Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 4090817" data-attributes="member: 1465">Mmm... somehow I have the feeling that you're thinking at "results" only in terms of balance, and already assuming that 3e should have the same balance features as 4e. I'm thinking that having a *basic* simulation properties IS a result they were looking for in 3e, and they dropped that target in 4e or at least lowered it significantly. Probably the problem is with Improved Trip, that it should have been limited to removing the -4 and not grant extra damage.In fact, the extra attack of Imp Trip is not necessary at all, from a believability point of view.But there is no problem in the basic 3e rules for tripping, and neither in removing the -4.3. Just change Imp Trip so that it removes -4 but gives no further benefits. Tripping an opponent sounds to me a tactic that someone would use when she's at a disadvantage (weaker) than the enemy, and wants to shift the battle to his favor. E.g. tripping could be a way for instance to hamper a monster bigger/stronger than you, that you cannot just beat by opposing your damage vs its own. Tripping could also be a good idea to slow an opponent for a round and then focus on another, or to facilitate capture, or sometimes even to catch the time to run away!In lieu of these ideas, the only fault of 3e tripping rules is the additional damage-dealing from tripping-focused feats.I think that turning it into an encounter class-only ability is like "throwing away the baby with the dirty water". You cannot even try your luck at it. Not only you cannot do it twice on the same opponent, but neither can you do it once to two different foes in a battle... These are limitations that turn me off, much more than Imp Trip ever did.</blockquote>

Verification