Please rate Chink in the Armor

[Ridley's Cohort]

It is quite literally 'of limited use'.

Only a very narrow style of character will gain benefit from this feat. Even those characters need to use very specific tactics. That is a lot of if's for a feat that might give you a +5 to hit once at the cost of an action on a good day.

 

[Stalker0]

It can be useful against monsters with very high natural ACs, I can think of plenty of monsters from MMI with +10 or higher from natural armor, and a +5 to your next attack isn't too bad. However, I do agree its of limited use, if it was a move-equiv action it would have been much nicer.

 

[Kemrain]

Knight in full plate is being attacked from behind by a rogue with a short sword. The Rogue targets a chink in the Knight's armor, the unprotected spot beneath hit arms(armpits), and successfully put his blade in the knight's ribcage, completely bypassing the armor. So....how would you justify the DR still being applied, even IF halved?

Because most good plate still has chain mail underneath some of the plates and in the joints. Chain mail gives a +5 armor bonus, 4 if it's just a shirt, so it can be assumed you hit the chain instead of a plate. Still, it means that you'll actually hurt the bugger, instead of merely alerting him to your presence.

Sorry to drag the thread so off topic. Heheh.

- Kemrain the Rogue

P.S. In the Grim and Gritty system, there's a standardized called shot that allows you to ignore half of your opponent's armor bonus. Add this to it, and for the cost of an action, you get a whack in that bypasses armor completely. Though, I agree with Stalker0 that it should cost a move action, instead of a full round. (You can only make one attack in a round if you make a called shot anyway. Hmmm..)

 

[Gaiden]

I think this feat is slightly better than the apparent rogue/assassin-only consensus. However, it only becomes better when you are higher in levels where it is worth it to lose a standard action for a bonus on a single attack.

It is very good for a single high level rogue (w/o a party) and even better for an assassin. But it is also very useful for those who fight but don't necessarily use a meat grinder tactic (get as many attacks as quickly as possible) [against a highly armored foe]. For example, the spring attacking warrior with a high movement can benefit from this feat tremendously. It is also nice for a paladin with ride by attack. The catch to using this feat effectively (outside of the context of an ambush) is to ensure that while you lose a standard action, your opponent also does (or is in some way hampered). This can be done by having a much greater movement than your foe and or having defensive abilities that can kick in, in conjunction with this feat.

Almost all tactics I can think of off the top of my head will require haste, and probably the 3E version. For example, combine this feat with the OA feat that allows you to gain +4 to your attacks the next round if you perform a total defense. Combine that with a high tumble score, karmic strike, the OA feat that allows you to attack someone who misses you and superior expertise and you can have a very high AC, a decent chance to hit someone who misses you, a good chance of hitting someone who hits you, and a very good chance of hitting the opponent the following round. Combine this with Power Attack and true strike if you can get it (take a level of Sor), and I see a smack coming on.

This feat is by far the most useful against Dragons. IME, dragons often times have ridiculously high AC's given their CR and if a character is based around a concept of dragon slaying this feat is definitely for them, especially at lower levels.

Essentially you must do the calculation is it worth it to lose a standard action (either haste partial action if use 3E version) or your standard action for the round to gain a bonus to one attack next round. If your iterive attacks are going to miss anyway and you have a 50% or more chance of missing with your main attack, it is worth it and not if vice-a-versa.

 

[Bismark]

For example, combine this feat with the OA feat that allows you to gain +4 to your attacks the next round if you perform a total defense.

Not arguing with the general message of the post, but I think Total Defense is a full round action, isn't it? It's at least a standard action.

 

[Li Shenron]

I have to say I am not very fond of combat feats that require the character to "lose" one action or one round to get some benefit, especially when the benefit is usable only once per encounter.

Anyway, it's not too bad a feat this one, with some usefulness in ambushes. I have to say, I would very much allow the ambushing party to "study" the opponent before the surprise round, so to use the benefit on the surprise round itself; I am quite sure that a sage advice or faq would rule that you can't, and you have to wait until initiative count begins

 

[smetzger]

Note: there is no restriction to melee weapons. So, get out your bow...

 

[Celebrim]

Gaiden: Yes, leaving aside some rules issues that is basically true. But, even so you are still talking about a very limited special circumstance feat.

Most springy types I've encountered are rogues, or at least multi-classed rogue/fighter/duelists/shadow dancers in some combination.

It is certainly not clear to me that attacking every other round (or half the time you are able) is worth a small bonus to hit. In most cases, I suspect that if you worked out the numbers the iterative attack sequence would do more damage than something with a small bonus to hit. Remember, a 20 always hits. Imagine the situation of a 3 attack character who needs a 10 on his first attack vs. something with 12 armor bonus. You are trading a single attack at a 80% chance of hitting, for one attack at 50%, one at 25%, and one at 5%. That's about a wash. Looking over the course of the whole cycle, you are basically trading one attack at 80% for two at 50% each, which is nearly a wash even under these 'good' circumstances. I don't really think you are getting enough to justify the feat unless you are regularly facing +20 armor bonuses and for some reason can't match that with an attack bonus.

Your mention of the Paladin's smite is worthy though. A paladin needs that smite to hit hard and every little bit will help, I just wonder whether a Paladin can afford the feat on his small feat budget.

As far as the 'ride by attack' goes, all of that evading a round to study the foe opens you up to being charged and to missile fire. It doesn't do you much good (and I know it would do my NPC's very little good vs. the sort of PC's I usually have) to open up the distance like that if it is just going to draw a barrage of longbow fire and fireballs, nor are you really separating yourself if you have to spend that standard action plotting tactics unless you have a really fast mount. I know you aren't really getting separation by just being 'springy' (unless you have a movement enhancement). For this reason, I think the feat might have good synergy with anti-charge feats like 'hold the line' (which IMO as a DM is a good feat to take anyway if you plan to keep your front line fighter alive in the long run).

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

For this reason, I think the feat might have good synergy with anti-charge feats like 'hold the line' (which IMO as a DM is a good feat to take anyway if you plan to keep your front line fighter alive in the long run).

An astute comment.

I can see that as a viable combo. If you spend a round studying your opponent there is a good chance they will attack you.

 

[Gaiden]

Celebrim,

All good points.

However, IME (although that may be limited), I have not seen too much rotation between missile and melee combat. Rather, at least PCs, tend to stick with one or the other. Even if they do both, missile generally only occupies the beginning of the combat. After all, who "sheaths" their bow once they are in melee? The bow is dropped in favor of a melee weapon. Moreover, quickdraw is required to get that full attack in. If the opponent wants to revert back to missile he has to drop/sheath his sword and then pick up his bow getting at most two attacks in (w/haste).

The other option is to just fire missiles, but than you run into the problems of cover, lack of threatening an area, and AoO while firing while threatened.

What I have seen is the chase, where the character chases his opponent around. You brought up the charge, but remember that requires a straight line. This can be very limiting in the right environments, namely, anything other than open space - forest with trees, mountains with rocks, hills with trees/bushes, desert with cacti, room with table/chair/desk/bed, etc.

This in general always favors the chased with the caveat that they have a greater movement. Moreover, even if the opponent can charge, the bonus to charge is pitily in comparison to the defensive benefits from the combo I outlaid above. On the other hand that is fairly specific. But it certainly could be made more general. Even if all one did was use expertise, or fight defensively with tumble, the chased still wins out. Especially given the fact that the next round, along with the armor halving, the character now also has an additional -2 to their AC.

Too often I notice that it is the case that a character tries to achieve more actions in his turn without keeping track of his/her opponent's number of actions per turn. The advantage for gaining additional actions comes from having a higher number relative to the opponent. In this case of this feat, you give your opponent an advantage by reducing your number of actions to his. To offset this balance you need to find a way to reduce his number of actions or increase yours. In general, your opponent can increase his actions the same way you can (e.g. you both can be hasted, for your TWF, the spellcaster has quickened spells, etc.) So, unless your opponent does not have access to these benefits, it is up to you to in some way reduce them. This can simply be done by interposing distance between yourself and your opponent with some sort of obstacle or beyond your opponents charging range. The catch is that while this would normally effect you and your opponent equally - neither of you gets to do anything, you have in fact gained some benefit.

So, the point - while it is true that it may be a wash between the stats (which it certainly isn't always - that is completely dependent upon the armor bonus), it is not a wash if you reduce your opponents number of actions.