Please rate Prone Attack
- Thread starter smetzger
- Start date
Apok
First Post
I voted 3, and that's being kind. If your DM allows them, there are other feats out there that let you stand up from prone as a free action ,which is a much better feat to take and isn't very overpowering IMO.
On the other hand, if you have a bullheaded DM who thinks that all non-core suppliments are overpowered and for munchkins only (in which case he wouldn't be allowing this feat either
) then it's better than nothing but still not very usefull. Most enemies don't use trip attacks unless it's a specialy prepped encouter and Knockdown is rare to see. I'd sooner take Close Quarters Combat since Improved Grab is becoming a staple feature of many nasty monsters.
On the other hand, if you have a bullheaded DM who thinks that all non-core suppliments are overpowered and for munchkins only (in which case he wouldn't be allowing this feat either
) then it's better than nothing but still not very usefull. Most enemies don't use trip attacks unless it's a specialy prepped encouter and Knockdown is rare to see. I'd sooner take Close Quarters Combat since Improved Grab is becoming a staple feature of many nasty monsters.Elder-Basilisk
First Post
3-Of limited use. Unless your DM uses lots of Grease spells and most of his monsters have Improved Trip, you won't get much use out of this one at all. In the various campaigns I've played (including over 50 Living Greyhawk modules and probably a dozen Living Arcanis modules which gives me reason to believe that this is a general D&D thing rather than a peculiarity of the particular DMs I've played with), I've only seen villains use trip attacks in two situations--one was a module I wrote that gave the villains improved trip and I was DMing for the other.
More importantly, this doesn't remove the +4 to hit you because you're prone so it does nothing to mitigate the primary advantage (at least at low levels) of a foe improved-tripping you. Compare this to Close Quarters Fighting which gives you an AoO (enabling you to inflict more damage on your foe) and enables you to add the damage to your grapple check (usually giving you a very good chance of avoiding the grapple altogether) or blindfight which enables you to retain your dex bonus and reroll any misses due to concealment. Both of those mitigate or eliminate the primary advantage of the foe's ability. Prone Attack doesn't.
It also suffers from lightning reflexes as a prerequisite. This is a feat which is, IMO less than optimal for fighters (except maybe dex based archer or finesse types) who will rarely make reflex saves anyway--even with the +2--and generally have enough hit points to be able to survive the effects of a failed reflex save.
In short, in comparison to other defensive feats like Close Quarters fighting or Blindfight, its prerequisites are less useful, in most campaigns, it will come up in fewer situations, and in those situations, it is less useful.
More importantly, this doesn't remove the +4 to hit you because you're prone so it does nothing to mitigate the primary advantage (at least at low levels) of a foe improved-tripping you. Compare this to Close Quarters Fighting which gives you an AoO (enabling you to inflict more damage on your foe) and enables you to add the damage to your grapple check (usually giving you a very good chance of avoiding the grapple altogether) or blindfight which enables you to retain your dex bonus and reroll any misses due to concealment. Both of those mitigate or eliminate the primary advantage of the foe's ability. Prone Attack doesn't.
It also suffers from lightning reflexes as a prerequisite. This is a feat which is, IMO less than optimal for fighters (except maybe dex based archer or finesse types) who will rarely make reflex saves anyway--even with the +2--and generally have enough hit points to be able to survive the effects of a failed reflex save.
In short, in comparison to other defensive feats like Close Quarters fighting or Blindfight, its prerequisites are less useful, in most campaigns, it will come up in fewer situations, and in those situations, it is less useful.
If the feat took out all the penalties for being prone then I would rank it much higher. For one, it would be a different style of fighting, a person who drops to the ground and starts going at it would be cool to play. It would also be great against archers, because they suffer penalties to hit you when your prone.
However, the +4 to hit you is really nasty, so you would never like choose to go prone and as most others said tripping doesn't come up all that much like improved grap does. So I rank it a 3 as well.
However, the +4 to hit you is really nasty, so you would never like choose to go prone and as most others said tripping doesn't come up all that much like improved grap does. So I rank it a 3 as well.
Corwin the Confused
First Post
It won't let me vote!
Sejs
First Post
it's very situational. Handy if your DM likes tripping you, or ambushing you in your sleep ... you don't have to get out of bed to fight! heh.
On a seperate note, I disagree with the fact that you have to take a feat to be able to kip up. That is a load of hooey. A jump or tumble check DC whatever (15ish?) should let you regain your feet from prone as a free action on your turn instead of a move equavelant.
On a seperate note, I disagree with the fact that you have to take a feat to be able to kip up. That is a load of hooey. A jump or tumble check DC whatever (15ish?) should let you regain your feet from prone as a free action on your turn instead of a move equavelant.
Similar Threads
