Karmic Strike: Undefeatable.......?

[Hawken]

Slightly off-topic, but I wonder why people think trip to be that much powerful tactics.

Trip isn't that powerful a tactic, but it is very useful. As for difficulty, like anything else, it just requires a potent combination of effects to be more effective. A barbarian with 18 str, improved trip, a sweeping weapon, and in a rage (+4 str), gets +14 to his trip roll. That tips the odds high in his favor against many opponents. And while it may not work all the time, when it does, the Improved Trip feat lets you immediately make an attack at that BAB against a now prone target (AC -4). Also, unless the target has the prone fighting feat, they are -4 to making any attacks and their AC is still penalized for the AoO they draw if they try to rise.

That's pretty argumentative. It is pretty obvious that the "Improved" line of feats you mention were intended to negate the AoO that the attacks normally provoke, so it'd be a DM's call as to whether they also negate AoO's granted through non-standard means. Feat A says you don't get an AoO, Feat B says you do. It's pretty much a toss-up as to which feat's wording trumps the other.

No it's not argumentative at all. Its actually rather straightforward. Those Improved feats, as written in the PHB, specifically state that the attacker making those moves does not provoke an AoO for doing those actions. Karmic Strike may allow AoO for doing them normally, but if you have the Improved feats, then Karmic Strike doesn't work. Period. There is nothing in Karmic Strike that states it trumps Improved feats and the wording of the Improved feats explicitly negate the benefits of Karmic Strike. As for your line of reasoning being obvious, that is your interpretation and you're welcome to it, but my statement was based on the rules as written in both books. And going by the letter, and most likely the intention behind them, the Improved feats in question negate KS. There's no toss-up or anything in question.

Whoa. Major errors there. Attacks do not automatically damage either a grappled or pinned opponent. You are required to make normal attack rolls, against which the opponent receive full AC. And in fact, the rules actually state (and this is pretty dumb IMO) that while you have an opponent pinned, you actually don't have the option of attacking him with any sort of weapon unless the opponent is actually holding it for you.

Not any major errors, maybe a slip in use of automatic. But read PHB, pg 156, under the section "damage your opponent", in place of an attack, all you have to do is make a grapple check and you inflict your unarmed damage--or damage from the spikes if you're wearing spiked armor. So, in my example, with the pinned (immobile) opponent, you just need to make a grapple check (melee touch) against a target with no dex bonuses to AC, and you get your base unarmed damage + armor spikes + str + whatever. So, while automatic may have been a bad word, my point still stands that grappling (with Improved Grapple) is one of the quickest, easiest ways to overcome the KS feat.

 

[Hypersmurf]

So, in my example, with the pinned (immobile) opponent, you just need to make a grapple check (melee touch) against a target with no dex bonuses to AC, and you get your base unarmed damage + armor spikes + str + whatever.

Hmm? If he's pinned, you make a grapple check against his grapple check. 'Melee touch' and AC don't come into it.

As far as Improved Grapple vs Karmic Strike, there's certainly room for argument. For example, from the text of Improved Unarmed Strike: "You do not provoke attacks of opportunity from armed opponents when you attack them while unarmed."

Does that mean that if I attack someone who's using Karmic Strike while I'm unarmed, he doesn't get any AoOs? Or does it mean that the feat removes the normal AoO provoked due to making an unarmed attack, without affecting AoOs for things like Power Lunge or Karmic Strike?

-Hyp.

 

[Hawken]

Hmm? If he's pinned, you make a grapple check against his grapple check. 'Melee touch' and AC don't come into it.

Heh! You're right. So much for being able to focus on a topic with my 2 yr. old daughter coming in and testing how far my ears will stretch!

You've got a point with the IUS feat, which is why I didn't specifically mention it. That feat states though that it prevents AoO which you would normally get for making an unarmed attack vs. an armed foe. But against Karmic Strike, it wouldn't matter. An unarmed strike or an armed one equally draw AoOs against that feat. IUS simply treats unarmed strikes as if they were armed; either condition allows retaliation via Karmic Strike.

With Improved Grapple, it specifically states that you do not provoke an AoO when you make a touch attack to start a grapple. So, it negates the condition (a melee attack or touch attack roll) that triggers the Karmic Strike feat. Same with Improved Bull Rush, Disarm and Trip. Improved Sunder is questionable though, since the DM must decide if attacking an object held or carried counts as an attack against the person--thus allowing Karmic Strike to come into play if it would.

 

[Hypersmurf]

With Improved Grapple, it specifically states that you do not provoke an AoO when you make a touch attack to start a grapple.

I quoted IUS above - it states that you do not provoke attacks of opportunity from armed opponents when you attack unarmed.

Those are the words it uses.

How is that different from your Improved Grapple argument?

Normally, attacking unarmed provokes an AoO. IUS prevents that.

Normally, initiating a grapple provokes an AoO. Improved Grapple prevents that.

Karmic Strike allows an AoO any time you are hit with a melee attack. Either this is prevented by both IUS and Improved Grapple, or by neither.

-Hyp.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Man this feat is a real mind-knotter, get whacked easily & gain the chance to whack back. I guess the key to using this is to have a decisive advantage in hit probability/damage output, ready healing, or some form of DR.

A 7th level monk would likely be making a mistake using this on a (power attacking) CR7 Hill Giant, but then that is the exception to the norm.

Question? Does Karmic Strike apply to one or all hits in a round?

 

[Bloodweaver1]

Understood that if you are fighting multiple opponents and/or an opponent that can deal at least double the amount of damage that you can deal in one round then this feat may not be high on the priority list. However, taking this feat combined with Knock Down, Combat Reflexes and their pre-requisites (Which a level 6 Monk can do.. I think) can greatly help in lowering the difficulty of fighting multiple opponents and even help when fighting that CR 8 Hulking Warrior. And on a side note, I seriously doubt the sanity of the character if they decide to take on a creature that can dish 2x the damage that it can.

A 7th level monk would likely be making a mistake using this on a (power attacking) CR7 Hill Giant, but then that is the exception to the norm.

Taking a minus four to AC I think works in this feats favor. The character wants to get hit or its pointless to have this feat. Plus Power Attack (unless combined w/ other feats) would only give the opponent an extra four points of damage. In my eyes they can have it, as the character is going to get their full attack damage in return which will be more than a mere four points….



And if the character wants to be more challenging against magic casters simply take Mage Slayer feat out of the Complete Arcane. Not a total fix but it does help when the caster can’t cast on the defensive.

The feat you mention with the free trip on the missed attack is Defensive Throw. You have to have Dex 13+, Improved Unarmed STrike, Dodge, Improved Trip and Combat Reflexes. And it is only useful against the focus of your Dodge feat.

Defensive Throw at that point is just an added bonus (Thanks Hawken) and more of a visually stimulating complement to this feat.

Also, what is so unfeasible or uncommon about using reach, ranged weapons, spells, spell-like abilities, or supernatural abilities against a character?

None… I was merely speaking strikly from a melee point of view. But you do have a very valid point.



***



I’ve learned, and I think most of the experienced players here will agree, that no one feat in the D&D setting can make or break a character but rather it takes a series of feats that takes a character from “eeh…” to “Holy Mary Mother of God!!!” With that and to maybe clarify my original post, I feel this feat has the greatest feat chaining capability a melee class character can get. Especially since there is no feat published yet that directly prevents this from happening.

That's pretty argumentative. It is pretty obvious that the "Improved" line of feats you mention were intended to negate the AoO that the attacks normally provoke, so it'd be a DM's call as to whether they also negate AoO's granted through non-standard means. Feat A says you don't get an AoO, Feat B says you do. It's pretty much a toss-up as to which feat's wording trumps the other.

I’m going to side with the fact that KS trumps the Improved **** attacks, as KS specifically says that you gain an AoO against any successful melee or touch attack. Period. For example if you were to have KS and go up against an opponent w/o Improved Grapple and they try to grapple you, would you get two AoO? No you would not, as dictated in the PHB you would only receive one. However conceptually you would get two AoO. And continuing with my conceptual thought process the Improved **** would only eliminate one of those two AoO. Hence KS would still work.



That is how I see it anyway…. Did I loose anyone…?



Action Result

Grapple AoO

Improved Grapple Negates AoO

Karmic Strike Regains the AoO

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Umm I don't think a Monk wants to trade hits with any heavy bruiser-type, that's their greatest Archilles heel.

I won't go through the math but a dimwitted Hill Giant will soon figure he wants to powerattack and that -4 becomes a +8 for his iterative attacks. Your 'typical' monk is risking death in this situation, especially if a *3 greatclub critical rears it's head.

 

[Bront]

The Improved XXXX feats negate the AoO for that particular action (Attacking unarmed, attempting a grapple/trip/disarm), but KS would still allow an AoO if the opponent hits.

Question. Is a successfull Trip a true Hit? How about a Disarm or Sunder? Grapple is, because you deal damage and are directly attacking the opponent. The others are not quite as clear.

Personaly, I don't think a trip is an actual hit, and a disarm or sunder is definately not (You're not attacking the character directly), so they wouldn't grant an AoO from KS.

 

[darkelfo]

Great thread. Lots of cool ideas. One thing that sucks about AoO based Feats is they depend on the GMs playstyle. Some GMs play the least intelligent mobs as some of the most astute tacticians for AoO purposes. Somewhat mitigated if you have a spiked chain since the area is so wide.

 

[Felon]

Not any major errors, maybe a slip in use of automatic. But read PHB, pg 156, under the section "damage your opponent", in place of an attack, all you have to do is make a grapple check and you inflict your unarmed damage--or damage from the spikes if you're wearing spiked armor. So, in my example, with the pinned (immobile) opponent, you just need to make a grapple check (melee touch) against a target with no dex bonuses to AC, and you get your base unarmed damage + armor spikes + str + whatever.

Hmm. You made a couple more mistakes while disagreeing with me.

Hype already pointed out one. The other is that you retain your Dex bonus to AC against someone you're grappling. I guess this mistake may be why you felt comfortable using the word "automatic"?

Karmic Strike allows an AoO any time you are hit with a melee attack. Either this is prevented by both IUS and Improved Grapple, or by neither.

Yep.