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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6049101" data-attributes="member: 6696971">@<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/members/eldritch_lord.html" target="_blank">Eldritch_Lord</a> I was speaking generally about "forced movement" as there was malcontent expressed about the mechanic conceptually (and CaGI was used as the prime offender to illuminate the point).  However, if you want to compare 3.x Combat Feint/Bluff to CaGI, I will attempt to do so.What are my primary concerns when it comes to mechanical tactical options?  In this order, they are:1 - Is it fun?2 - Does it promote dynamism and depth within the tactical interface and the accompanying running combat narrative in a genre/archetype-relevant fashion?3 - Is it balanced with other options such that it is good enough to be chosen against other options while not being too good such that there is no choice (you must take it)?4 - Is it abstract/versatile enough that it can allow for multiple renderings/applications within the running combat narrative?5 - Is it mechanically functional/streamlined with respect to ease-of-use?6 - Finally, is it so abstract as to have no meaning at all (process simulation agenda)?3.x combat feint/bluff fails miserably here as it is fiddly, but more importantly, it is an action economy catastrophe.  It was never used in my game save by one Rogue who decided to take the Improved Feint feat.  However, once he realized that;- He was always able to catch a target flat-footed in the first round of combat- He was typically able to flank someone in subsequent rounds- Moving (improved feint is a move action rather than standard) rendered his full attack routine inert (thus crushing his DPR)He traded it for Flick of the Wrist (which requires an easy to meet condition, no action economy expenditure, and no contest).  On most of those metrics, 3.x Combat Feint fails.  As such, for all intents and purposes, it did not exist for my group.  Further, beyond all of this, if we're truly interested in accurate process-sim, a true Combat Feint should be an expression of equal parts Dexterity (coordination + quickness), Intelligence (information processing to size up your opponent's posture/stance/acumen quickly + learned technique to disguise your true attack with what you are feinting...a la a pump fake in football modelling a real pass and a change up looking like a fastball out of the pitcher's hand).  Panache, Presence or Drive may come into play but only in an exceedingly narrow narrative view of a bluff...and it certainly wouldn't trump Dex and Int.  In my estimation, this is the poster child for arbitrary granularity (and incoherent granularity at that).  They would have been better served going with Sleight of Hand (although if they truly wanted granularity that would have still been insufficient).Alternatively, CaGI hits all of those marks (and well) but, clearly, for some folks, it fails at 6.  So lets talk about 4 and 6.Do we really need to have a mechanical resolution aspect of "you shift back one square" and then the enemies come at you?  I say no.  Not only does that serve no real purpose mechanically, it is one of those odd granularities for no end.  It can, and should, be assumed that actors in combat are constantly moving.  They are not standing still for 6 seconds waiting for their turn.  If that is true, it is easily enough accomplished just by narrating the power as "I swiftly turn and take a hard step or two toward <the alley, the docks, the stairs, the embankment, etc>.  As I hear the roars of my foes and the thunder of their footsteps closing in...I whirl on them, the gleam of death in my eyes."  Further, forcing a 5 foot move hurts 4.  It narrows the scope of narrative possibilities.  It makes CaGI comport only with the possibility of such a feint as I outlined.  It drowns out the possibility of a challenge such as; "I take my great sword in both hands and bury it into the ground, halfway to the hilt, before me.  I crouch like a wild beast.  A roar that awakes my prideful ancestors bellows from somewhere deep within me.  My enemies accept the challenge.  I cut them down like dogs."  And on and on.  In short.  CaGI works perfectly for my agenda and my playstyle preferences.  Combat Feint does not.  However, I do understand there are differences on this and I can respect them easily enough.</blockquote>

Verification