I attack...I attack...or do I? Hmm...

In the last post I went into detail about the issues with fighters and how I plan to address them...or at least the methodology and mind-set behind how I am going to address them. With that in mind, I present some Combat Maneuvers.

Combat Maneuver Bonus = Attack Bonus/2 + # of Hit Dice/2

Combat Maneuver Defense = 10 + Combat Maneuver Bonus

First things first, let's talk about CMB and CMD. They were introduced in Pathfinder to simplify things like grappling. Now as most know...grappling usually either sucks or is amazing depending on how the character is built using numerous source books and rules. In general, however, grappling blows as an option unless you make it good. The buggy issue with CMB and CMD is that it scales poorly...so at some point people that are bad at Combat Maneuvers cannot hope to resist those that are good at them. This is stupid. I have changed it to the calculations above. Now, at worst, a 10th level fighter versus a 10th level wizard gives the fighter a +10 roll (half of Attack Bonus 10 + 10 Hit Dice) versus the wizards 18 defense (10 base + Attack Bonus 5 + 10 Hit Dice). The result is that the Wizard still sucks at it and the Fighter will still probably be able to successfully maneuver him but it isn't a boring needless roll where you're just hoping to not get a 1. Boring rolls are boring. They went for simpler...they got boring. Same ballpark...different game.

Of course it needs to be tested at extremes too. So let's look at 20th level wizard vs 10th level fighter. That is a +10 versus a 25. Fighter needs a 15. That is very reasonable. The wizard is still vulnerable to a fighter....the fighter just has to get close enough to do something (good luck little guy!) but when he gets in close it isn't an auto-success. Tension. I love it. Players love it. On the flip, the wizard has a +15 versus the fighters 20 CMD. So the wizard can throw down! In fact, statistically he might be better off just trying to trip up the fighter with his staff so he can put some distance between them instead of attacking! Well hot-dog that sounds just about right, doesn't it?

More extremes need to be looked at though. Stress testing is critical. Let's pair up a 10th level fighter versus a 20th level fighter. That is a +10 versus a 30. The 10th level needs a nat 20 to successfully effect the 20th level fighter. Well that just works beautifully doesn't it? On the flipside, the 20th level fighter has +20 against the 10th level fighters 20 CMD. He can't fail except on a 1. Seems right to me!

One last stress test. Level 1 fighter versus level 10. Level 1 fighter has +1 to his roll. We already know the level 10 has a 20 CMD. Lvl 1 needs a 19 or 20. Fair enough. On the flipside, the level 10 has a +10 versus the level 1's CMD of 12.

Interestingly enough, at lower levels people are closer in ability to muck around with each other. After all a 1st level wizard has a bonus of +1 to his CMB and a defense of 11. A 1st level fighter has a +1 to his CMB and a CMD of 11. So identical. Fair enough, these guys are both rookies. By the time they reach level 3 the wizard will be CMB +2 and CMD 12 while the fighter is +3 and CMD 13. By level 8 the wizard is +6 and 16 while the fighter is +8 and 18. Level 12 is wizard at +9/19 and fighter at +12/22. They stay within striking distance of one another but the advantage will always be to the fighter. As we know they will top out at the wizard with +15/25 and the fighter with +20/30. This is fair especially as the fighter is going to be getting class abilities that make their combat maneuvers even more attractive as options. They never fully go away as options for the wizard tho...they just aren't as attractive. Most importantly, they never become NON-VIABLE for the wizard.

As for monsters well I stat them with, generally, lower attack bonus but with increasing hit dice. Giants, for instance, are not super accurate because most are not trained in any way (watch out for those Fire Giants tho!) but they have a lot of Hit dice. After all, as Alexis showed us over at his blog, it's really awesome to give monsters more HP if they're bigger! So a bigger monster with more Hit dice is harder to use certain maneuvers against. Logical.

Now onto the maneuver examples themselves!

Parry [Use: Standard] - Until the characters next turn, after any Attack Roll against the character, they may make an Attack Roll. The character may use their Attack Roll as their AC against the Attack Roll targeting them. Each Attack Roll the character makes after the first in a round receives a cumulative -2 penalty to the roll. A character may choose to use their Parry to defend an adjacent character. If they do, the adjacent character may use the Attack Roll as their AC against an attack. If a character defends another in this way, they are Flat-Footed until the beginning of their next turn.

Now, as stated in a previous post, players should have a good defensive action. Now why such a good defensive option? It has to be good for players to do it. Generally attacking and dealing damage is a better option than anything else precisely because it removes a threat. In other words, a good offense is the best defense. Hence, a purely defensive action has to be pretty damn good. And what's that you say? This allows & encourages players to defend vulnerable group members and allows shield walls to actually do their job for people behind them?! Yeah I noticed that too.

Cut-Off [Use: Standard] - Until the characters next turn, they may make an attack against any foe entering the threatened space they're facing. Any successful attack does only half damage. If the attack hits and does damage the hit foe cannot continue moving through the characters threatened spaces. When moving into a threatened area, a foe may choose to continue moving even if they are hit but they are flat-footed against the characters attack and a successful attack does full damage instead of half.

First you'll notice mention of "facing". Yup it's gonna exist in the system. More on that later. You know all those movies where enemies charge and the guy with a sword wards them off and back with his weapon, cutting off a hallway from their advance? Notice that there is also an option built into the maneuver for attackers as well since they can basically walk into the blade, hope to soak the damage and muscle their way through. Mind you, for most reasonable NPCs that will be a "no way" situation...but, on the other hand, you wouldn't expect this to work against mindless skeletons that aren't even aware of what you're trying to do, right? The possibilities for this maneuver are amazing. It also gives pikemen something to do!

Push Back [Use: Standard] - The character makes a Combat Maneuver roll against a target. If successful, the target is moved back 5 feet. If the attempt succeeds by 5 or more, the character may choose to push back the target 10 feet instead.

Been here. Discussed that.

Power Attack [Use: Full] - The character makes an Attack Roll using 2d20 and uses the lower of the two as their result. If the attack is successful, the character rolls damage and adds all standard modifiers twice.

God I love this version of power attack. It is not only a gamble but it pays off in a fun way (more dice!) that players should feel when they do it. It makes Power Attacking feel different from a regular attack in a tactical and tactile way. Instead of it being useless (oh hai 3.5!) or the statistically best option for every swing (oh hey there Pathfinder!) it always remains a gamble.

Trip [Use: Standard] - The character makes a Combat Maneuver roll against a target. If successful, the target is knocked off balance and considered Entangled until the start of their next action. If the attempt succeeds by 5 or more, the target is knocked Prone. You cannot attempt a Trip against a creature more than one size category larger than you.

Trip makes it's return in all it's glory...however it's less binary now. After all, it's easy to stumble someone up than it is to make them fall over. Simple and easy to understand. Having this be binary pass/fail was ALWAYS stupid.

To be fair, I might not have any more maneuvers than this. Sunders and Disarms are left to critical hits & fumbles (they are on my charts) or as perfect fodder for morale failure. After all, if a soldier fails morale, isn't it more interesting to tell the player that during the interplay of swords their fighter slaps the weapon out of their opponents hand and puts their blade to their throat forcing an immediate surrender instead of just saying "He gives up"?