New Feat: Hook Punch

[nameless]

The idea of the feat is to take advantage of a momentary opening in an opponents offense, caused by a "parry" to make a quick punch or kick. This strike can leave an unwary opponent momentarily stunned.

Prereqs: BAB 9+, Improved Unarmed Strike, Expertise

Benefit: While using expertise, and an opponent's attack misses, you may make an attack of opportunity using only an unarmed strike, and only if using a one-handed weapon in your main hand. If the attack successfully deals damage (even subdual damage), the opponent must make a Fortitude save DC = (10 + damage dealt). Failure means the opponent's initiative is reduced by 4 for the remainder of the skirmish. Any opponent reduced to less than 0 initiative loses the remainder of his actions for the round and rolls a new initiative at the beginning of the next round. Despite the change in initiative, the opponent may still finish the rest of his actions on his former initiative.

I'm mostly looking for how to pick the prereqs, and how to handle the penalties for losing some initiative. Any advice or suggestions are welcome.

-nameless

 

[Vaxalon]

... to make a quick punch of kick.

What is a "quick punch of kick"?

Let's take a look:

You have hook punch. You roll 20 on your initiative, I roll 19.

Before I lose an action, I have to fail my roll five times. When my initiative drops to 3, and I'm in danger of losing an action, I refocus, putting my initiative at, say, 23. Now if I fail another save, I'll be back at 19, but I'll have lost an action relative to you.

Now let's say I *don't* refocus. I get hit and fail the save, so my initiative drops to -1, and I have to reroll. I get a 14, and I have lost an action relative to you... but now, if I fail my save just four more times, I'm in danger of losing an action relative to you, rather than seven.

So anyone who's getting hit by this attack would be stupid to allow the reroll; a refocus is the right way to go.

 

[nameless]

I think you may have missed the point. Normally, a missed attack doesn't provoke an AoO. The feat has two main points: Give expertise another combat style, and give fighters with one-handed weapons some more options. Also note that the unarmed strike can be a stunning fist attack, a disarm, an eagle claw sunder, etc.

From a cinematic persepctive, the feat isn't supposed to be a repeated pummeling, it's locking the opponent's weapon momentarily so he's open for an off-hand punch. It also has the added benefit of applying a mini-stunning fist when the opponent has a low initiative.

Anyways, Vaxalon, do you think the feat is balanced?

-nameless

 

[Duganson]

Nameless.
Perhaps you should make Stunning fist a prerequisite. Give them a couple of additional Stunning Fists attacks per day then say that if an opponent misses you in melee and you use the expertise feat to make an AoO and must Stunning Fist. I would also reduce the BAB prerequisite to 4 or 5 if you do this.

The system you have is alittle underpowered IMO, especially for what you have to have to get it.

thysl in silver

 

[Vaxalon]

I agree. It's underpowered, and it's too complex.

I don't think there's another feat out there that takes this much space to explain.

 

[Shinsetsu]

How about making this maneuver a branch in the pin weapon/pin shield tree (expertise is fine, but pin weapon doesn't even have a style)? Just making the AOO available is pretty good. As for inflicting initiative penalties, I think Vaxalon is saying that a -4 penalty is not enough. You have to hit a guy so many times to take away one of his actions, you may be better off just eagle clawing him, or stunning him. How about a -10 penalty? Also, I disagree with the one handed weapon rule. What about the guy who takes his hand off the two handed sword for a sudden backfist to the temple? Where's the harm in that?

 

[Frostmarrow]

I like the feat. (I've been waiting for something just like it). However, I have a few issues with it. First of all I think that Improved Unarmed Strike and BAB+1 should suffice as prereqs. I like the idea of getting this feat as early as first or second level. Secondly I think the initiative loss is bad. You can, per the rules, act even at -10 initiative so what's the point of losing actions? I certainly don't get it. If you really like the idea of the hook being 'stunning' perhaps the victim gets clobbered (slowed next turn) on a crit. I don't know. If you polish it a bit I think it will make for a killer feat.