Pounce House Ruling [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

PollyOliver

2011-05-17, 10:22 PM

... not logical.... what is this...I don't even.

And there are some awesome boosts you can use with charges.

Also the bounding assault maneuver, which appears to read, "go run around wherever you want, and oh by the way this is a charge attack". Always fun.

But yeah, taking pounce away from melee because it "doesn't make sense"...doesn't make sense. The wizard can fly, the druid can become a bear, the bard can inspire you to fight better by ringing a cowbell, and the rogue is so good at pretending to be someone else that even inanimate objects are convinced. Why can't the barbarian swing his sword twice after running at someone?

Edit: As the guy above wrote, one of the main things ToB gives melee is the ability to move and do something cool. In some cases, that's move and full attack, in some cases it's move and standard action awesome maneuver, and in some cases it's boost and full attack (and combinations thereof), but pounce basically is one of those things--the versatility to be both mobile and useful on the same turn.

Seerow

2011-05-17, 10:25 PM

Honestly, if you want to nerf pounce, make it so only the first attack with each weapon counts as charging. This results in a pretty hefty nerf to leap attack and the like, while still keeping pounce at least somewhat useful to non-TWFers.

But seriously, no. No need to nerf something that's already very weak.

No brains

2011-05-17, 10:25 PM

..Attempts to bring realism to D&D mechanics often only make it harder on players.

I forgot about that kernel of wisdom [that's what an odd point to a score is called, a kernel]. Thank you. :)

The thing I have a beef with is the problem of narrating a pounce. How exactly does someone zip across a room and swing at someone multiple times? Maybe what I need here is just a better word for the ability to help me abstract it.

PollyOliver

2011-05-17, 10:30 PM

I forgot about that kernel of wisdom [that's what an odd point to a score is called, a kernel]. Thank you. :)

The thing I have a beef with is the problem of narrating a pounce. How exactly does someone zip across a room and swing at someone multiple times? Maybe what I need here is just a better word for the ability to help me abstract it.

Perhaps I'm just too used to the term, but I don't see the problem. Imagine a guy with a sword running up to another guy, sword swinging, hitting him once, and then spinning the blade and hitting him again. Or a tiger leaping on something, biting and clawing.

McSmack

2011-05-17, 10:34 PM

The problem as I see it is not that Pounce allows a full attack with a charge, it's that melee classes need an ability that does that. I've seen several games where they simply allow full attacks as a standard action, and they haven't had any real issues.

It really all depends on your particular game. A character is only as powerful as the player, if your optimizers are playing melee classes while the non-optimizers are playing tier 1 classes badly, then your melee is going to outshine the casters. It's easier for the tier 1 and 2 classes to overshadow their melee counterparts, but not always the case.

I don't think it's unreasonable for a highly trained warrior to be able to get more than one hit in after moving.

Another option you might consider is something similar to PF's Vital Strike feat tree which allows you to roll double/triple/quadruple the dice if you're only making a single attack. It's not quite as good as a full attack, but better than nothing and you get to make the attack at your highest bonus.

Personally I've toyed with the idea of incorporating x2/x3/x4 total damage instead of iterative attacks. It would speed up combat, and give some extra love to TWF by negating the need for extra TWF feats. Something to think about, I'd have to crunch some numbers to see how it would work out.

Cog

2011-05-17, 10:37 PM

Think of it this way:

You learn to use the momentum of your charge to greater effect. The first swing you make, even if it doesn't connect, is delivered with such force that your opponent is unbalanced. You have now learned to take advantage of that unbalancing to deliver a quick series of followup attacks, keeping your opponent on edge for a few swings more - and you're able to keep that up for more swings as you grow in skill.

Incanur

2011-05-17, 10:40 PM

3.x pouncing is indeed silly. Nerfing it would make mounted combat with the lance - which I find more reasonable and aesthetically pleasing - better in relative terms. On the other hand, D&D basically has gone beyond salvaging in this respect.

No brains

2011-05-17, 10:41 PM

Perhaps I'm just too used to the term, but I don't see the problem. Imagine a guy with a sword running up to another guy, sword swinging, hitting him once, and then spinning the blade and hitting him again. Or a tiger leaping on something, biting and clawing.

It's just hard for me to visualize that looking elegant. I mentioned above that a cat accomplishes a pounce by virtue of many weapons. Also, watching a tiger pouncing is just as sill and adorable at seeing a house cat do the same.

I want to be able as a player and a DM to imagine the PCs being really cool. Charging into someone and shanking them repeatedly is a little inelegant and would also only work with small weapons.

One thing that almost equates to pounce is the dervish dance from complete warrior. Maybe I should imaging it more like that...

Incanur

2011-05-17, 10:50 PM

When cats pounce, they grapple. Swords, spears, axes, and so on could only be used once in such an attack.

Geigan

2011-05-17, 10:52 PM

Yeah I do agree that it's a bit hard to represent as is. Rename it as the current incarnation doesn't really represent a lion's pounce(Jumping and latching on to the enemy and tearing it to the ground). It's more of an advancing swordsman making an attack with every step he advances. A lot of the fights in melee I tend to picture like video games. Take a fighting game like Soul Caliber. A pounce could be like a combo that is initiated when advancing. Mitsurugi (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoeN25dJd84) is particularly good for this. Notice how he advances with each strike. Prince of Persia (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj4oIxPyv5w&feature=related) is also pretty good as he tends to have a very pouncey way of killing his enemies. Notice how he stalks his enemies and then leaps onto them killing with a series of blows. The basic idea is to narrate it like as a combination of blows that follow into each other. If the attack isn't fatal just make sure not to include a killing blow in the description. More brutal melee is leaping onto them and mauling them about with every blow sort of like mitsurugi with a bit of god of war thrown in. More dexterous characters are more like the prince.

Incanur

2011-05-17, 11:02 PM

As with many 3.x abilities, the barbarian's pounce looks like a fighting game super (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWvsFPrql7o&feature=related) in my head. I can't escape this impression. Sometimes this bothers me as it's not what I want for a heroic fantasy RPG. Other times I embrace it. Fighting games have their own logic and beauty.

Godskook

2011-05-17, 11:06 PM

Incanur

2011-05-17, 11:11 PM

Almost everything about D&D 3.x combat is ridiculous. Sure, folks can do the flurry of blows thing up close with kicks, punches, or knife stabs. It's difficult against someone who won't cooperate and thus has limited combat utility.

Lord.Sorasen

2011-05-17, 11:17 PM

What if you abstract it a bit? The pounce isn't a bunch of attacks. It's one big attack - With the dice representation being a full attack. All attacks of your full attack represent the same single swing/stab/whatever.

But you're right that the move really only makes sense with a creature with natural weapons. I suppose that's why no classes used to get access to it.

AslanCross

2011-05-17, 11:50 PM

In some martial arts (armed types, like kali or kendo), I've seen the combatants perform 2-3 solid strikes after advancing in well below the six seconds that a D&D round represents (albeit not after travelling the 60 feet a charging character would cover; their charges were much shorter, about 5-8 feet tops). Considering that D&D characters are well above "puny modern human" level, they'd certainly be capable of that.

It definitely doesn't break anything and I don't see anything ruinous to verisimilitude about it.

Tvtyrant

2011-05-18, 12:25 AM

You could just give them like a Rhino's Powerful Charge instead, where they do double damage automatically on a charge.

Hirax

2011-05-18, 02:06 AM

It's just hard for me to visualize that looking elegant.

This isn't reason to ever think that anything unambiguously legal by RAW should be changed. Further, I don't understand why you have a problem visualizing it. Remember that rounds last 6 seconds, and your PCs are supposed to be above average to extraordinary members of their respective races, so let's compare them to professional athletes. Most NFL receivers can run 40 yards in under 5 seconds, and faster tackles (the huge guys) can also make at or under 5 seconds. So let's pick on Marcell Dareus (third overall pick in this year's draft, will be a multi-millionaire when he starts getting paychecks). Weighing in at over 300 pounds, he was able to run 40 yards in just slightly under 5 seconds. The maximum charge distance for a typical human in D&D is 60 feet, and so let's assume that if Marcell Dareus can run 120 feet in 5 seconds, he can run 60 in 2.5 seconds. That's still 3.5 seconds to slash/pierce/bludgeon an enemy. With that in mind, I find it entirely reasonable that someone could run 60' and make multiple attacks in the span of 6 seconds. As an archer IRL, it's a hell of a lot more plausible than what D&D archers get away with, and I'm not just talking about manyshot.

ffone

2011-05-18, 02:18 AM

Pounce is unbalanced in the sense that (for a 1 level dip in a class like barbarian with good HP and skill ranks and another good ability, rage or whirling frenzy) it's one of the best single abilities for a (high level or TWF) melee character, and you have a 'haves / have nots' of who has it, it gets boring to see so many PCs with 1 level of the same barbarian variant, and there's an annoying tactical 'cliff function' when an enemy is 2X vs 2x+5 feet away where X is your speed (or where some column corner just barely obstructs the straight-line requirement for a charge).

It also can make combat less tactically interest by removing a lot of the spatial reasoning (anticipating where to move so you're more likely to get a full attack next round.)

It's not unbalanced in the sense that casters can do even better things and (according to the Playground) this imbalance is actually a practical issue that comes up in games.

In other words, it's not that it's Too Good for Melee (blah blah nice things), but that it'd be nice to have less of a 'sudden jump' between the power of some melee chars vs others, and in the damage output of a given character some rounds vs others (which is also the case w/o pounce...it might be nice if melee characters could get some of their iterative attacks if they moved some of their 1-move-action distance, or something, to smooth things out).

The within-melee unbalance is easy to see by thinking about monsters and NPCs. Giving 1 level of spirit lion totem barbarian to, say, a dragon (6 natural attacks, high flight speed, and the Improved/Multiattack feats are recommended in their SRD entry) will make it much more dangerous to a typical party* than 1 level of most anything else (ditto for any other monster with a lot of natural weapons or NPC with a lot of iteratives). 1 sorcerer level gives a dragon access to a new spell level (they all have odd sorc levels in their tables) so there might be a few spell choices that make it harder (is Lion's Pounce sor/wiz or just ranger? I forget).

* i.e. not a party that knows you're apparently supposed to begin every battle with Greater Celerity to kill a foe before it can act, even if it won initiative the normal way, Walls of Salt for infinite wealth, and chain Gate/Wish-SLA for most anything.

Alleine

2011-05-18, 02:28 AM

It's just hard for me to visualize that looking elegant. I mentioned above that a cat accomplishes a pounce by virtue of many weapons. Also, watching a tiger pouncing is just as sill and adorable at seeing a house cat do the same.

Oddly enough, the only way pouncing is correctly portrayed is by adding on 2 rake attacks to most of the big cats when they pounce. Without that little bonus it would look a lot less like a pounce and more like charge+full attack.

You may want to try looking around at various videos of people fighting with various weapons if you're having trouble visualizing it. I can easily see it considering I have both done something like this and had it done to me on occasion during a fencing bout. There's usually more movement involved, but I'll sometimes see people attack 4 or more times in rapid succession. after moving forwards quickly.

Person_Man

2011-05-18, 09:13 AM

I pretty much wrote the book on Pounce (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103358). (Or more accurately, read every book with Pounce, made a list, asked for help finding more citations from the amazing Playground, read those, improved the list, and then played with a variety of builds that depended on it). I would ask you to consider the following:

1) Non-melee character can essentially move and do their thing (cast a spell, make a full attack with a ranged weapon, activate a power or invocation or soulmeld or breath weapon or whatever) every round by default.

2) Non-melee characters movement is not restricted to a Charge (strait line, with no hindering terrain, directly towards an enemy). They can move tactically to avoid enemies, whereas melee builds must move directly towards them.

3) The power level of full attacks vs other stuff (spells et al) varies very widely. An optimized melee build is often less powerful then an unoptimized full caster who picks strong spells.

4) Non-melee build basically get their ability to move and attack by default, whereas melee builds often have to go out of their way and pay a "tax" to get Pounce. (For example, taking 1 level of Barbarian or 2 feats for Sphinx Claws. Though admittedly melee builds don't have it as bad as archers, who must spend 4ish feats in order for their abilities to work.)

5) Even if you eliminated Pounce entirely, it wouldn't stop melee builds from making a full attack every round or dealing insane damage. It would simply shift their build strategies towards free movement (like Hustle), increased size/reach (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7081777), and high damage combos that don't depend on Charge (Claws of the Beast, unarmed damage, Tome of Battle, Incarnum, etc).

6) Balance is highly relative. If 4 newbs are playing core Monks and one of them picks up Pounce from a splat book, then that guy is really powerful compared to his friends. But if 4 veterans are playing tier 1 builds, then the guy who decides to make an ubercharger pounce build is probably the weakest guy in the party.

PinkysBrain

2011-05-18, 09:22 AM

Pounce is stupidly powerful.
And level appropriate SoDs by a well build caster have a better than 50% success rate most of the time.

I really don't think it was intended to give someone a chance to do a full attack with a weapon, but rather Attack once with each of their weapons.
Full attack has a meaning, I don't have that high a respect for game designers ... but I'm willing to believe they know what a full attack is.

Does anyone else believe that it would be reasonable to house rule pounce so that it works more like a tiger and less like Vegeta?
No, not really. Not unless you fix all the other rocket launcher tag aspects of the game ... which is a lot of work.

Malkav

2011-05-18, 09:24 AM

Another example of "melee can't have nice things" way of thinking...

They can't have nice things. Not allowed.
/sarcasm

6) Balance is highly relative. If 4 newbs are playing core Monks and one of them picks up Pounce from a splat book, then that guy is really powerful compared to his friends. But if 4 veterans are playing tier 1 builds, then the guy who decides to make an ubercharger pounce build is probably the weakest guy in the party.

This is true.

Incanur

2011-05-18, 09:53 AM

With that in mind, I find it entirely reasonable that someone could run 60' and make multiple attacks in the span of 6 seconds.

There's this little thing called momentum. If you rush somebody at full speed you've either got to slam into them or fly past them. :smallwink:

6) Balance is highly relative. If 4 newbs are playing core Monks and one of them picks up Pounce from a splat book, then that guy is really powerful compared to his friends. But if 4 veterans are playing tier 1 builds, then the guy who decides to make an ubercharger pounce build is probably the weakest guy in the party.

Yet also possibly the go-to character for damage dealing. Being supported by casters isn't necessary a bad position to be in. Sometimes melee PCs get all the glory. :smallamused:

Cog

2011-05-18, 09:56 AM

There's this little thing called momentum. If you rush somebody at full speed you've either got to slam into them or fly past them. :smallwink:
I prefer to call it "body-ablative braking".

Just remember it's the other guy's body that you're supposed to ablate.

Quietus

2011-05-18, 09:58 AM

Perhaps I'm just too used to the term, but I don't see the problem. Imagine a guy with a sword running up to another guy, sword swinging, hitting him once, and then spinning the blade and hitting him again. Or a tiger leaping on something, biting and clawing.

Sure.

I wasn't sure what to make of it, really. I'd been paired up with John and Jimmy to form a blocking front for Archmage Sukkum. There we were, shield to shield, and down the path, we saw Krog. Just one guy, we can handle this, right? I mean, sure, he's one very large guy. With a big-ass spear. But there's three of us, and we know how to use our shields. We figured we'd be safe.

Did you know that you can get an echo in a forest? I didn't. Krog's battle cry is LOUD, man. It was like thunder. And he's quick - the next thing we knew, he was on top of us. That spear of his went straight through my shield, and you know, I knew it'd buried itself in my gut, but there was no pain. I think I was far too surprised for that. And then I was lifted off the ground, the spear still sticking through me, and Krog, he just smashed me into Jimmy, then flicked me off the end of that spear like I was a rag doll. It was crashing into the ground that hurt the most, which kind of surprised me. The last thing I can remember was seeing the other end of that spear whistle over my head, and clock John upside the head. Somehow he took out all three of us, and I swear it didn't take more than a blink of an eye.

So, this is Heaven, huh? The Hall of Heroes? .. Do I still get in if I barely had time to think before I was killed?"

Mechanically? That above can be represented fairly easily as a pouncing charge with a spear. Primary (through the gut), second attack (smash into the next guy), third (flick off into the ground), cleave (clock third guy in the head). Does that sound unreasonable for a melee character between 11th and 15th level?

Doug Lampert

2011-05-18, 11:48 AM

So let's pick on Marcell Dareus.... Weighing in at over 300 pounds, he was able to run 40 yards in just slightly under 5 seconds. The maximum charge distance for a typical human in D&D is 60 feet, and so let's assume that if Marcell Dareus can run 120 feet in 5 seconds, he can run 60 in 2.5 seconds. That's still 3.5 seconds to slash/pierce/bludgeon an enemy.

There's this little thing called momentum. If you rush somebody at full speed you've either got to slam into them or fly past them. :smallwink:

Yeah, that little thing is a large part of the POINT when Dareus or someone similar moves toward you at 16-20 MPH. He plans to stop abruptly when his body slams into yours and drives it into the ground. If he had a weapon handy I'm sure he'd also be able to whack you a few times with it while you're lying there. And for that matter the weapon makes a fine thing to slam into you for the original momentum transfer too.

Greenish

2011-05-18, 11:56 AM

there's an annoying tactical 'cliff function' when an enemy is 2X vs 2x+5 feet away where X is your speed (or where some column corner just barely obstructs the straight-line requirement for a charge).

It also can make combat less tactically interest by removing a lot of the spatial reasoning (anticipating where to move so you're more likely to get a full attack next round.)First you point out how charging requires spatial reasoning and tactics as if that was a bad thing, then complain how it doesn't require those. :smallconfused:

Vulaas

2011-05-18, 12:08 PM

In one more attempt to bring real world 'pouncing' into this, I play in a sport called Belegarth. What that in essence is is a full combat sport just done with high quality and specially designed foam weapons so it's less likely to have anyone fully injured.

I have seen charges where the guy ran up about 30 feet, and got a good 2-3 swings in at the end of it. Were they still running straight into the guy? No, of course not. Did they run, continue their momentum via the blade and get a good 2-3 swings off of it before settling into a regular sort of melee? Definitely.

BluesEclipse

2011-05-18, 12:31 PM

Pounce, by my interpretation, is precisely intended to allow a full attack when charging.

My basis?

The Sphinx Claws soulmeld(Magic of Incarnum). When bound to the Hands chakra, it allows the user to make an attack with each of their weapons while charging. Yet... it doesn't grant Pounce. Meaning the two abilities are kept separate.

ffone

2011-05-18, 12:51 PM

First you point out how charging requires spatial reasoning and tactics as if that was a bad thing, then complain how it doesn't require those. :smallconfused:

Um, no. Try go read what I wrote instead of just smearing every non-totally-pro-pounce post. The first part of what you quoted lamented the steep 'step function' in damage per round between when you meet charge conditions vs don't, not that spatial layout does affect damage (finer gradation would increase tactical richness, in fact).

In other words, you're making a false dichotomy. Not wanting 1 step function is different than wanting a flat function.

The thing about these threads is they tend to confound several different questions:

-does pounce make melee better than other archetypes? (Consensus is a vehement no)?

-is easily acquired pounce preferable to other powerups to melee of comparable magnitude? In other words do we love it be because we want melee boosts generally or b/c it's a tactical improvement to DnD combat?

-Do we like its flavor / verisimilitude? (Most of this particular thread) .

Greenish

2011-05-18, 12:58 PM

Um, no. Try go read what I wrote instead of just smearing every non-totally-pro-pounce post.Whoa, hostile, aren't we?

I read your post, and it's offending to claim I didn't. I don't recall "smearing" any posts here, or even commenting in this thread before, so try to hold the rhetoric back.

The first part of what you quoted lamented the steep 'step function' in damage per round between when you meet charge conditions vs don't, not that spatial layout does affect damage (finer gradation would increase tactical richness, in fact).You pointed out that pouncers have to use tactical movement to be able to use full round attacks (of course there could be more nitty-gritty stuff, you can always add more details, but whether that'd improve the game I can't say), by being close enough, and having the straight line over non-difficult terrain.

How that is fundamentally different from other forms of using tactical movement to ensure full attacks I don't see.

[Edit]:
The Sphinx Claws soulmeld(Magic of Incarnum). When bound to the Hands chakra, it allows the user to make an attack with each of their weapons while charging. Yet... it doesn't grant Pounce. Meaning the two abilities are kept separate.Sphinx Claws actually specifically allows you to full attack on charge. It just has a limitation of using only natural weapons on said full attack.

ffone

2011-05-18, 01:06 PM

Whoa, hostile, aren't we?

I read your post, and it's offending to claim I didn't. I don't recall "smearing" any posts here, or even commenting in this thread before, so try to hold the rhetoric back.
You pointed out that pouncers have to use tactical movement to be able to use full round attacks (of course there could be more nitty-gritty stuff, you can always add more details, but whether that'd improve the game I can't say), by being close enough, and having the straight line over non-difficult terrain.

How that is fundamentally different from other forms of using tactical movement to ensure full attacks I don't see.

In my experience, whether you meet charge conditions is rarely a function of prior tactical decisions (b/c it's a function of initial setup when your DM declares the encounter) , whereas moving to get full attacks after the 1st round is.

But again, I didn't say charging wasn't tactical, just that it's a huge cliff function. 5' cs 10' distance of foes vs regular full attacks is similar. I'd like to see partial tradeoff between a move and full attack.

As a DM for pounce PCs , it's socialy awkward to do indoor encounter design and know that distance 60' vs 65' of enemy from the door will have a massive effect on the fight. I center had to start randomizing dimensions (I like outdoor type settings where spot and listen induce some natural randomization).

No brains

2011-05-18, 01:19 PM

Watch this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CAN5KeP0Ug), and then note that's 13 kicks in a round. By a human being. D&D is supposed to be setup such that mundane 'caps' at ~5-7 area, so I don't see lvl 20 characters getting iteratives on pounce to be at all ridiculous.

What's going on there could be a full attack with 5-foot steps. Another thing about that is that this guy keeps doing the very same kick over and over again. It would be too predictable and probably warrant effective retaliation after a bit. Props to the guy for his speed, coordination, and endurance, but I think even he might admit doing that in an actual match would be ill advised... :smallfrown:

Pounce is unbalanced in the sense that (for a 1 level dip in a class like barbarian with good HP and skill ranks and another good ability, rage or whirling frenzy) it's one of the best single abilities for a (high level or TWF) melee character, and you have a 'haves / have nots' of who has it, it gets boring to see so many PCs with 1 level of the same barbarian variant, and there's an annoying tactical 'cliff function' when an enemy is 2X vs 2x+5 feet away where X is your speed (or where some column corner just barely obstructs the straight-line requirement for a charge).

It also can make combat less tactically interest by removing a lot of the spatial reasoning (anticipating where to move so you're more likely to get a full attack next round.)

It's not unbalanced in the sense that casters can do even better things and (according to the Playground) this imbalance is actually a practical issue that comes up in games.

In other words, it's not that it's Too Good for Melee (blah blah nice things), but that it'd be nice to have less of a 'sudden jump' between the power of some melee chars vs others, and in the damage output of a given character some rounds vs others (which is also the case w/o pounce...it might be nice if melee characters could get some of their iterative attacks if they moved some of their 1-move-action distance, or something, to smooth things out).

The within-melee unbalance is easy to see by thinking about monsters and NPCs. Giving 1 level of spirit lion totem barbarian to, say, a dragon (6 natural attacks, high flight speed, and the Improved/Multiattack feats are recommended in their SRD entry) will make it much more dangerous to a typical party* than 1 level of most anything else (ditto for any other monster with a lot of natural weapons or NPC with a lot of iteratives). 1 sorcerer level gives a dragon access to a new spell level (they all have odd sorc levels in their tables) so there might be a few spell choices that make it harder (is Lion's Pounce sor/wiz or just ranger? I forget).

* i.e. not a party that knows you're apparently supposed to begin every battle with Greater Celerity to kill a foe before it can act, even if it won initiative the normal way, Walls of Salt for infinite wealth, and chain Gate/Wish-SLA for most anything.

I need to read your posts more often. :smallsmile: The NEED for pounce to make melee builds good makes it seem that it should be given to everyone anyway so they have more options, and not every character with every ideal, alignment and motive with a sharp stick learned their skills from the same tribe of barbarians.

Marcell Dareus can run 120 feet in 5 seconds...

So can anyone with the run action/feat!:smalltongue: I know you put this back into the idea of D&D not being firmly based in reality outside of pouncing, so don't think I'm making fun of you. Also, moving that fast involves gaining momentum and balancing your entire body. Just stopping from running that fast isn't simple, and I don't think a person could coordinate themselves to put in a competent attack after running full tilt like that.

Greenish

2011-05-18, 01:20 PM

In my experience, whether you meet charge conditions is rarely a function of prior tactical decisions (b/c it's a function of initial setup when your DM declares the encounter) , whereas moving to get full attacks after the 1st round is.If a non-pouncer has to move to get full attacks, so does the pouncer. It only has different limitations.

But again, I didn't say charging wasn't tactical, just that it's a huge cliff function. 5' cs 10' distance of foes vs regular full attacks is similar. I'd like to see partial tradeoff between a move and full attack.Sure, but that's a problem with the game system itself, not just pounce, like you point out yourself.

[Edit]:
Also, moving that fast involves gaining momentum and balancing your entire body. Just stopping from running that fast isn't simple, and I don't think a person could coordinate themselves to put in a competent attack after running full tilt like that.A real life person? Maybe not, but how can you know about elves or other fantastic creatures (such as D&D humans) who do stuff that defies RL expectations regularly.

Hirax

2011-05-18, 02:54 PM

AslanCross

2011-05-18, 06:21 PM

So can anyone with the run action/feat!:smalltongue: I know you put this back into the idea of D&D not being firmly based in reality outside of pouncing, so don't think I'm making fun of you. Also, moving that fast involves gaining momentum and balancing your entire body. Just stopping from running that fast isn't simple, and I don't think a person could coordinate themselves to put in a competent attack after running full tilt like that.

For one, charging is not running full speed. That's what the Run action does. Regular combat movement is equivalent to a hustle. Charging can go up to double that. And as some of us have mentioned, people totally do that all the time in martial arts, especially since they specifically train to do that.

The stereotypical nerd who doesn't get much exercise probably can't, but trained professionals (which most D&D classes represent) probably do that for warm-ups in the morning.

See the control this kendoka exerts in this haya suburi dril (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TalKKTwMREQ)l. He attacks ten times in nine seconds while maintaining balance in a rapid, back-and-forth motion. Sure, those attacks probably aren't at full power, but if he were swinging a sharp sword you still wouldn't want to be in the way. Yes, it's not a charging attack, but you can see the control over momentum there happening at the same time he swings his weapon.

Then you realize that kendo is the modernized sport form of kenjutsu, which was actually used to kill people.

Then you realize that D&D characters are superhuman.

Godskook

2011-05-18, 07:18 PM

What's going on there could be a full attack with 5-foot steps. Another thing about that is that this guy keeps doing the very same kick over and over again. It would be too predictable and probably warrant effective retaliation after a bit. Props to the guy for his speed, coordination, and endurance, but I think even he might admit doing that in an actual match would be ill advised... :smallfrown:

You missed my point entirely. It went like this:

Premise:
-Its possible for a mundane, real life human being to launch ~13 attacks in a round's time.
-A real life human being is normally supposed to be accurately represented by no higher than a level 5-7 D&D statblock.
-(Implied:)A level 7 character gets *ONE* iterative.

Point(s):
-At the time you can compare D&D to reality, pounce grants exactly 1 additional iterative attack on a charge, and that seems entirely in line with what a real person is capable of doing, especially considering that you can pull off 13 kicks in that timeframe.
-At level 20, when max iteratives come into play, PCs are 'super'human, and are supposed to be capable of feats that are seemingly ridiculous by 'normal' standards.
-Almost all sources of addition attacks that aren't iteratives or made with another weapon-hand are magical in nature, and need not be discussed in a topic about realism.

Incanur

2011-05-18, 08:28 PM

And as some of us have mentioned, people totally do that all the time in martial arts, especially since they specifically train to do that.

Making multiple attacks while advancing rapidly isn't unreasonable, though calling it a pounce creates confusing mental imagery. This fatal flaw both aesthetically and realistically comes from how time stops during the charge. Ye ole lion totem barbarian wins initiative, rushes sixty feet, uses Shock Trooper to Power Attack for everything, and murders some poor fool who never even got a chance to scream. The barbarian's AC has possibly dropped into the negatives, but that doesn't matter thanks to the segmented nature of D&D combat. The penalty for charging an experienced warrior should at least match the benefit given to the aggressor. 3.x tried to do a bit of this with the rules for setting weapons against a charge but that mostly failed.

See the control this kendoka exerts in this haya suburi dril (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TalKKTwMREQ)l. He attacks ten times in nine seconds while maintaining balance in a rapid, back-and-forth motion.

That video doesn't relate to this topic in any way. :smallsmile:

Hirax

2011-05-18, 08:48 PM

Making multiple attacks while advancing rapidly isn't unreasonable, though calling it a pounce creates confusing mental imagery. This fatal flaw both aesthetically and realistically comes from how time stops during the charge. Ye ole lion totem barbarian wins initiative, rushes sixty feet, uses Shock Trooper to Power Attack for everything, and murders some poor fool who never even got a chance to scream. The barbarian's AC has possibly dropped into the negatives, but that doesn't matter thanks to the segmented nature of D&D combat. The penalty for charging an experienced warrior should at least match the benefit given to the aggressor. 3.x tried to do a bit of this with the rules for setting weapons against a charge but that mostly failed.

Pouncing for animals and pouncing for charging PCs shouldn't be differently labeled imo. Creating a duplicate ability with a different name solely for aesthetic reasons creates unnecessary RAW ambiguities. In fact, some aspects of D&D suffer for having identical abilities with different names, because of stacking/applicability questions. For instance, if something says it works on a charge (valorous weapons, shock trooper, powerful charge, etc.), does it also work on a dive?

Your other complaint, though, isn't really specific to charging, that's an issue with D&D's combat system in general. Along with any turn based combat system, for that matter. Whoever goes first has a distinct advantage, regardless of whether they're a caster, archer, or melee fighter.

Veyr

2011-05-18, 09:19 PM

-A real life human being is normally supposed to be accurately represented by no higher than a level 5-7 D&D statblock.
Not even close to accurate. Characters in the 5-7 range behave more like Greek mythological heroes/demigods than they do actual human beings. Being literally restricted by the real-life limits of the human body makes you an NPC in 3.5, and a low-level one at that. A level 1 Human Barbarian can break the world record in most athletic events without even trying too hard.

Hirax

2011-05-18, 09:27 PM

Not even close to accurate. Characters in the 5-7 range behave more like Greek mythological heroes/demigods than they do actual human beings. Being literally restricted by the real-life limits of the human body makes you an NPC in 3.5, and a low-level one at that. A level 1 Human Barbarian can break the world record in most athletic events without even trying too hard.

Not really. If you point buy to 18 then rage for 22 strength, you can lift 520 pounds over your head according to D&D strength rules. Apparently the world record for the clean & jerk (lifting a barbell from the ground to over your head) is 580.

Seerow

2011-05-18, 09:30 PM

Not really. If you point buy to 18 then rage for 22 strength, you can lift 520 pounds over your head according to D&D strength rules. Apparently the world record for the clean & jerk (lifting a barbell from the ground to over your head) is 580.

A character can lift as much as double his or her maximum load off the ground, but he or she can only stagger around with it. While overloaded in this way, the character loses any Dexterity bonus to AC and can move only 5 feet per round (as a full-round action).

That is more indicative of what those world record holders are doing with the clean and jerk. 520 pounds is what the barbarian can carry on his head and walk around with semi-normally. He walks at 30ft per turn while carrying this much, and can run up to 90ft in a round while carrying that. Find me anybody in real life who can carry 520 pounds and run at 10 miles per hour. Also worth noting, carrying a max load only causes a -6 penalty to skill checks. The first level Barbarian with 22 strength while raging can pick up 520 pounds, and jump on average 15 feet, or 3 feet straight up in the air.

A 18 strength human with no rage can lift 201-300x2, for a max of around 600 (almost identical to the world record). The Barbarian at level 1 can rage and lift 1040, an amount far beyond any human world record. He can also push and drag something as much as 2600lbs.

edit: Updated with more info on what the barb can do while carrying 520 lbs over his head.

Also fun to note, A first level human Barbarian can take the Run and Acrobatic feats. This gives him a jump check of 6(str)+4(ranks)+2(acrobatic)+4(run)+4(base movespeed) for a +20 jump check at level one, letting him jump an average of 30 feet in a long jump, or 10 feet straight up, which I'm pretty sure breaks world records (and of course if he rolls high he shatters them)

Hirax

2011-05-18, 09:33 PM

Right you are. That'll teach me to only test 1 aspect of lifting and carrying for comparison purposes.

Veyr

2011-05-18, 09:41 PM

tyckspoon

2011-05-18, 09:43 PM

Also, a Human Barbarian 1 can trivially break the world records in the long jump, high jump, and any conceivable foot race.

Except the marathon, because the rules don't allow you to do anything more than a double-move walk on the overland scale (despite long-distance running being the major form of human travel and even hunting for the entire time before we domesticated mounts/invented vehicles.)

Seerow

2011-05-18, 09:45 PM

Also, a Human Barbarian 1 can trivially break the world records in the long jump, high jump, and any conceivable foot race. While wearing a Chain Shirt, no less.

And without actually using Rage, since Fast Movement is the relevant class feature here.

I just edited that in. Though I did notice while making that edit, the Barbarian -doesn't- shatter the world record for sprinting.

The info I found with a quick google search said the world record for human speed clocked in at 28 mph. A barbarian with Run and Dash, thus able to move 225 feet per turn while running (45 base move speed), or only 25.5 miles per hour, just shy of the world record.

I attribute this to there being no skill to increase movement speed. You're still faster than almost any human alive, and you can maintain that run far longer than any sprinter, but you can't break the world record.

You can keep up that run for probably a good 2-3 minutes though, depending on your exact constitution score and luck with dice. I don't think any sprinter maintains that kind of speed for more than 10-20 seconds.

Hirax

2011-05-18, 09:49 PM

Traits to the rescue! (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/buildingCharacters/characterTraits.htm#quick)

Vladislav

2011-05-18, 09:50 PM

Don't worry, the marathon record is well within his grasp too, with the Quick trait and the Dash feat - total speed of 55', or 110' in 6 seconds on a double move. This translates into 42.195 kilometers in 2 hours and 6 minutes.

Also a Javelin throw record is possible with Far Shot. The guy is a one-man Olympic team!

Veyr

2011-05-18, 09:51 PM

Huh, when I did the numbers last, the Barbarian won handily... might have not used the best time I could have for that, though, I suppose.

Except the marathon, because the rules don't allow you to do anything more than a double-move walk on the overland scale (despite long-distance running being the major form of human travel and even hunting for the entire time before we domesticated mounts/invented vehicles.)
Yeah, but if you can get your move speed up to 60 ft. (Barbarian 1 with the Dash feat and the Quick trait), you can "walk" a marathon faster than anyone's ever run one. And keep doing it all day long.

Vladislav

2011-05-18, 09:54 PM

I just edited that in. Though I did notice while making that edit, the Barbarian -doesn't- shatter the world record for sprinting.

The info I found with a quick google search said the world record for human speed clocked in at 28 mph. A barbarian with Run and Dash, thus able to move 225 feet per turn while running (45 base move speed), or only 25.5 miles per hour, just shy of the world record.Add the Quick trait, and you have 100 meters in 8 seconds, shattering any imaginable record. So he loses a hit point per level, who cares...

Seerow

2011-05-18, 09:57 PM

Add the Quick trait, and you have 100 meters in 8 seconds, shattering any imaginable record. So he loses a hit point per level, who cares...

Ah I always forget about traits.

Okay that gets you up to 55 base land speed, getting you 275 feet per round getting you up to 31mph while running, which as you note beats the world record handily.

Also worth noting adding that trait to the acrobatic barbarian nets you another +4 to jump checks.

Cog

2011-05-18, 10:56 PM

Fast Movement is the relevant class feature here.
I think I've heard about that ACF. You have to give up pounce for it, though...

Seerow

2011-05-18, 11:01 PM

I think I've heard about that ACF. You have to give up pounce for it, though...

I think you have that backwards. You give up fast movement for Pounce. And given we're talking about a level 1 non-magical character breaking every world record in the book by virtue of being a level 1 character rather than an NPC, his ability to pounce or not isn't particularly relevant.

No brains

2011-05-18, 11:02 PM

You missed my point entirely. It went like this:

Premise:
-Its possible for a mundane, real life human being to launch ~13 attacks in a round's time.
-A real life human being is normally supposed to be accurately represented by no higher than a level 5-7 D&D statblock.
-(Implied:)A level 7 character gets *ONE* iterative.

Point(s):
-At the time you can compare D&D to reality, pounce grants exactly 1 additional iterative attack on a charge, and that seems entirely in line with what a real person is capable of doing, especially considering that you can pull off 13 kicks in that timeframe.
-At level 20, when max iteratives come into play, PCs are 'super'human, and are supposed to be capable of feats that are seemingly ridiculous by 'normal' standards.
-Almost all sources of addition attacks that aren't iteratives or made with another weapon-hand are magical in nature, and need not be discussed in a topic about realism.

The kicking man and the suburitio are impressive, but there are flaws to assuming that their exercises are actual fighting. Mortal Kombat spams like that just don't work as an effective technique. If you keep swinging into the same area, you're not really attacking something as dynamic as someone weaving, ducking, and blocking with whatever they are holding or wearing. The kicking man is going to leave consistent openings for someone with a shield in their right hand, and the suburito is going to get stabbed by someone in a hardhat. Real attacking involves skillfully striking either at or to create a vulnerable area. When I see a youtube video of someone attacking x times in y seconds against different points on an animate target, I will be convinced.

It is also worth noting that a person swinging like a (noticeably well-balanced) maniac is represented in attacks of opportunity. The only time a spam actually hits is when someone lets their guard down.

I will, however, concede to Godskook that the reality of a 1-weapon pounce is irrelevant at the levels that it is implemented, but now I'm just curious:

An utterly ridiculous assertion, hopefully there are some RL fencers around that can talk some sense into you.

Hirax seems to believe in 'real-life-level' pounces. Is there an example where a fencer moves 10 feet and attacks multiple times with their momentum? Moving near 10 feet undoubtedly makes his 'attack' a 'charge' rather than a '5 foot step' and 'full attack'. Since Youtube has already been used twice, why not try to find us a video?

Making multiple attacks while advancing rapidly isn't unreasonable, though calling it a pounce creates confusing mental imagery. This fatal flaw both aesthetically and realistically comes from how time stops during the charge. Ye ole lion totem barbarian wins initiative, rushes sixty feet, uses Shock Trooper to Power Attack for everything, and murders some poor fool who never even got a chance to scream. The barbarian's AC has possibly dropped into the negatives, but that doesn't matter thanks to the segmented nature of D&D combat. The penalty for charging an experienced warrior should at least match the benefit given to the aggressor. 3.x tried to do a bit of this with the rules for setting weapons against a charge but that mostly failed.

Actually, uncanny dodge with a reach weapon makes shock trooper go splat. Make it a guisarme and you can trip him to end his movement and then splat him. Uncanny dodge prevents you from being flat-footed, which is what stops opportunity attacks. From there, its an arms-reach race. :smallcool:

Hirax

2011-05-18, 11:03 PM

You have got to be kidding me. I'm not convinced you're arguing in good faith at this point.

Greenish

2011-05-18, 11:07 PM

I think you have that backwards.I think you missed the joke. :smalltongue:

[Edit]:
Uncanny dodge prevents you from being flat-footed, which is what stops opportunity attacks.Uncanny Dodge doesn't prevent you from being flat-footed, but Combat Reflexes allows AoO while flat-footed.

Anyhow, what you'd want is a reach weapon, Combat Reflexes, Steadfast Boots, Hold the Line and maybe Stand Still. Probably some Power Attack too, since the charger has tanked his AC big time.

Eldariel

2011-05-18, 11:12 PM

Instead of houseruling Pounce, how about you houserule standard action attacks? That's the root of the issue; a Fighter gets stronger by getting more attacks as he levels (note how the damage his weapon deals doesn't scale inherently, only the number of times he gets to use it) but he can only apply those on a full attack. Which means a Fighter full attacking is much, much stronger than a Fighter not full attacking.

Which, in effect, means that if two Fighters of the same level (without control abilities and all the good stuff) engage each other, the one to move and attack first loses because he's giving the other the first full attack and thus, while he got 1 swing in, is taking much more back. In other words, the system punishes you for moving in a fight. While everyone else is expected to move. If a Fighter attacks a...well, any spellcaster, he moves and attacks the caster once.

Caster moves away, and even without Tumble or any such, only takes one attack of opportunity. Then casts a spell without any risk. Fighter moves again and attacks once. This Fighter could be level 20 TWF with Speed weapon, entitled to 8 attacks a round, but all he ever gets is 2. And same works against Dragons, The Tarrasque and basically any creature that attacks.

It's fairly obvious how asinine the whole system is. Level 1 Fighter attacks once on a full attack or a standard attack. A level 20 Fighter, master warrior, still attacks exactly once on a standard attack while attacking four times on a full attack. So his ability to land hits while standing still has quadrupled but his ability while moving is exactly the same as 19 levels before. And a bear attacks exactly once after moving but with both claws and bite if it doesn't move. Wut.

Instead of houseruling away charge, go the other way and houserule away the stupidity that involves being able to attack only once ever even though you're entitled to way more attacks.

AslanCross

2011-05-18, 11:45 PM

That video doesn't relate to this topic in any way.

I was addressing the OP's points on "attacking right after running at full speed with a melee weapon is difficult because of momentum." The video shows that trained fighters:

1. Can attack multiple times rapidly.
2. Can control their body momentum with great skill.
3. Can do both at the same time.

I certainly think it's relatable, as the ideas are present.
He's still not convinced, though.

Unfortunately I don't have time right now to trawl youtube for videos of "guy charges while doing martial arts."

Geigan

2011-05-19, 01:20 AM

After some YouTube diving of my own I'd say there are very few videos if any of people "charging and doing martial arts." Of course that's more because there are very few situations where it comes up nowadays. Almost all combat sports start opponents less than 10 ft apart and the momentum that would go into your strike is no longer of value since you're not trying to punch through armor, but just to score a hit no matter how trivial. If it's unarmed they'll be about a yard, if they've got weapons they'll be touching.
Contact sparring and/or "real fighting" isn't much better since opponents typically agree to meet each other at close range. The only ways I can think of to get a demonstrative pounce would be to get a) a joust(doesn't work, pounce never made sense with lances anyway),b) people actually trying to kill each other(not likely to appear on YouTube ;P), or c)watch a movie or video game with demonstrative fight scenes(not realistic, or not realistic enough to convince anyone at least). Anybody got any ideas?

Greenish

2011-05-19, 01:24 AM

c)watch a movie or video game with demonstrative fight scenes(not realistic, or not realistic enough to convince anyone at least).I don't know, wasn't this about the aesthetics of pounce? For that argument, it doesn't have to be realistic, it just has to look like that (or go for rule of cool).

Geigan

2011-05-19, 01:32 AM

I don't know, wasn't this about the aesthetics of pounce? For that argument, it doesn't have to be realistic, it just has to look like that (or go for rule of cool).

Well the argument I gathered was those that don't like the aesthetic, can't picture it realistically and therefore don't like it. You certainly could invoke rule of cool or whatever and just ignore it but that's choosing not to picture it at all. I used video games earlier as an example and that seemed to be written off as cheesy mechanics, and I feel that anything that's also from a fictional source won't capture it for them either. That leaves the above options.

kardar233

2011-05-19, 02:20 AM

Veyr

2011-05-19, 09:35 AM

*No offense to actual fencers here, I just get annoyed when people don't recognize the difference and I like to exercise my superiority. Whoops, there I go again. :smalltongue:
It should be noted that I have a few friends who train with real weapons who are similarly derisive of fencers, but they've all admitted that once a fencer gets over his hang-ups re: two-dimensions and there not being the same rules, they tend to make very good — freakishly fast — swordsmen. So there is some cross-application here.

Lapak

2011-05-19, 10:45 AM

Hirax seems to believe in 'real-life-level' pounces. Is there an example where a fencer moves 10 feet and attacks multiple times with their momentum? Moving near 10 feet undoubtedly makes his 'attack' a 'charge' rather than a '5 foot step' and 'full attack'. Since Youtube has already been used twice, why not try to find us a video

You're not talking about a fencer here. Fencers move in straight lines and point prissy narrow rods of metal at each other, never getting closer than a lunge*. What you want here is an actual swordsman, which I happen to be training as.

In Italian longsword (what D&D calls bastard sword in two hands, as opposed to a spadone which would be a great sword/fullblade), there's an entire style of combat called the "Adaptive Style" which focuses on attacking while moving forward at some velocity; call it a pounce crossed with a bull rush. Yes, it is very possible to make multiple attacks while moving at/through someone.

*No offense to actual fencers here, I just get annoyed when people don't recognize the difference and I like to exercise my superiority. Whoops, there I go again. :smalltongue:Entirely aside from kardar's relevant points, the answer to no brains' question is still 'yes'. In fact, you'll see it if you look at almost ANY fight. Charges get a bonus mechanically not just from raw momentum; they get a bonus because the guy charging has taken the offensive. If you watch fencing (and, presumably, more realistic combats) the person who makes even one strike that forces his opponent to on defense can often make two or three more in rapid succession before the opponent gets the situation under control enough to counter-attack and make the aggressor stop whaling on them and attend to his own defense. If every incoming attack is driving your weapon out of line and you're barely keeping them off, you don't have a chance to make a cut of your own.

So if you want a 'realistic' reasoning for Pounce allowing full attacks, and you still don't believe the people who are saying "yes, you can in fact make multiple attacks while still in motion," you can simply rule that Pounce represents training which focuses on pressing the advantage that a charge gives. People who can pounce specifically know how to use a charge to put the opposition on their heels such that even after they've stopped the opponent is still reeling on the defense. They can just hit away instead of coming to a halt and entering the combat with the caution needed if an opponent has the chance to counter-attack.

Doug Lampert

2011-05-19, 11:11 AM

You're not talking about a fencer here. Fencers move in straight lines and point prissy narrow rods of metal at each other, never getting closer than a lunge*.

Flèche attacks in fencing can involve moving past the opponent at a run while delivering two attacks.

It's not used often by experts since their opponents are also experts and tend to hit them between the first and second strike, also the rules say that the second strike MUST come prior to passing your opponent and the easiest way to get the second hit in is for the moving fencer to stab the guy in the back just after he's too far forward for it to be legal. And again, an expert will move forward if you manage to avoid his counter-attack so as to invalidate your second strike.

So even with the restriction to moving in straight lines with prissy narrow rods of metal they do what D&D would call a pounce.

It should be noted that I have a few friends who train with real weapons who are similarly derisive of fencers, but they've all admitted that once a fencer gets over his hang-ups re: two-dimensions and there not being the same rules, they tend to make very good — freakishly fast — swordsmen. So there is some cross-application here.

[Edited to add]
Note that Foil fencing (probably the least "realistic" and most sylized fencing style) is pretty well directly descended from training for how to kill someone in a one on one duel. The really old fencing manuals from when it was serious include moves not used in the more stylized modern system. But the basic idea is still to put a pointy bit of metal where it would go through someone's vital organs if there weren't something non-pointy at the very end.

Epee the "standard" strike is to your opponent's weapon arm, it's the style descended from trying to win a duel without neccessarily killing anyone.

Sabre is descended from military sword training. Probably actually the least resemblance to the historical art (you're not on a horse to start with, and the blade wieght and shape differences are significant, dueling swords really could be very light and thin, but a military blade had to be sturdier). But sabre you can use the blade as well as point because any old wound is good in real combat and the military sabre had a sharpened blade.

Thrice Dead Cat

2011-05-19, 11:32 AM

@ Veyr, Greenish, and the rest of the "pro-pouncing crowd" vs. their opponents.

While you guys are arguing for or against pounce, I often find myself agreeing with you "pro-pouncers" rather than against. As such, while it probably be would be easier to either nerf the ACF that gives pounce to barbarians back to 6th level rather than have it at 1st, nerf it so it only works with natural attacks a la sphinx claws, or change the structure of the game in such a manner that a 6th level+ fighter can, say, only make one attack per 5 ft. of movement, it is clear that the upper bounds of human movement can allow for that.

That said, the limits of actual human limits is hard to place. I know an article roughly found that most DND characters start breaking records at about 6-9th levels, which is why E6 exists and all. We could argue tooth and nail for or against such, but we'll only get more precise, not accurate with that.:smallwink:

Greenish

2011-05-19, 11:40 AM

While you guys are arguing for or against pounce, I often find myself agreeing with you "pro-pouncers" rather than against. As such, while it probably be would be easier to either nerf the ACF that gives pounce to barbarians back to 6th level rather than have it at 1st, nerf it so it only works with natural attacks a la sphinx claws, or change the structure of the game in such a manner that a 6th level+ fighter can, say, only make one attack per 5 ft. of movement, it is clear that the upper bounds of human movement can allow for that.The barbarian dip might be a tad too easy, but I don't feel the ability to move and full attack should be too hard to get even at early levels, since TWF (already feat starved) is going to need it.

Thrice Dead Cat

2011-05-19, 11:44 AM

The barbarian dip might be a tad too easy, but I don't feel the ability to move and full attack should be too hard to get even at early levels, since TWF (already feat starved) is going to need it.

Fair enough, but it has been a common "fix" that pounce be swapped with whatever the hell the 6th level ability is that barbarians gain instead on that track, instead.:smalltongue:

Veyr

2011-05-19, 11:46 AM

It's dumb that every melee character without Tome of Battle who wants to move and attack (efficiently) at the same time needs to dip Barbarian or Cleric, or gish it up (using a very broad version of the term "gish" here to include things like Psionics and even Incarnum). Tome of Battle fixes this, which is why it is, IMO, the most important book in the game beyond the actual foundation rules, but it really shouldn't be this way.

Still, being able to dip one level of something in order to get this ability is a massive improvement over what we had. Moving the Pounce ACF to 6th makes things worse, because you're forcing every melee character to actually spend a lot of time in the Barbarian class rather than what they actually want to be doing. Ideally, every single melee class ought to receive some form of "attack-and-move" ability in the first six levels, probably as early as possible, so that we eliminate this need to dip issue. But that is a lot of classes to change.

Or just use Tome of Battle, since that fixes this and several other issues.

Thrice Dead Cat

2011-05-19, 11:56 AM

*snip*

While I do generally agree with you, Veyr, some people do recommend swapping the 1st and 6th level gains of the Lion Spirit Totem Barbarian around, so I figure'd I mention it for prosperity.

Veyr

2011-05-19, 11:59 AM

It wasn't really meant as a direct response to you, more just commentary on the idea.

Thrice Dead Cat

2011-05-19, 12:00 PM

Fair enough, Veyr! I just wanted to mention it, again, for posterity, not further the argument, since not everyone agrees with "our side.":smallwink:

Person_Man

2011-05-19, 12:52 PM

Observation: Virtually all of the Tier 3 melee classes: Psychic Warrior, Totemist, Swordsage, Warblade, Crusader, Incarnate, Binder, Wildshape Ranger, etc., have easy access to Pounce and/or free movement by mid levels as part of their default abilities. That leads me to believe that Pounce and/or free movement is pretty much a requirement of Tier 3ish melee gameplay, which for me is the "sweet spot" of 3.X D&D.

I would also add that Tier 4/5/6 melee classes can still get Pounce or free movement a variety of ways without dipping into Barbarian or a Tier 3 class. It's just less efficient for them. They can use the Lion's Charge spell (Ranger 2), Knight's Move spell (Paladin 2), Protective Imposition spell (Paladin 1), Anklet of Translocation, Sparring Dummy of the Master, Belt of Battle, Psicrown of the Evader, or any one of a dozen different prestige classes.

Thrice Dead Cat

2011-05-19, 01:05 PM

Cog

2011-05-19, 01:06 PM

Or Lion's Charge, Psionic power, perhaps?:smallbiggrin:
On a list of what Tiers 4-6 have access to?

Edit: Okay, a Divine Mind with the Conflict mantle gets it...

Greenish

2011-05-19, 01:06 PM

Or Lion's Charge, Psionic power, perhaps?:smallbiggrin:Psywarr is tier 3 and mentioned there. The list was for the ways available for tier 4 and below.

Thrice Dead Cat

2011-05-19, 01:07 PM

Psywarr is tier 3 and mentioned there. The list was for the ways available for tier 4 and below.

Fair enough, but I know that psychic rogue and divine mind are lower tier, and they have a round about away of getting that power.:smalltongue:

kardar233

2011-05-19, 01:43 PM

It should be noted that I have a few friends who train with real weapons who are similarly derisive of fencers, but they've all admitted that once a fencer gets over his hang-ups re: two-dimensions and there not being the same rules, they tend to make very good — freakishly fast — swordsmen. So there is some cross-application here.

Not how I do it. Fencers may do well cross-training into sidesword but only the very basic applications of fencing (finding the sword) apply to longsword.

Person_Man

2011-05-19, 05:16 PM

Fair enough, but I know that psychic rogue and divine mind are lower tier, and they have a round about away of getting that power.:smalltongue:

I actually consider the Psychic Rogue to be Tier 3 (though it's certainly on the weaker side). They have a slightly slower progression and don't get as many Power Points compared to the Psychic Warrior. But Sneak Attack opens up access to feats like Craven, Maiming Strike, Staggering Strike, etc, plus they get Evasion, Danger Sense (Uncanny Dodge), an excellent Skill list, and Mind Cripple. I also just like their Power List. While it lacks the raw power of Expansion/Claws of the Beast/Vampire, Energy Missile, etc, it has a nice mix of useful Powers from various lists, such as Deja Vu, Vigor, Compression, Aversion, Hustle, Freedom of Movement, and Psionic Dimension Door (which opens up late game access to your standard Shadow Pounce combo). Plus you can always take more Powers with Expanded Knowledge, and get more Power Points with various tricks. But obviously YMMV.

But yeah, Divine Mind is garbage as far as I know. Has anyone actually played one before?

AslanCross

2011-05-19, 06:47 PM

I really think the OP's issue with Pounce comes from two things:

1. Pounce allows melee characters to go so far beyond the pale of the normal melee action economy that there's almost no reason to take it if you plan on being a charger/don't have Tome of Battle.

My response: This is not so much a problem with Pounce as it is a problem with D&D's way of modeling things, as has been mentioned earlier. It's that melee is really sucky. As such I think Pounce should actually be seen as a good thing, as it's one of the things that makes playing a classic fantasy archetype more feasible.

2. The "Pounce" nomenclature doesn't accurately describe the real-life action being done.

I don't really know what else to replace it with apart from clumsy terms like "furious charge" or "advancing full attack." That said, D&D is pretty poor at modeling real life anyway, because even a pouncing animal's attacks aren't executed simultaneously. (Aren't pounces in real life usually meant to stop the prey and bring them down to the ground instead of allowing the predator to attack really quickly? In that case, pounce would also include a trip attempt. :P Then it would be too good.)

JaronK

2011-05-19, 07:05 PM

Just to be clear: a round is 6 seconds. I'm hardly a super trained swordsman, but I can absolutely hit multiple times in 6 seconds with a charging attack. Charge in shield forward, stab under the shield as your shield slams into the target, spin to slash down across the neck and follow with a hit from the edge of the shield, then come over the top with a sword hack. That's 5 attacks, easily done while letting the momentum of the attack knock your opponent down. If I can do that at a run, I'm pretty sure a fantastical super warrior can manage something similar.

JaronK

Siosilvar

2011-05-19, 07:06 PM

Not how I do it. Fencers may do well cross-training into sidesword but only the very basic applications of fencing (finding the sword) apply to longsword.

Distance has nothing to do with longsword? You'd think that there's a definite difference between being six feet away from your opponent and within grappling distance (or shorter variations in distance). Likewise, parry -> riposte (in opposition or not) goes quite a long way, as does not being where your opponent's sword is.

Sure, they're not exactly the same, but a lot of the same principles apply. Heck, I noticed I got better at dodgeball after I started fencing. How's that for different?

But this is off topic anyway.[hr]Hmm... actually, other than that, I have nothing to contribute that hasn't already been said. Aslan, why'd you have to post before me? :smallwink:

Seerow

2011-05-19, 07:06 PM

JaronK

2011-05-19, 07:11 PM

The biggest question is why it's some special ability and not something all characters have access to.

Well, I'm okay with some melees being less mobile and having something else to make up for it (for example not being able to full attack when they move, but being able to disable when they charge so the followup full attack next round is devastating and hard to escape). But in general, melees that just suck while moving are a problem.

JaronK

Tvtyrant

2011-05-19, 07:37 PM

The biggest question is why it's some special ability and not something all characters have access to.

Because then you have to deal with the logic of why enemies don't all get it. A Giant Squid with pounce?

No brains

2011-05-19, 07:55 PM

[Edit]: Uncanny Dodge doesn't prevent you from being flat-footed, but Combat Reflexes allows AoO while flat-footed.

I was so sure I read it carefully too! It prevents them from losing their Dex AC due to being flat-footed, but doesn't actually stop them from becoming so. Weird. So if someone has combat reflexes and uncanny dodge, they can still be flat-footed, it just doesn't have any real effect on them. (A rogue, four levels higher than them can still sneak attack them, but that's mentioned under the uncanny dodge entry, not the flat-footed entry, making it a function of confusion.)

So, after reading all this, I figure, forget pounce. Unless full attacks on every charge or standard action ends up killing my players (AoOs should still be single attacks), I might just allow iterative attacks outside of the full-attack.

Pounce is a dire have-have not thing that seems to hurt the fun of the game. Also, everyone could just take the feral template and then buy off its silly +1 LA later on for minimal impact, so abolishing the limits on attacks that pounce was supposed to surpass might just spare paperwork for everyone. Taking into account that pounce only really works at the levels where realism's precarious perch on the window sill tilts outward, trouble abstracting 'real people' doing it becomes irrelevant.

Though I still believe 'real people' swinging real fast is covered in the AoO mechanic and that a person's attack is the crescendo where they move in for their vital hit. I won't pick any fights to change my mind anytime soon anyway.

Veyr

2011-05-19, 08:42 PM

So if someone has combat reflexes and uncanny dodge, they can still be flat-footed, it just doesn't have any real effect on them.
No: they still cannot use Immediate Actions.

Popertop

2011-05-19, 11:27 PM

Personally I've toyed with the idea of incorporating x2/x3/x4 total damage instead of iterative attacks. It would speed up combat, and give some extra love to TWF by negating the need for extra TWF feats. Something to think about, I'd have to crunch some numbers to see how it would work out.

This sounds like a fantastic idea

HappyBlanket

2011-05-19, 11:56 PM

The biggest question is why it's some special ability and not something all characters have access to.

Because a dragon that full attacks on every flyby isn't as welcome as you might imagine.

NichG

2011-05-19, 11:58 PM

So my problem with Pounce is that it further pigeonholes melee into the 'all I can do is full attack' pit. Tome of Battle goes the other way, giving melee maneuvers that do all sorts of random things, which I like. But when you add in pounce, it means that now Tome of Battle stuff often becomes not worth doing compared to the Pounce-based Ubercharger. Why damage an enemy and maybe give them a status effect if they fail a save when you can just straight out kill them with damage?

It gets to the point where I'm advising people who want to play high level rogues to pick up a level of barbarian for easy access to pounce, so they can get a full sneak attack every round. 'Everyone, pick up your level of barbarian so you can be relevant!'

I guess I'd say I'd prefer to drop or mitigate pounce and have more ToB-like things that do interesting things on standard attacks.

Edit: I'd sort of like it if the main reason to go for full attack is because the enemy has some sort of gimmicks that help them avoid one attack a round (like Abrupt Jaunt), or that make one attack just not certain enough (like a miss chance). That makes it an interesting tradeoff between wasting an opportunity to do something better than a full attack to guarantee that you hit, versus going for the more potent choice but losing the redundancy.

Incanur

2011-05-20, 12:05 AM

Taking into account that pounce only really works at the levels where realism's precarious perch on the window sill tilts outward, trouble abstracting 'real people' doing it becomes irrelevant.

Whirling-frenzy lion-totem barbarians start murdering people with pounce at level 1. 1d12+11 to the head, twice. It's not broken or anything - see color spray - but straightforward and effective.

Seerow

2011-05-20, 12:09 AM

Because a dragon that full attacks on every flyby isn't as welcome as you might imagine.

Dragons are dangerous to fight. News at 11. If you're fighting a dragon, you best have a way to deal with that flyby. And regardless, you're probably just happy he's not killing you with spells.

Greenish

2011-05-20, 12:15 AM

(Aren't pounces in real life usually meant to stop the prey and bring them down to the ground instead of allowing the predator to attack really quickly? In that case, pounce would also include a trip attempt. :P Then it would be too good.)Leaping Pounce = Pounce + Rake + Trip + Grapple. :smallamused:

Thrice Dead Cat

2011-05-20, 03:46 AM

*snip*

I see that more of an issue of the state of3.5 where "mundanes" are constantly being in a state of "you must get that full attack to be effective." Tome of Battle at least gives you uses for swift and immediate actions even if you do go that route.:smallwink:

Rei_Jin

2011-05-20, 05:18 AM

Blergh. Just make a Full attack able to be used as a Standard Action and be done with it. Now the Action Economy isn't so bad for martial characters.

Whammydill

2011-05-20, 06:44 AM

At the risk of killing catgirls, I've been doing historical martial arts for some time now. I've trained in: Italian and German longsword; Capo Ferro and Fabris rapier; Bolognese side sword; I.33 sword and buckler; smallsword....and others. One thing I can say is the less chance there is to be injured, the less like real combat a martial art is. Whenever we use our padded longswords from woodenswords.com I notice everyone is a lot more daring in their attacks. When we use wooden wasters where getting hit is a big bruise or worse then everyone is more conservative.

My point is, trying to use any modern "sport" combat like fencing or even kendo is a poor gauge for what is possible in D&D. Sure you might say a raging barbarian just don't care about getting hit back, but you have to consider that your 6 cat-girl killing seconds are also your opponents 6 cat-girl killing seconds. Pounce don't make sense, but it doesn't have to. It's just a game. I say leave pounce alone, there are many ways to ruin a pounce.

Dusk Eclipse

2011-05-20, 07:42 AM

Leaping Pounce = Pounce + Rake + Trip + Grapple. :smallamused:

The beauty of a Fleshraker in motion :smallcool:

NichG

2011-05-20, 11:22 AM

I see that more of an issue of the state of3.5 where "mundanes" are constantly being in a state of "you must get that full attack to be effective." Tome of Battle at least gives you uses for swift and immediate actions even if you do go that route.:smallwink:

Yeah, I agree that its an effect of the state of 3.5. Homebrew and houserules can mitigate that issue though.

Godskook

2011-05-20, 11:49 AM

So my problem with Pounce is that it further pigeonholes melee into the 'all I can do is full attack' pit. Tome of Battle goes the other way, giving melee maneuvers that do all sorts of random things, which I like. But when you add in pounce, it means that now Tome of Battle stuff often becomes not worth doing compared to the Pounce-based Ubercharger. Why damage an enemy and maybe give them a status effect if they fail a save when you can just straight out kill them with damage?

1.Um, have you seen or played ToB characters against 'by the book' CR challenges? Their damage is solid, and don't suffer pounce's many charge restrictions, not to mention requiring *FAR* less optimization effort.

2.Comparing melee to the Ubercharger is like comparing a caster to pun-pun. Compare anything 'normal' to the ridiculous, and the ridiculous is going to look ridiculous. At less ridiculous optimization levels(such as this (http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheetview.php?sheetid=265125)), ToB maneuvers compare far more favorably.

NichG

2011-05-20, 12:13 PM

1.Um, have you seen or played ToB characters against 'by the book' CR challenges? Their damage is solid, and don't suffer pounce's many charge restrictions, not to mention requiring *FAR* less optimization effort.

2.Comparing melee to the Ubercharger is like comparing a caster to pun-pun. Compare anything 'normal' to the ridiculous, and the ridiculous is going to look ridiculous. At less ridiculous optimization levels(such as this (http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheetview.php?sheetid=265125)), ToB maneuvers compare far more favorably.

I have a fairly high-op group right now, so there is actually an issue of the ToB-using guy falling far behind the guy who combos things so he gets 8 solid hits on a standard action spring attack. That's an extreme example though - all it takes is for someone to get ~40 damage per hit and ToB maneuvers that add a bit to damage start looking less attractive damage-wise compared to a full attack for ~120. I mean, take Ruby Nightmare Blade - its awesome until you get your third attack, and becomes pretty obsolete once you get your 4th plus haste/TWF/natural attacks/whatever.

Greenish

2011-05-20, 12:27 PM

all it takes is for someone to get ~40 damage per hit and ToB maneuvers that add a bit to damage start looking less attractiveYou mean "ToB strikes".

ffone

2011-05-20, 02:05 PM

Dragons are dangerous to fight. News at 11. If you're fighting a dragon, you best have a way to deal with that flyby. And regardless, you're probably just happy he's not killing you with spells.

"Challenge Rating" is the answer to the implied query.

Dragons are gishes and all-around good (highly mobile, 3 good saves, etc.), so they should have less beatstick ooomph than, say, a big Animal of that CR, their spellcasting is lower level than an NPC human sorcerer of that CR, etc.

Dragons are popular as BBEGS and 'challenging' encounters (CR > party level), hence your "dragons are dangerous, duh" comment.

This doesn't change the fact that allowing them to full attack on a flyby attack or charge makes a dragon much *more* dangerous (roughly 4x damage on these attacks; bite and tail are comparable, and the claws and wings are about half each; maybe less if it lacks Multiattack, maybe more if it has rapidstrike, haste, etc.).

Remember that a dragon may not 'kill you with spells' directly, but use them to buff up its physical attacks. Since it's a gish this is probably its best bet.

So my problem with Pounce is that it further pigeonholes melee into the 'all I can do is full attack' pit. Tome of Battle goes the other way, giving melee maneuvers that do all sorts of random things, which I like. But when you add in pounce, it means that now Tome of Battle stuff often becomes not worth doing compared to the Pounce-based Ubercharger. Why damage an enemy and maybe give them a status effect if they fail a save when you can just straight out kill them with damage?

It gets to the point where I'm advising people who want to play high level rogues to pick up a level of barbarian for easy access to pounce, so they can get a full sneak attack every round. 'Everyone, pick up your level of barbarian so you can be relevant!'

I guess I'd say I'd prefer to drop or mitigate pounce and have more ToB-like things that do interesting things on standard attacks.

Edit: I'd sort of like it if the main reason to go for full attack is because the enemy has some sort of gimmicks that help them avoid one attack a round (like Abrupt Jaunt), or that make one attack just not certain enough (like a miss chance). That makes it an interesting tradeoff between wasting an opportunity to do something better than a full attack to guarantee that you hit, versus going for the more potent choice but losing the redundancy.

This is exactly how I feel. "Don't forget your level of barbarian! Hope you aren't Lawful or you're out one rage! (I forget, does whirling frenzy have the alignment thing)" And in campaigns which don't waive multiclass XP penalties (a very common houserule), you get issues with people trying to retool their build to fit in the barb level.

For example, if someone wanted to make an elf or lesser tiefling daring outlaw (rogue-4 swashbuckler-X)....now you better play a human barbarian-2 rogue-3 swash-X (barb-2 and rogue-4 both get Uncanny Dodge so it works nicely). This can be 'blamed' on multiclass XP penalties rather than pounce, and more DMs than not waive them, but it illustrates the annoyance of 'must-have' dips in general.

Veyr

2011-05-20, 02:47 PM

This is exactly how I feel. "Don't forget your level of barbarian! Hope you aren't Lawful or you're out one rage! (I forget, does whirling frenzy have the alignment thing)" And in campaigns which don't waive multiclass XP penalties (a very common houserule), you get issues with people trying to retool their build to fit in the barb level.

For example, if someone wanted to make an elf or lesser tiefling daring outlaw (rogue-4 swashbuckler-X)....now you better play a human barbarian-2 rogue-3 swash-X (barb-2 and rogue-4 both get Uncanny Dodge so it works nicely). This can be 'blamed' on multiclass XP penalties rather than pounce, and more DMs than not waive them, but it illustrates the annoyance of 'must-have' dips in general.
I very much disagree:

It's dumb that every melee character without Tome of Battle who wants to move and attack (efficiently) at the same time needs to dip Barbarian or Cleric, or gish it up (using a very broad version of the term "gish" here to include things like Psionics and even Incarnum). Tome of Battle fixes this, which is why it is, IMO, the most important book in the game beyond the actual foundation rules, but it really shouldn't be this way.

Still, being able to dip one level of something in order to get this ability is a massive improvement over what we had. Moving the Pounce ACF to 6th makes things worse, because you're forcing every melee character to actually spend a lot of time in the Barbarian class rather than what they actually want to be doing. Ideally, every single melee class ought to receive some form of "attack-and-move" ability in the first six levels, probably as early as possible, so that we eliminate this need to dip issue. But that is a lot of classes to change.

Or just use Tome of Battle, since that fixes this and several other issues.

The answer is not to make Pounce harder to get by taking away the ACF or by enforcing the bloody-stupid multiclass restrictions, but to simply widen access to mobility so that Barbarian isn't necessary for every non-ToB, non-gish (using the same wide definition of "gish" as above) martial character (which it currently is necessary).

Also, on multiclass XP penalties, a class in which you have only 1 level does not incur any penalties, IIRC. Thus, you aren't actually fixing anything by enforcing them, just unnecessarily restricting player options for no good reason.

Greenish

2011-05-20, 02:50 PM

I very much disagreeFunny, since it reads as if you agree with ffone: you both feel that the barbarian dip (or pounce in general) shouldn't be necessary for mobility.

Veyr

2011-05-20, 02:51 PM

I disagree with her statements of the problems and causes. To her, the problem is that the Barb 1 dip exists. To me, the problem is that the Barb 1 (and Cleric 1) dips are the only options that exist. Very different, I think.

Greenish

2011-05-20, 02:54 PM

I disagree with her statements of the problems and causes. To her, the problem is that the Barb 1 dip exists.That's not what he's saying in the post you quoted. :smallconfused:

Veyr

2011-05-20, 03:01 PM

Perhaps I am reading into it a bit much, on rereading, but here's where I got that idea:

For example, if someone wanted to make an elf or lesser tiefling daring outlaw (rogue-4 swashbuckler-X)....now you better play a human barbarian-2 rogue-3 swash-X (barb-2 and rogue-4 both get Uncanny Dodge so it works nicely).(emphasis mine)

I took the "now" here to indicate "since they printed Complete Champion", i.e. the problem is the introduction of new, desperately-needed abilities, not the lack thereof beforehand.

Also...

This can be 'blamed' on multiclass XP penalties rather than pounce, and more DMs than not waive them, but it illustrates the annoyance of 'must-have' dips in general.
This. If the "fault" here is waiving XP penalties, then the "problem" is the dip itself — not the fact that those other classes don't have similar options.

Those were the sentiments I was responding to. But I admit I may have misunderstood.

Geddoe

2011-05-20, 04:00 PM

No: they still cannot use Immediate Actions.
You also still get trounced by any Iaijutsu Masters that wander into the campaign.

Greenish

2011-05-20, 04:09 PM

This. If the "fault" here is waiving XP penalties, then the "problem" is the dip itself — not the fact that those other classes don't have similar options.

Those were the sentiments I was responding to.But you both agree that barbarian shouldn't be a must have dip for melee builds, or indeed, that there shouldn't be ”must have" dips.

Veyr

2011-05-20, 04:10 PM

Sure, but very different reasons for that. My position is that the Barbarian 1 dip is bad only because there aren't other options: I'm happier with the option existing than with being without any option at all. I just wish there were a lot more of them.

Thrice Dead Cat

2011-05-20, 04:28 PM

I have a fairly high-op group right now, so there is actually an issue of the ToB-using guy falling far behind the guy who combos things so he gets 8 solid hits on a standard action spring attack. That's an extreme example though - all it takes is for someone to get ~40 damage per hit and ToB maneuvers that add a bit to damage start looking less attractive damage-wise compared to a full attack for ~120. I mean, take Ruby Nightmare Blade - its awesome until you get your third attack, and becomes pretty obsolete once you get your 4th plus haste/TWF/natural attacks/whatever.

To be fair, considering that this othe person is getting 8 attacks anywhere from level 6-16, you clearly know more on this issue than we do. It's entirely possible the guy actually using ToB simply isn't as adapt at optimizing as the guy with 8 attacks.

NichG

2011-05-20, 08:57 PM

To be fair, considering that this othe person is getting 8 attacks anywhere from level 6-16, you clearly know more on this issue than we do. It's entirely possible the guy actually using ToB simply isn't as adapt at optimizing as the guy with 8 attacks.

Well, thats true, he isn't as much of an optimizer as the 8 attack guy. However I've also been in the situation where I was playing a ToB character and, without particularly optimizing for it, making a full attack was a lot more attractive than any of my strikes as far as taking the enemy seriously. I'd still end up using strikes instead in lower risk situations, because hey, its fun to mix it up, but if it came down to a really hard encounter the full attack pounce was usually the go-to option until I got Time Stands Still and Avalanche of Blades.

tyckspoon

2011-05-20, 09:12 PM

Well, thats true, he isn't as much of an optimizer as the 8 attack guy. However I've also been in the situation where I was playing a ToB character and, without particularly optimizing for it, making a full attack was a lot more attractive than any of my strikes as far as taking the enemy seriously. I'd still end up using strikes instead in lower risk situations, because hey, its fun to mix it up, but if it came down to a really hard encounter the full attack pounce was usually the go-to option until I got Time Stands Still and Avalanche of Blades.

I'm pretty sure that's how it was intended to work. Strikes generally don't completely replace the damage output of a good full attack- it'd be hard to and probably overpowered if they did, considering they'd be competing with 3 or so full BAB attacks and then the iteratives for moderately well-optimized attackers. Instead, strikes give you an option for doing something relevant when you can't full attack, instead of being restricted to either 'lots of damage' or 'poke him a bit' in the Full Attack/single standard paradigm.

Plus there's always things like the Mongoose boosts and Burning Blade to make your ToB-ness relevant to your full attacks as well, so it's not like you're stuck pretending to be a Fighter even when you do 'only' full attack.

Thrice Dead Cat

2011-05-20, 09:19 PM

The point of most strikes isn't "LOL MASSIVE DAMAGE" but more "I can do this instead!" by either going for touch AC, giving you more attacks, or something else. If you choose the right maneuvers, you can keep doing full attacks (most of time) and have something else to do, too! (boosts, counters, BY CROM!)

Incanur

2011-05-20, 09:33 PM

For warblades who use two-handed weapons, strikes beat full attacks until level six barring whirling frenzy, which can only happen once per day at first. At that point, nothing beats Shock Trooper plus Leap Attack on a pouncing charge for sheer damage. However, Mountain Hammer will sometimes prove a better choice against damage reduction you don't overcome and Rapid Wolf Strike provides a somewhat less suicidal way to deal decent damage. This pattern continues indefinitely. Throw in a valorous weapon and even Time Stands Still can't compete with ye ole pounce.

Greenish

2011-05-20, 09:36 PM

For warblades who use two-handed weapons, strikes beat full attacks until level six barring whirling frenzy, which can only happen once per day at first. At that point, nothing beats Shock Trooper plus Leap Attack on a pouncing charge for sheer damage. However, Mountain Hammer will sometimes prove a better choice against damage reduction you don't overcome and Rapid Wolf Fang strike provides a somewhat less suicidal way to deal decent damage. This pattern continues indefinitely. Throw in a valorous weapon and even Time Stands Still can't compete with ye ole pounce.You'd need to dip fighter or otherwise grab a bonus feat to get both Leap Attack and Shock Trooper at level 6.

Also, Rapid Wolf Strike and Wolf Fang Strike are two different strikes. :smalltongue:

Incanur

2011-05-20, 09:44 PM

You'd need to dip fighter or otherwise grab a bonus feat to get both Leap Attack and Shock Trooper at level 6.

That just proves fighters are better than warblades. :smallamused: You've got to dip to get pounce too, right? That or wait until level nine.

Thrice Dead Cat

2011-05-20, 09:56 PM

That just proves fighters are better than warblades. :smallamused: You've got to dip to get pounce too, right? That or wait until level nine.

Well, for the first two levels, maybe!:smalltongue: I mean, Fighter 2/Warblade X/Barbarian 1/Some other Full BAB class, maybe one that gives another "rage" 1/Warblade 16-X is super legit.

EDIT: On pouncing barbarians versus Time Stands Still, while I don't have the data myself, it was fairly easy to show that, by the time Time Stands Still is online, the two's damage is comparable, with the barbarian slightly ahead.

Greenish

2011-05-20, 10:01 PM

Well, for the first two levels, maybe!:smalltongue: I mean, Fighter 2/Warblade X/Barbarian 1/Some other Full BAB class, maybe one that gives another "rage" 1/Warblade 16-X is super legit.Extra Rage gets you two more uses, and barb 2 has some nifty ACFs.

But I probably wouldn't bother going the whole pounceshocktrooperleapattack monty on a full or nearly full warblade, unless you play in a campaign where you really need that sort of damage (I usually don't).

NichG

2011-05-20, 11:04 PM

I'm pretty sure that's how it was intended to work. Strikes generally don't completely replace the damage output of a good full attack- it'd be hard to and probably overpowered if they did, considering they'd be competing with 3 or so full BAB attacks and then the iteratives for moderately well-optimized attackers. Instead, strikes give you an option for doing something relevant when you can't full attack, instead of being restricted to either 'lots of damage' or 'poke him a bit' in the Full Attack/single standard paradigm.

Plus there's always things like the Mongoose boosts and Burning Blade to make your ToB-ness relevant to your full attacks as well, so it's not like you're stuck pretending to be a Fighter even when you do 'only' full attack.

This comes full circle, where I was saying my problem with Pounce is it makes everything a full attack, therefore relegating backup options and tactical choices to 'build my character so there's no need for backups'. Or as I said, I'd prefer full attack to be weaker while keeping the maneuvers about as strong as they are now, and for more ToB-like options to exist.