Please rate Knock-Down

[Pax]

I like this feat. It is not uber-powerful but it has some nice tactical applications.

Pax, even though you are mistaken about losing Dex when prone, Expert Tact is still an excellent choice for that Fighter; with such a large threatened area is would be quite easy to capitalize on enemys that get stunned or blinded (stunning fist, Sound Burst, Holy Smite, etc.). Instantly knocking them on their butts so your friends can finish them off more easily is a good move.

Difference of opinion mostly. I consider being knocked down to be equivalent to being "off balance" until you have a chance to actively correct that state -- at which point you are merely prone. I agree, it'snot true in teh strictest sense of the rules, but it's a logical extrapolation of what the rules offer.

Personally I would pick up Hold the Line before Expert Tact. With such a huge tactical footprint, enemies will be tempted to charge you to take you out of the picture. HtL will cause conniption fits for anyone without Spring Attack. Remember to beg the Wizard to cast Protection from Arrows on you.

A very good idea, especially with the problems the Errata for Knockdown presents (ugh, that's not a change I'll apply IMC ...). And, as I sugested, especially useful for people using non-spked-chain "reach" weapons, like the Long Spear.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Difference of opinion mostly. I consider being knocked down to be equivalent to being "off balance" until you have a chance to actively correct that state -- at which point you are merely prone. I agree, it'snot true in teh strictest sense of the rules, but it's a logical extrapolation of what the rules offer.

Don't recall any condition called "off balance" in the core rules. Knocked down==prone, as far as I can tell.

I am not very happy withe "off balance" condition for the simple reason is it often much worse than simple falling flat-faced into the turf. Expert Tact is one reason but Sneak Attacks are the big issue. Personally I think "off balance" is getting a little too clever with the mechanics for a very abstract, cinematic system.

 

[Arcanus]

How about it you rule it this way:

You have Expert Tact. & Knockdown with all the prerequisites.
You also have 2 attacks a round due to BAB or Haste etc...
(NOTE THAT THIS IS NOT BECAUSE OF THE FEATS ABOVE)
Now you manage to do 10 points or more to said opponent on 1 attack, now you get to do a free attack which has to be a trip,
lets say you win then trip opposed roles, now he is ON HIS WAY to the ground, While all of this is happening in a 6 second time frame you make your last attack from BAB or from Expert Tact. etc... and you smack him good while he is UNBALANCED allowing no Dex bonus but you can't have your +4 prone bonus because he isn't on the floor yet.

Your Knockdown feat gives you a free trip.
You win the trip. Opponent on the way to ground.
If you have Expert Tact. and he has lost his Dex becuase of the
unbalancing issues while falling you smack him again.

I dunno know what you think about it but I would not give anyone the no Dex thing on a tripped opponent unless the following criteria can be satisfied.

1. Attacker has more than 1 attack to begin with OR Expert Tact.
2. Opponent chose to use his Dexterity modifier to oppose the trip and lost. If so then he shows the he is not agile enough and that he COULD be off-balance
3. He only looses (MAYBE) his Dex bonus to the attacker nobody else get that advantage.
4. The attack is made from Expert Tact. without the prone bonus becuase he is hitting him as he falls to the ground.
5. If you had more than 1 attack to begin with and Expert Tact. then you can get the prone hit against him after you make your No DEX to AC Attack as explained in #4.

I see the Knockdown feat as not really grabbing a foot to trip but hitting him hard enough to knock him over and you are using your strength etc... to keep following through to get him down.

I might not have explained it correctly in my opinion as it only is.
OR......... I might just be talking out my ass just to hear a funny noise.

 

[KarinsDad]

Difference of opinion mostly. I consider being knocked down to be equivalent to being "off balance" until you have a chance to actively correct that state -- at which point you are merely prone. I agree, it'snot true in teh strictest sense of the rules, but it's a logical extrapolation of what the rules offer.

So, you want to make the uber Knockdown feat even more unbalanced?

A very good idea, especially with the problems the Errata for Knockdown presents (ugh, that's not a change I'll apply IMC ...). And, as I sugested, especially useful for people using non-spked-chain "reach" weapons, like the Long Spear.

So, you consider Knockdown balanced as written in S&F?

Hmmm. Strange. That’s like saying that a feat that gives you a free extra swing if you do 10 points of damage is balanced. Because, that’s fairly close to what this feat does.

Granted, Knockdown does not allow you to do extra damage (if using the errataed version), but it does give you an automatic hit on the follow up trip.

Cleave only gives you an extra attack if you drop your opponent. Plus, you need an additional roll to hit on the free swing. Most characters at that number of feats can generally do 10 more points of damage more often than they can drop a foe.

So, compared to Cleave, the non-errata version of Knockdown will not only give you an extra attack, but that attack will be at +4. And, any remaining attacks that round from you or allies will be at +4. And, your prone opponent cannot do a full round attack next round against you.

Power-wise, Knockdown (as written in S&F) is vastly more potent than Cleave.

In fact, even with the errataed version of no free swing, it is more potent than Cleave.

Just the fact that once you get a full round attack against a same sized creature (for the most part) will tend to result in an eventual trip in that round, hence, further attacks in that full round attack are at +4. Plus, your opponent cannot full round attack back due to having to use up a move equivalent to attack back.

Many attacks against one is virtually like having some form of Improved Haste on the character with Knockdown.

Knockdown with the errata is worth about 2 normal feats. Knockdown without the errata is easily worth 3 normal feats. It’s just that powerful.

 

[Caliban]

Please rate the usefulness/must have of the Knock-Down feat.

Knock-Down [General]
REQ: Base Attack bonus +2, Improved Trip, Str 15+
Whenever you deal more than 10 or more points of damage to your opponent in melee, you may make a trip attack as a free action against the same target.
Use of this feat cannot be combined with Improved Trip to generate an extra attack, and successful use of this feat does not grant an extra attack through Cleave or Great Cleave feats.
Sword and Fist, pg 7

It's a good feat, if you use it by the core rules and the errata. It's basically an upgrade to Improved Trip (you get the attack first, and then you trip them, instead of trying to trip them and maybe getting an attack).

It's a broken feat if you choose to ignore errata and use Pax's "creative" interpretations of the rules.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

You exagerate slightly, KD, but I agree with your point.

If we use Pax's interpretation, one attack could result in:
(1) a hit
(2) if >10 damage, Trip
(3) if Trip succeeds, attack again

That is three attacks for the price of one, only two of which cause damage.

The net effect would be to potentially double damage and knock every opponent to the ground. Can you imagine the synergy with Great Cleave?!? Who needs Whirlwind when you have double damage on your side?

With my "stingy" interpretation, I rated Knockdown as above average and cool.

Caliban is right. It is a nice feat as an incremental upgrade to Improved Trip because it saves you the trouble of deciding whether to attack for damage or not. Just whack away and enemies will fall down. (Theorectically you might prefer to not risk missing in the first place, but that would be rather rare.)

 

[Pax]

So, you consider Knockdown balanced as written in S&F?

Yes, absolutely. If it replaces Improved Trip, then the feat should REPLACE Improved trip, not add to it. It adds no real functionality to the damage atatck + trip attack combination, except tolet you make the damaging attackfirst, and then require you to meet or beat a damage threshold before proceeding to the trip attack.

If the feats chained more along the lines of Cleave / Great Cleave, that would be one thing (where Great Cleave is basically "Cleave and Again"). However, Knockdown is not "Improved trip, and again".

Hmmm. Strange. That’s like saying that a feat that gives you a free extra swing if you do 10 points of damage is balanced. Because, that’s fairly close to what this feat does.

No. If your first attack hits, and then if you do sufficient damage (lets face it, most pre-ELH characters don't have a guaranteed 10+ damage per hit), you have the option of attempting a trip, and if you succeed at that attempt, you get to attack again; if that last attack roll connects, you get to do damage again.

So we're lookng at:

? (1) Roll to hit
if successful, proceed to (2) else terminate sequence
? (2) Roll damage
if damage>9, proceed to (3) else terminate sequence
? (3) Roll to hit
if successful, proceed to (4) else terminate sequence
? (4) Roll Opposed Trip
if successful, proceed to (5) else suffer consequences
? (5) Roll to hit
if successful, proceed to (6) else terminate sequence
! (6) Roll Damage

I count six times the entire sequence can be derailed by not getting a good enough roll to proceed. "Suffer consequences" as a reuslt of step (4) refers to teh fact that a failed trip ofteninvolves being tripped, or losing one's weapon(s) where the weapon specifies this as an option.

Neither of those penalties is insignificant; either one surrenders the initiative to the enemy, and he who surrenders the initiative in combat ... typically loses. Often badly.

I don't see how the above sequence is unalanced, and yet ...it's exactly how the feat is presented in Sword and Fist.

And you nkknow what? I'm willing to bet the Errata for Knockdown came in response to fears of an "infinite loop" combination (knock him down, get free trip, succeed in trip, get free attack, knock him down, get free trip, succeed in trip, get free attack, knock him down, get free trip, succeed in trip, get free attack, knock him down, get free trip, succeed in trip, get free attack, and so on and so forth). I fixed that problem with much better simplicity: prone creatures cannot be tripped. End of loop. End of problem.

Granted, Knockdown does not allow you to do extra damage (if using the errataed version), but it does give you an automatic hit on the follow up trip.

I don't see that. IT allows you to make the attempt, but it does not automatically follow that the to-hit roll is obviated in regard to the trip attack.

Cleave only gives you an extra attack if you drop your opponent. Plus, you need an additional roll to hit on the free swing. Most characters at that number of feats can generally do 10 more points of damage more often than they can drop a foe.

The Cleave or Great Cleave attacks canbe against anyone; Knockdownand Improved Trip attacks have to be against the same target. Otherwise, Improved Trip itself allows a Whirlwind-like attack on everything in reach (not just within 5', if you have a Spiked Chain), as oen trip allows you to try for another, on a different foe. More restricted target ---> better frequency of use = balance.

So, compared to Cleave, the non-errata version of Knockdown will not only give you an extra attack, but that attack will be at +4. And, any remaining attacks that round from you or allies will be at +4. And, your prone opponent cannot do a full round attack next round against you.

Improved Trip already gives you that attack, and all subsequent attacks, at +4. Errata'd, there is a LOT less reason to bother with Knockdown.

Power-wise, Knockdown (as written in S&F) is vastly more potent than Cleave.

Well it shoudl be at least somewhat better. Cleave is second step in a feat chain; Knockdown is the THIRD step. Knockdown is better compared to Great Cleave.

I disagree on it being "vastly" better, as cleave works with anything, and only certain weapons can even attempt a trip attack.

In fact, even with the errataed version of no free swing, it is more potent than Cleave.

I disagree, bu regardless, it should be better. Again, it's the third in a chain (Expertise -- Improved Trip -- Knockdown) versus the second in a chain (Power Attack -- Cleave -- Great Cleave).

Just the fact that once you get a full round attack against a same sized creature (for the most part) will tend to result in an eventual trip in that round, hence, further attacks in that full round attack are at +4. Plus, your opponent cannot full round attack back due to having to use up a move equivalent to attack back.

You DO realise, a failed trip attack screws the trip-er over, landing either him or his weapon sprawled at the trip-ee's feet?

Improved Trip and Knockdown inherently involve a greater degree of risk than Cleave or Great Cleave, so that also justifies anincrease in power level.

In my mind, that alone justifies Improved Trip beign better than Cleave (which it is), and pre-errata Knockdown being better than Great Cleave (which it is, but only pre-errata).

Many attacks against one is virtually like having some form of Improved Haste on the character with Knockdown.

Knockdown with the errata is worth about 2 normal feats. Knockdown without the errata is easily worth 3 normal feats. It’s just that powerful.

No, I strongly disagree; the reasons are spelled out above, but to summarise:

One, Knockdown shoudl be compared to Great Cleave, as both are the third in a three-feat chain. Comparing the third feat in a chain to the second, and you are AUTOMATICALLY biasing the comparison.

Two, Improved Trip and Knockdown are more restricted in which weapons allow their use, than Cleave or Great Cleave; only certan weapons can be used to make Trip attacks, therefor, the feats should get some degree of enhanced perceived power to comensate. You can cleave with anything, but you can't trip with anything.

Three, trip attacks carry a certain degree of risk; in the event of a failure, either the attacker accepts being tripped themselves, or, the atatcker surrenders their weapon, and drops it. This heightened tactical risk also justifies anenhancement to the perceived power level of the feats. Taken with two above, this justifies a qite significant power increase in relation to the power atatck / cleave / great cleave chain.

 

[Limper]

Concidering if you fail to trip your foe, then your foe gets to trip you unless you can drop your weapon... given all this I dont think the feat is worth much, heck all they have to do is stand up... if you havn't moved away then they can stand up and whump on you.

I played a Fighter/ Barb with it and it never worked to my advantage once and I got to play with it for 5 levels.

I believe "off balance" leaves you flat footed... according to OA.

 

[KarinsDad]

The issue here is the ease in which Knockdown can be done.

How hard is it to roll 10 points of damage? Typically it‘s fairly easy, in fact, it is often automatic at mid to high level for a straight combatant type character. For example, if your +2 Longsword and 18 Strength and Weapon Specialization could manage a 9, you could easily have the Cleric buff you up with Bulls Strength, or you could put one point in via Power Attack, etc. It is a piece of cake to automatically get a minimum of 10 points of damage for most combatant types at mid to high level.

How hard is it to roll a touch attack on the trip attempt? Typically you have a 95% chance by the time a character acquires this feat and will only fail on a one.

How hard is it to make the opposed check to trip? Typically, you only do this when your opponent appears less capable, hence, your chance is typically better than 50%.

How hard is it to make the opposed check to trip if you fail the first opposed check? Typically, you only do this when your opponent appears less capable, hence, your chance is typically less than 50%. And, if you are really worried about being counter tripped, you can carry multiple weapons that give the trip capability and all you lose is your weapon for a short period of time.

For example, in the case of you having a 60% chance to succeed a trip, you will succeed 60% of the time, nothing will happen 24% of the time, and you will fail 16% of the time. Assuming you only do this when your chance is 50% or better, the odds (round closest) for most combat situations works out to be:

50 25 25
55 25 20
60 24 16
65 23 12
70 21 09
75 19 06

And, the first roll to hit is irrelevant. If you are just attacking, you either hit or you do not. The question comes down to what MORE can you do with Knockdown, if you do hit.

So, what does this mean in lay terms? Let’s take the 60% chance to trip case again. It means that when you feel that you have an advantage, you will be at an even greater advantage about 4 times as often as your opponent. If you succeed, you will get +4 more to hit (as will your allies) and your opponent will not be able to do full round attacks on his turn.

And, in a full round attack sequence, you can attempt this virtually every time you hit, so at mid to high levels with 3, 4, or even more attacks per round depending on other feats, you have a good chance of putting your opponent down every round. In the 60% chance to trip case, this means that more than 84% of the time (i.e. you either did not do 10 points or you failed the range touch attack or you succeeded, or nothing happened), you will not fail the first time you attempt it and can try it again later in the same full round attack sequence.

When you look at the fact that characters with this feat can either boost their Strength themselves (e.g. Barbarians or Fighter/Clerics) or have it done for them (e.g. magic items or assistance from spell casters) and they decided when to do it or not, it’s fairly easy to see that the chance to do 10 points of damage is fairly high or automatic and the chance to make the opposed roll is fairly high as well. Yes, if you are taking on a combatant type or a Rogue, your chances might be in the 50% to 60% range. But, if you are taking on some other class character or a lot of same sized Monsters, your chance will often fall in the 65% to 75% or higher.

When you see that their opponent is not only effectively at -4 AC, but that the character with the feat can start doing full round attacks to his opponent’s one attack, or he does one attack to his opponent’s zero attacks (i.e. the opponent gets up and moves away instead of getting up and attacking), this can be game breaking.

One other good tactic with this. Charge up and attack. Chances are good that you will do damage and trip your opponent, all with one attack. Then, you can start up the full round attack versus one attack cycle on the next round.

Granted, there is a chance that your opponent will counter trip you (assuming that you are not using a trip weapon). Big deal. What is better? Being at no perceptible advantage every single round, or being at a significant advantage anywhere from 2 to 12 times as often? Round after round after round.

Allowing the extra attack from Improved Trip just takes this from an extremely potent feat (compared to other comparable 3 feat chain feats like Great Cleave where you might be able to use it one combat in 20 at mid to high level) to a broken one. IMO.

Btw, Improved Trip is very potent as well, just like the errata version of Knockdown. In fact, there is little difference between them except that with Knockdown, even if you get counter tripped, you still have done damage. So, it is typically a little more potent than Improved Trip. Knockdown is a better choice against lower ACs (for example, early on in a full round attack sequence), and Improved Trip is a better choice against higher ACs (for example, later on in a full round attack sequence if you have not already knocked them down).

And, that’s how it should be, a little more potent than Improved Trip. Not, 3 attacks (hit, trip, attack again at +4) compared to 2 attacks (trip, attack again at +4) from one attack and one feat. That’s unbalanced. Throwing "unbalanced penalties of loss DEX bonus" on top of that is ludicrously unbalanced.


Finally, the argument that only certain weapons can trip is specious. First off, the type of character who takes Improved Trip and Knockdown is often likely going to take a weapon that can trip. Just like a character who takes Ambidexterity and Two Weapon Fighting will most likely take weapons that allow him to use those feats.

Plus, you do not NEED a trip weapon in order to trip. I can attack with a longsword with Knockdown, do the 10 points of damage, and then attempt to trip you with my leg. Nothing in S&F says that I have to use the same weapon to attempt to trip you. It just says that I have to do it against the same target. Ditto for Improved Trip, or any trip for that matter.

 

[Jeremy]

As KD pointed out, there are a couple of powerful abilities that knockdown has been ruled to have that you have missed.

1) You don't need a trip weapon to use knockdown. If you have one good, but a great club will work just as well as an unarmed strike to deck someone. 10 points of damage is the only prerequisite.

2) As it is not a trip so much as knocking someone down with damage (decided by using the trip mechanic) not only do you not get the improved trip follow up attack (as clarified in errata) but you also do not provide a counter trip attempt if you fail. There was no tug of war with the legs to allow it. It was a single blow to the right place (maybe the crook of a hip or the side or back of a knee) that had the chance to send the foe sprawling. No counter trips.

And as I pointed out in my monk example above, it is still a powerful and useful feat even when used with the proper errata. Without it, you may acquire some dirty looks from your gaming fellows. Especially when one of them looks up the errata and founds you have been doing it wrong.

Might want to go check out the Official D&D FAQ.

Link to FAQ