D&D 3E/3.5 Is there a Parry in 3.5?

[hero4hire]

Nice! I gotta buy them babies.

To get back on thread. I've been working on my Readied Action Opposed Attack roll houserule...Taking into account weapon sizes and coming up with some Feats that would work well with the option. So far it hasn't proved to be unbalancing. Using AoO though was tried and it got broken real quick with Combat Reflexes.

 

[Ascii King]

Wow. Finding out Parry was just an optional rule in the 2E Fighters Handbook is like finding out Santa uses a harley and never even heard of reindeer. Thanks for the clarity. Now I have to go look up Devoted Defender.

I still stand by my argument though, that the parry is not represented in the normal give and take of combat. If it was, then your AC would improve equally with your Base Attack. Looks like it's gonna have to be a Readied Action Opposed Attack Roll house rule, though.

I can't believe I typed Revenge of the Jedi. Must have been tired.

 

[Soul]

Actualy in the 3.0 DMG there is an optional rule very much in that flavor. Its called Defensive Roll, in escense what it does is to simulate any defensive sort of action it allows you to roll a d20 and add your modifiers to AC to the roll becoming your 'new AC' against that attack. Now, I know this ventures into house rule category, but you can add a few simple things to this to change it. You can assume when a character doesn't want to roll defense rolls that they are in effect 'taking 10' on their defense. However, how I'd consider using this is taking a page from one of my favorite rpgs. Treat the normal AC as a standard defense, if an opponent strikes and hits the target's AC I'd allow them to spend an attack of oppertunity (if no AoOs are avaliable to the target no active defense roll can be made) for an active defense roll, i.e. the last minute parry or manuever. If you wanted to simulate Ripostes, you could even say something like if the target succesfuly parries he can spend an attack action if he has any left this round to immediately make a follow up attack at a -4 penalty or something. Any way, I'll stop now as I realized I've veered too far off course.

 

[Aaron2]

I still stand by my argument though, that the parry is not represented in the normal give and take of combat. If it was, then your AC would improve equally with your Base Attack.

I disagree due to the availability of Expertise which allows you to convert BAB to AC. You BAB represents your total combat skill all focused towards attacking only. If you wish to focus on defense (by parrying or dodging etc), your BAB is reduced by the same amount your AC is increased.


Aaron

 

[Menexenus]

Parrying = Expertise

I always thought that the Expertise feat (in 3.0, in 3.5 I think it is called Combat Expertise) was meant to represent a character's ability to use their weapon to parry blows. You can choose to take a -5 penalty to attack and add +5 to AC. Doesn't this represent the fact that you are using your weapon to try to block blows rather than attack?

Of course, those who aren't trained in this fighting style (i.e., those who don't have the feat) can still try to block their opponents' blows with their weapon, but when an untrained person tries to do it, then it's called Fighting Defensively, and it isn't nearly as effective (-4 to attack, +2 to AC).

 

[Pbartender]

If you want some well thought out Parrying rules for 3.5, take a look at Skull & Bones by Green Ronin and Adamant Entertainment.

In a nutshell,

Give up an attack from you next turn* to make an opposed attack roll to parry an attack. Even if you fail the opposed roll, you opponent must hit your AC. You cannot parry more times than the number of attacks you would normally have with a full-attack action.

*This means that you MUST take some sort of attack action on your next turn, and you must decide what bonuses and penalties (from Feats, etc.) apply to the attack roll when you make the parry. Characters with high BAB or weilding two-weapons may make several parries, but they MUST take a full-attack the next round.

Example 1: The enemy attacks and you decide to parry a single attack. The next round, you take a normal Attack Action, but do not attack (the attack was used to previously parry). You have only a single Move-Equivalent Action for this round.

Example 2: The enemy attacks and you decide to parry a single attack. The next round, you take a full-attack action, but make one less attack than normal (the attack was used to previously parry). Aside from attacking, you can only take a 5-foot Step for this round.

Example 3: The enemy attacks and you decide to parry a several attacks. The next round, you take a full-attack action, but make one less attack than normal for every time you parried (the attacks wre used to previously parry). Aside from attacking (if you had any attacks left), you can only take a 5-foot Step for this round.

Skull & Bones also has several feats to enhance the effects of parrying.

I would lalow it as well, but the group I play with take turns DM'ing. For this reason they don't allow anything that isn't in the rules.

That makes it tough.

Another house rule that I've used, if your group is willing to accept it, is to allow character to use Attacks of Opportunity to make opposed attack rolls for parrying... Taking Combat Reflexes allows you to parry more than once per round. It's simple and it's easy, and let's people do something with those rarely-used AoOs.

 

[Kroax]

I have to agree with Menexenus. I too have always thought of (Combat) Expertise as the "parrying feat," although I also like to view it as the feat can give you as other types of defensive actions as the player chooses, such as dodging and kicking up dust.

The same goes for Fighting on the defensive. And if you're really paranoid about getting hit you can give up all your attacks in that round for a +4 AC bonus.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

In a nutshell,

Give up an attack from you next turn* to make an opposed attack roll to parry an attack. Even if you fail the opposed roll, you opponent must hit your AC. You cannot parry more times than the number of attacks you would normally have with a full-attack action.

If you have iterative attacks and you parry once, is your attack on your following round at the lower bonus? If you parry more than once, are subsequent parries at the lower attack bonus? If not, it's another case of "something for nothing."

Another house rule that I've used, if your group is willing to accept it, is to allow character to use Attacks of Opportunity to make opposed attack rolls for parrying... Taking Combat Expertise allows you to parry more than once per round. It's simple and it's easy, and let's people do something with those rarely-used AoOs.

I assume you meant "Combat Reflexes"?

That's the key, right, that AoOs are (relatively) rarely used? In other words, this house rule would allow something -- a good chance of blocking an attack completely -- for very little -- "those rarely-used AoOs." The rarer AoOs are in a game, the worse this house rule is.

If I ever did allow parries, as I said, it would only be as a Readied action. I'd also require the parrying weapon to take half-damage (less Hardness) from the attacker's weapon. (I'd do this not so much to balance parrying -- which I think would balance fine as a Readied action -- but because I like the idea of modelling superior grades of steel in combat, and this'd be another chance to do that. There's a reason steel replaced iron, which replaced bronze.)

 

[Tumbler]

So, if combat expertise reflects parrying or dodging or whatever defensive move (as does fighting defensively), why not a house rule that lets you fight as a defender, taking the fighting defensively penalty to attacks and granting the AC bonus to an adjacent ally. Then you could have a feat like combat expertise that would let you do so at a 1 to 1 ratio.

 

[Caliban]

So, if combat expertise reflects parrying or dodging or whatever defensive move (as does fighting defensively), why not a house rule that lets you fight as a defender, taking the fighting defensively penalty to attacks and granting the AC bonus to an adjacent ally. Then you could have a feat like combat expertise that would let you do so at a 1 to 1 ratio.

There is already the "Aid Another" option, which can be used to give someone +2 to their AC against a specific attacker, if you threaten the attacker and make a melee attack against AC 10.

A feat that increases the AC bonus probably wouldn't be out of line.