Trip, Disarm, Sunder

[Lord Zack]

I hope that stuff like tripping, disarming and grappling is simplified, but not removed, and especially not fighter class features. Class features might improve these capabilities, though.

 

[ruleslawyer]

If they stay, I hope that AoOs aren't tied to them any more. It added a whole layer of complexity that didn't make the game more fun to play.

Did you really have people without the right feats attempting these moves very often?

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Did you really have people without the right feats attempting these moves very often?

Often enough. It's pretty fun when the wizard says: "Well, I need a 20 to hit anyway, so I'm going for the grapple!"

 

[Davelozzi]

Did you really have people without the right feats attempting these moves very often?

For me, that is the problem. If it requires a feat to be worth considering, then there is a problem.

 

[blargney the second]

Did you really have people without the right feats attempting these moves very often?

Like Olgar said, often enough. The maneuvers themselves are complicated enough without adding in the hassle of AoOs.

Honestly, I'm still not clear how cover applies with and without reach against AoOs. After. Seven. Years.
-blarg

 

[Stalker0]

I think they will make them manuevers. Or perhaps they will incorporate some kind of action point based stunt system that recharges per encounter. Like every player starts with 4 action points each fight and can spend them to do neat things like swing off the chandeler for a bull rush or trip, disarm, etc.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

That would be awful, frankly.

But perhaps not unexpected. I've watched as the 3.5 splat-books have increasingly moved more and more actions which should be attemptable by anybody into the realm of "need a special class" or "need a special feat".

I consider this direction in design to be a complete dead-end. It seems foolish to move skills towards a "if you can think of it, you should be able to try it" direction while moving combat in the opposite direction.

Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net

I agree. There should be penalties to characters that try to do this without any training but they shouldn't be flat out unable to attempt it. I wouldn't like it if they went down that path.

Olaf the Stout

 

[ruleslawyer]

For me, that is the problem. If it requires a feat to be worth considering, then there is a problem.

Except, of course, that the likely tendency will be to require a feat (or maneuver slot) to perform in the first place! It's one of the things I don't like about, say, SWSE; you can't even TRY to properly grapple someone if you don't have the feat.

Also, I don't understand why it's really a "problem" to require a feat for such a non-standard option to become worth considering. There is a reason why grapples, trips, disarms, and so on are unusual maneuvers in combats in reality and fiction alike; it's generally more efficient to just whack your opponent and have done with. An AoO seems a small price to pay if you don't have the right feat.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Like Olgar said, often enough. The maneuvers themselves are complicated enough without adding in the hassle of AoOs.

Honestly, I'm still not clear how cover applies with and without reach against AoOs. After. Seven. Years.
-blarg

It doesn't negate AoOs.

EDIT: Regular cover doesn't negate AoOs. Total cover does.

 

[JustinA]

Do you think they'll remove the "trained only" skills from the game and make everything usable untrained?

Not. But it will almost look like Star Wars Saga where, except for a couple of "trained only" skills, you'll never be faced with the "I'd like to do X, but I didn't invest skill points in it 15 levels ago" situation.

Anyone can kick someone but it takes a little more training to really do a sweep kick trip attack.

I refuse to believe that anyone actually believes that only people specially trained can trip people.

A more powerful or effective trip? Sure. But anyone can attempt to trip somebody else. This is just a no-brainer.

Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net