CE.

 

[3d6]

From the SRD:
Two characters are engaged in melee if they are enemies of each other and either threatens the other. (An unconscious or otherwise immobilized character is not considered engaged unless he is actually being attacked.)

"In melee" is defined, although the definition isn't in the most obvious place. It looks like you can use Combat Expertise with a ranged attack, so long as you're in an enemy's threatened area (which is generally not the best place to be making a ranged attack, but I guess that makes sure you'll use the AC bonus).

 

[Gansk]

"In melee" is defined, although the definition isn't in the most obvious place. It looks like you can use Combat Expertise with a ranged attack, so long as you're in an enemy's threatened area (which is generally not the best place to be making a ranged attack, but I guess that makes sure you'll use the AC bonus).

You can't threaten anybody with a ranged weapon, thus you are not in melee according to the definition you provided. Both combatants have to threaten each other, so if one has a ranged weapon, they are not in melee.

 

[Hypersmurf]

You can't threaten anybody with a ranged weapon, thus you are not in melee according to the definition you provided. Both combatants have to threaten each other, so if one has a ranged weapon, they are not in melee.

Read the definition again. They are engaged in melee if either threatens the other.

Assuming we're enemies:
If I threaten you, and you threaten me, we're engaged in melee.
If I threaten you, but you don't threaten me, we're engaged in melee.
If I don't threaten you, but you threaten me, we're engaged in melee.
If I don't threaten you, and you don't threaten me, we're not engaged in melee.

-Hyp.

 

[Gansk]

Read the definition again. They are engaged in melee if either threatens the other.

Assuming we're enemies:
If I threaten you, and you threaten me, we're engaged in melee.
If I threaten you, but you don't threaten me, we're engaged in melee.
If I don't threaten you, but you threaten me, we're engaged in melee.
If I don't threaten you, and you don't threaten me, we're not engaged in melee.

-Hyp.

Oops! OK, never mind!

Good thing, otherwise that opens up a entirely different can of worms regarding CE.