"What do you mean I can't...?"

[diaglo]

In both cases, I'll happily admit up-front that we didn't stick 100% to the rules. But we had an exciting, fast-moving scene that allowed the characters to try what they wanted to, that was highly cinematic, and was far more interesting than a standard "exchange of blows" combat would have been.

who's having an exchange of blows combat?

read the story hour in my sig.

we do narrative too.

my halfling ranger (favored enemy: Giants) leapt from a 20 ft balcony onto the back of an Ogre in the City of the Spider Queen. the whole time yelling out taunts and Geronimos and so on.

just b/c OoC it may sound lame to use rule X, Y, Z ... IC it still works.

 

[Mouseferatu]

who's having an exchange of blows combat?

Didn't mean to imply that's what you were doing, at all. I was simply commenting on how well the fight worked for our group, not comparing it to anything you (or anyone else) was doing.

The group makes frequent use of the grapple check. I just felt it was faster and easier to forego it in this case, that's all.

 

[DreadPirateMurphy]

There is a disparity between the perception of characters as heroic and the limitations imposed by the system for the purposes of balance. If Arnie or Stallone or Vin could do it in that movie, then I should be able to!

The reason these things require feats is because they are very hard to do.

Try dropping 10 feet onto the back of a live bull and try to land, grab hold, and stay on. Even professional rodeo cowboys would likely break their neck.

Take a bow and try to knock a sword out of somebody's hand with a shot from twenty feet away.

Run up to somebody, punch them, and then run away before they can react.

Try to run on top of a fence while juggling.

I agree that many of the things listed above could be handled with existing rules (charge followed by a grapple -- a grapple is considered a melee attack).

Jumping on a dragon would require a jump check to cover the distance, followed by a grapple attack, but only if the jump and the attack could take place in the same round (i.e., no running start). If the beast is large and you fail -- well, you are now suspended some distance above the floor, which means you fall and probably land prone (next to a large, annoyed foe).

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

That way, when you REALLY want that extra oomph, you can get it, but it's still VERY worthwhile to get Power Attack, even by itself.

Nah - just treat it like Fighting Defensively and Combat Expertise. Call it Fighting Offensively and Power Attack.

Take a -4 penalty on all attacks until your next turn, and gain a +2 bonus to all melee damage rolls (+0 for light weapons, +3 for two-handed weapons).

 

[jmucchiello]

can't sunder armor by RAW only weapons and shields

You can also sunder items carried or worn. But you are correct, there is a specific exclusion on armor. And there's no justification for it. Bad rule.

Sundering a Carried or Worn Object: You don’t use an opposed attack roll to damage a carried or worn object. Instead, just make an attack roll against the object’s AC. A carried or worn object’s AC is equal to 10 + its size modifier + the Dexterity modifier of the carrying or wearing character. Attacking a carried or worn object provokes an attack of opportunity just as attacking a held object does. To attempt to snatch away an item worn by a defender rather than damage it, see Disarm. You can’t sunder armor worn by another character.

and yet....

If You’re Pinning an Opponent...
You can use a disarm action to remove or grab away a well secured object worn by a pinned opponent, but he gets a +4 bonus on his roll to resist your attempt (see Disarm).

So while you cannot attack someone's armor, you can take it off them during a grapple. Wow, that's consistent. If I did this to my players, they'd lynch me.

I'd say ignore that last sentence under Sunder, or at least add the armor's armor bonus to the opposed grapple check when wrestling it off someone.

 

[diaglo]

You can also sunder items carried or worn. But you are correct, there is a specific exclusion on armor. And there's no justification for it. Bad rule.
and yet....
So while you cannot attack someone's armor, you can take it off them during a grapple. Wow, that's consistent. If I did this to my players, they'd lynch me.

I'd say ignore that last sentence under Sunder, or at least add the armor's armor bonus to the opposed grapple check when wrestling it off someone.

yeah, but removing armor takes minutes....even with help. edit: per the rules on donning armor.

 

[LostSoul]

Anyone can do this. It takes two rounds unless you have a special feat. In the first round you move and attack. On the next round you move. Easy.

It's just too much time for me to buy it.

 

[DonTadow]

It's just too much time for me to buy it.

I'd have to house rule against the taking off armor while grappled. That just doesnt make sense. The DMG is very lenient for describing donning and undonning armor as it took much much longer in mideval times.

As for attacking armor, yeah thats silly that you can't purposely attack the armor, because there's no way that a player can shield his armor from being attacked. I can see the thought pattern to this rule (everyone would just be sundering for the armor instead of trying to hit the player). But thats why I"m considering using armor as damamge reduction instead of AC strengthening. I might even consider allowing sundering of armor (considering its value would have dropped)

 

[fiddlerjones]

I for one am thrilled to see more feats coming out. They do not restrict combat options, as many have stated. They simply give the DM a benchmark of the appropriate power level of the maneuver. For example, if the diving charge deals extra damage of YdX, then maybe doing it without a feat should only grant an attack bonus, or deal Yd(X-2), or something. Just makes houseruling easier.
And IH's combat challenges are wonderful.

 

[Storm Raven]

It's just too much time for me to buy it.

If the limitations of the D&D combat system bother you, there are other games that give lots more detail and options.