How good should this feat be?

[Felon]

Becoming incredibly sick of all the attacks of opportunity going off all the time, I'm thinking of creating a feat that provides a flat bonus against all attacks of opportunity. In comparison to feats like Mobility, what sort of bonus would be reasonable? +2?

 

[Thanee]

-> House Rules

+2 seems reasonable, yes.

Most AoO can be avoided, though, simply by using 5-ft. steps, unless you fight against a high number of opponents with reach, or use combat maneuvers which provoke, of course.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Felon]

Or you want to put your bow away or drink a potion before you chop your foe....lots of situations provoke, unfortunately.

 

[Thanee]

Of course, but many of them can be avoided...

i.e. you could attack then 5-ft. step then retrieve the potion (can't drink it, anyways).

At least, while sometimes provoking an AoO is certainly unavoidable, I don't find that you really have to do so often. At least in our games, that is.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Felon]

The point was, sometimes there's a tactical reason to put away the bow or drink the potion first.

You're right about this belonging in House Rules.

 

[UltimaGabe]

Isn't there a feat in Complete Adventurer that gives you a +4 on Attacks of Opportunity based on movement? (Basically, it counters the Mobility feat, and screws you over if you don't have Mobility.)

 

[Phaedrus]

Setting game mechanics aside, what's the flavor reason for such a feat?

Letting your guard down, distracting yourself from your opponent, opens you up to an attack (or, stated differently, makes the ongoing exchange of blows favor your attacker). What sort of real world explanation would negate this?

I'm in active swordplay and decide to reach into my backpack for a potion. Why wouldn't I expect to get whacked for that? What feat of combat prowess would offset this? Quick hands? Multitasking expertise?

I like AOO's as a game mechanic way of representing the ebb and flow of combat and the consequences of not focusing 100% on your opponent. As such, I am wary of feats that "unrealistically" take away from AOO's (I realize that "unrealistic" is a bad term for the abstraction that is combat in D&D... but you know what I mean, right?)

 

[Felon]

Not sure about Complete Adventurer, but Miniatures Handbook has the Deft Opportunist, which gives a +4 bonus on all attacks of opportunity.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Weapon Focus gives you a +1 bonus to all attacks with a particular weapon. Dodge gives you +1 to AC versus a particular opponent. The key number is +1, and there are limitations on the bonus.

Deft Opportunist gives you +4 to attacks of opportunity, and to be completely analogous to Weapon Focus there should be a limitation on its use; the bonus is to AoOs incurred when moving, or something (making it ant-Mobility). Mobility gives +4 to AC when your movement provokes an AoO. The key number to these AoO feats is +4 and it seems that there should be a limit to the bonus; Deft Opportunist might be a little too good.

Anyways, your feat should grant a +4 bonus to AC against attacks of opportunity, but there should be a limit on when the bonus applies. If you make your feat analogous to Dodge, make it so you have to specify the opponent the bonus applies to. Dodge and perhaps Mobility could be the pre-requisites.

If you make the bonus apply to everyone, it should be less. +2 would be low enough, I think. Combat Expertise and maybe a few ranks in tumble could be pre-requisites.

 

[Felon]

Setting game mechanics aside, what's the flavor reason for such a feat?

What's the flavor reason for Mobility or defensive casting or the flavor reason for all of the "Improved" feats that negate attacks of opportunity altogether? It reflects a skill at keeping your guard up.

I like AOO's as a game mechanic way of representing the ebb and flow of combat and the consequences of not focusing 100% on your opponent. As such, I am wary of feats that "unrealistically" take away from AOO's (I realize that "unrealistic" is a bad term for the abstraction that is combat in D&D... but you know what I mean, right?)

I believe that AoO's are a terrible game mechanic, or at least the way they were implemented is terrible. Realism can go take a flying out the window if it makes combat static and dull. A fantasy adventure game should encourage flashy, dynamic combat. Instead, the system rewards players for standing in place to make a full round of attacks, and punishes players who try to spice up combat or dare more than a 5 foot step.

Now, the counter-arguement is that AoO's introduce an exciting tactical element by adding an element of danger for characters who do risky things ("risky" being anything other than standing in one place and waiting for some other dummy to try to be daring), but if I were to even buy that then I'd point out that players should have resources made available to mitigate that risk.