Robilar's Gambit: Good or not?

[Elves]

What do you guys think of this feat for melee characters? Personally it seems a little overrated since at high levels the last thing you want is to be trading hits with melee monsters, and AoO/tripper builds are going to try to not end up in that situation to begin with.

[Zaq]

It’s pretty neat conceptually if you build for it properly, but it’s really expensive in terms of build resources, so it’s rarely practical unless you’re doing almost a full Jack B. Quick setup.

[Mr Adventurer]

It has one feat as a prerequisite other than BAB, so I don't think the comment about build resources is accurate. Sure, you can spend more resources to make it much more effective - but that's kind of true with nearly any strategy so I'm not sure it's a fair criticism of the feat.

[Esprit15]

I look at it as a combat option, not as your only tool. Against a hydra where each attack isn’t particularly bad and your attacks might actually be scarier? Hell yeah, make those attacks of opportunity! Against a giant swinging a club around? Maybe better to play it safe.

[Zaq]

It has one feat as a prerequisite other than BAB, so I don't think the comment about build resources is accurate. Sure, you can spend more resources to make it much more effective - but that's kind of true with nearly any strategy so I'm not sure it's a fair criticism of the feat.

Huh. You’re right. I had something totally different in mind, though now I can’t seem to determine just what that might have been. Mea culpa.

[Efrate]

Effective use of the gambit requires: reach so everything not medium cannot ignore you; a high dex score so you get enough AoO to make it worthwhile; high strength or a bunch of on hit riders to make you attacks matter, or stormguard warrior (which requires iron heart glare) and power attack to convert that to hit into damage; high ac, con, or miss chance so you live, or improved trip (which requires combat expertise and int 13 which strains pb further, and requires more effort to be reliable).

That is a lot of resources.

[Mato]

Q: Robilar's Gambit: Good or not?
A: If you deal more damage than your opponent does, it's obviously good.

And that are a lot of ways to explain, demonstrate, and provide examples of such without intentionally mucking up with the usage of a single poster's assigned name of a class/feat combination stolen from thousands of people that saw the same merits in the same combinations almost twenty years ago. However this is GitP, and I am forced to reply in a contradictory manner and use vague answers.

So do you like butterflies?

[DeTess]

Huh. You’re right. I had something totally different in mind, though now I can’t seem to determine just what that might have been. Mea culpa.

You might have been thinking of karmic strike? That one requires dodge and combat expertise (which in turn requires int 13) as well as dex 13. And then you'd obviously need combat reflexes to make it worthwhile in the first place.

[Elves]

Q: Robilar's Gambit: Good or not?
A: If you deal more damage than your opponent does, it's obviously good.

And that are a lot of ways to explain, demonstrate, and provide examples of such without intentionally mucking up with the usage of a single poster's assigned name of a class/feat combination stolen from thousands of people that saw the same merits in the same combinations almost twenty years ago. However this is GitP, and I am forced to reply in a contradictory manner and use vague answers.

So do you like butterflies?

I know you want a precise question, but I'm asking an open-ended question about for what builds the feat is worth taking.

>A: If you deal more damage than your opponent does, it's obviously good.
Is also clearly not true, eg, if they have more HP than you.


You might have been thinking of karmic strike? That one requires dodge and combat expertise (which in turn requires int 13) as well as dex 13. And then you'd obviously need combat reflexes to make it worthwhile in the first place

Karmic Strike also requires the opponent to actually hit you.

[Mr Adventurer]

Defensive Throw is the other one, usually

[Esprit15]

>A: If you deal more damage than your opponent does, it's obviously good.
Is also clearly not true, eg, if they have more HP than you.

Well, not necessarily true. If you deal more damage as a percentage of HP than the enemy does to you, then in a vacuum you’re probably going to win. But, even if you aren’t, that’s what party members are for, and anything that ups your damage output compared to not having it does make you a more effective fighter than not having it.

[Elves]

The point being that Mato's statement wasn't as unilateral as claimed.

Let me rephrase the question though: in what contexts, as a melee character, do you find Robilar's worth taking?

[Efrate]

If you can get into attack range reliably and early enough in inititative to get procs, ideally with reach, and can survive the full attacks of whatever you are fighting, it's worth because its free dps. Ideally you want enough invested to get at least 3 attacks or so but its technically free damage if you get 1.

[Sutr]

Cant you also use it with the feat in tome of battle to move out of a full attack making it almost always worth it?

[Elves]

Evasive Reflexes lets you 5ft step instead of taking an AoO. Yes, it's a good combo. Though a lot of the monsters with strong melee full attacks will have reach that partly or fully negates it.

[Endarire]

Robilar's Gambit's effectiveness depends on your other options. An ubercharger can be built to do more damage and negate the need for RB and Karmic Strike. If you -really- want RB's effects, you still can go for it, but be prepared to invest significantly for significantly helpful returns.

[Mato]

>A: If you deal more damage than your opponent does, it's obviously good.
Is also clearly not true, eg, if they have more HP than you.Your rebuttal isn't as unilateral as claimed, they can have more HP than you and you can still deal enough damage to kill them first.


Let me rephrase the question though: in what contexts, as a melee character, do you find Robilar's worth taking?Any character with enough dexterity to validate obtaining combat reflexes in the first place. :smallsmile:

Look, Robliar's is about AoOs. Like most wizards don't care about shock trooper, this doesn't mean shock trooper is a terrible feat. It just points out shock trooper is part of a well used feat chain for charge-related tactics. Robliar's is similar, it is the greater version of karmantic strike and part of a well used feat chain for AoO-related tactics. Whether or not you incorporate & expand on the obvious benefits of extra attacks on someone else's turn in addition to your normal actions is a building decision not applicable to every character type due to the number of feats a single character can reasonably obtain. For example, combine charging and AoOs, or just shock trooper and Robliar's, consumes at least five feat slots.

[zlefin]

Is Robilar's useful on some monsters when respeccing their feats to deal with more optimized parties?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Frozen Wild Shape into a 12-headed Cryohydra, and you get to make 12 bites on an AoO....

[pabelfly]

Is Robilar's useful on some monsters when respeccing their feats to deal with more optimized parties?

If you've got some way to make use of those extra AoOs like extra reach or large size then yes.

[gorfnab]

Robilar's Gambit combos nicely with the feat Stormguard Warrior from Tome of Battle.

[PoeticallyPsyco]

The point being that Mato's statement wasn't as unilateral as claimed.

Let me rephrase the question though: in what contexts, as a melee character, do you find Robilar's worth taking?

When you also have Mercurial Strike and max ranks in Iaijutsu Focus. Some Sneak Attack certainly wouldn't go amiss in there either.

[weckar]

Don't forget Snap Kick.

[SirNibbles]

Evasive Reflexes lets you 5ft step instead of taking an AoO. Yes, it's a good combo. Though a lot of the monsters with strong melee full attacks will have reach that partly or fully negates it.

An alternative option is the Sidestep feat (Miniatures Handbook, page 28) which allows you to take a 5-foot step after making an AoO. It's better but has more prerequisites.

Also, against charging characters, that 5-foot step is guaranteed to get you to safety since a charging character must attack from the first spot it can reach you. That means you only get hit once by a pounce build and then get to move back and they can't do anything.

__

Dragon Magazine #340 has two feats, Improved Combat Reflexes and Greater Combat Reflexes which allow you to make two or three attacks, respectively, per opportunity (though this does burn through your AoOs per round quicker). This stacks well with Double Hit and Snap Kick.

[Elves]

Also, against charging characters, that 5-foot step is guaranteed to get you to safety since a charging character must attack from the first spot it can reach you. That means you only get hit once by a pounce build and then get to move back and they can't do anything.

If you 5-foot away from someone who charged you and then they use some form of swift action movement like anklets of translocation to catch up to you, would they be able to continue their full attack or would it be canceled because the original terms of the charge ended?

[SirNibbles]

If you 5-foot away from someone who charged you and then they use some form of swift action movement like anklets of translocation to catch up to you, would they be able to continue their full attack or would it be canceled because the original terms of the charge ended?

They used a full-round action to charge. They were able to make one attack. Then they used a swift action to teleport. By RAW, they should not be able to continue attacking because they don't have any actions remaining. They are no longer charging so they can't make a full attack, in the same way that you can't charge an enemy, drop them in one or two hits, and then continue to pounce another enemy just because you used a swift action teleport.

"When a creature with this special attack makes a charge, it can follow with a full attack..." - Pounce; SRD

[Elves]

You can use swift actions between swings of a full attack, so if it were a normal full attack it would be totally acceptable. What I'm asking is exactly:



the same way that you can't charge an enemy, drop them in one or two hits, and then continue to pounce another enemy just because you used a swift action teleport.

What makes you think this? That quote doesn't really provide guidance IMO. If anything, since it indicates that a full attack action is being initiated after the charge, you could argue that, as normal, swift actions are acceptable between swings. You charge, and the full attack action "follows" -- you no longer need to be fulfilling the initial condition of the charge, ie attacking from the closest possible space. But I'm not sure.

[Blackhawk748]

Robilar's Gambit is a solid feat and is usually the "capstone" of a tripper or AoO based build. It's also one of the ways Ive seen someone make a pure Fighter 20 actually be effective.

As others have said when paired with reach and some form of increased defense (Mineral Warrior DR, Miss Chance, or just a crapload of hitpoints combined with good self healing options) it can turn a Fighter into a wood chipper that some beast got their hand caught in.

Now, as others have pointed out this usually requires it to be a bit higher focus on the build, but really any build with Combat Reflexes can benefit from this, it's a matter of how much.

[King of Nowhere]

Also consider that the fighter, as the front line of the party, was likely to get attacked anyway. So all you're losing is a -4 to AC and +4 to damage, in return for making an attack for every attack you are taking. if you are facing high level monsters, chances are they would hit regardless, and +4 damage wouldn't be muc

and consider that the feat requirement is combat reflexes, which many builds use. so, if you have a combat reflexes build, why not? -4 AC in exchange for a lot more attacks. add in a decent investment in AC and defensive throw and hurting you becomes more trouble than it's worth.

Finally, the feat would be great for a boss opponent, since that guy would be likely to be attacked by the party anyway. give the feat to a dragon with higher-than-average-for-dragons dex, add him some dex buffs, and you've practically doubled the dragon's attacks.

By the way, if both you and your opponent have robilar's gambit, how does stuff resolve? you both strike for as many attacks of opportunity you have?

Of course it's not effective every time or in every situation, but it's very useful, and not expensive at all in a build that can make use of it.
it gives a lot of extra power to someone who has many aoo and gets attacked often, especially to villains. personally, i prefer to soft ban* it at the table because it's above the power level i prefer.

*soft ban: i say i'd rather nobody use it. if the players want to use it, I make it clear that they can take it, but their enemies will have it too. if they take it, high level npcs will also have the feat when appropriate

[PoeticallyPsyco]

You can use swift actions between swings of a full attack, so if it were a normal full attack it would be totally acceptable.

I really don't think that you can. As far as I know, free actions are the only actions you can take during another action.

[Elves]

I really don't think that you can. As far as I know, free actions are the only actions you can take during another action.

You can take a swift action whenever you can take a free action.

[Doctor Awkward]

I really don't think that you can. As far as I know, free actions are the only actions you can take during another action.

Action Types: (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#actionTypes)
"Full-round action: A full-round action consumes all your effort during a round. The only movement you can take during a full-round action is a 5-foot step before, during, or after the action. You can also perform free actions (see below)."

"Free action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally."

Swift Actions: (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#swiftActions) "A swift action consumes a very small amount of time, but represents a larger expenditure of effort and energy than a free action. You can perform one swift action per turn without affecting your ability to perform other actions. In that regard, a swift action is like a free action. However, you can perform only a single swift action per turn, regardless of what other actions you take. You can take a swift action any time you would normally be allowed to take a free action."

possibly relevant Full Attack (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#fullAttack) text:
"If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon or for some special reason you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones."

So in general you are free to take your attacks one at a time, checking the results of each previous attack before assigning later ones. You can additionally perform your swift action for the round in between these attacks unless the specific action you wish to take says otherwise.

[PoeticallyPsyco]

Huh. I stand corrected.

[Mr Adventurer]

Which is fine, but charging ends your turn.

[Elves]

Which is fine, but charging ends your turn.

Where are you getting that from? It's not in the SRD or RC.

[Mr Adventurer]

Ah, not sure - maybe I'm mistaking a 4e rule - but sure I'd seen it somewhere for 3e. Ah well.

[Zaq]

Ah, not sure - maybe I'm mistaking a 4e rule - but sure I'd seen it somewhere for 3e. Ah well.

It is indeed a 4e rule.

3e just assumes that you have to spend all your actions on it, but then swift actions happened. (Of course even in Core you could theoretically charge and then use a Quickened spell.)