PDA

View Full Version : Stand Still feat



Tyger
2010-02-21, 11:50 PM
OK, this one is creating some consternation from our group, and I'd love to get some additional viewpoints on the feat. The feat is, from the SRD:


Stand Still [General]
You can prevent foes from fleeing or closing.

Prerequisite
Str 13.

Benefit
When a foe’s movement out of a square you threaten grants you an attack of opportunity, you can give up that attack and instead attempt to stop your foe in his tracks. Make your attack of opportunity normally. If you hit your foe, he must succeed on a Reflex save against a DC of 10 + your damage roll (the opponent does not actually take damage), or immediately halt as if he had used up his move actions for the round.

Since you use the Stand Still feat in place of your attack of opportunity, you can do so only a number of times per round equal to the number of times per round you could make an attack of opportunity (normally just one).

Normal
Attacks of opportunity cannot halt your foes in their tracks.

As we see it, there are two questions to be asked.

1) And in my opinion, the lesser of the two - what do you roll for the damage roll? The feat just says you roll "normally" which would imply that any and all bonuses and bonus damage die would get rolled, which has the potential to send that Reflex DC into the "nigh impossible" realm. Hell, if you can hit for more than 35 damage, it means there are no creatures that can make the save on anything but a 20. In my opinion, this is a small issue, as bonus damage dice aside, we can all make a power attacking raging barbarian with a greataxe who hits for that kind of damage without any other help... so there it is.

2) What does it mean where it says "immediately halt as if he had used up his move actions for the round"? If that is read literally, it means that you can't move at all, as you have "used up" your move actions for the round. But I have trouble with that... in a big way. Effectively, that would mean that some creatures would be so easily defeated that it would be laughable. Hell, a enlarged spike chain wielder using this feat and dishing out reliable damage, could lock any creature in place and render it unable to move at all. And if the move actions are "used up", the poor thing can't even attack back unless it has reach equal to or greater than the Stand Still user! Sure, smarter critters will Free 5, and nimble ones will tumble. But what about really dumb ones? What about the lowly purple worm and his ilk?

In my opinion, it means that you have used that move action, and must immediately stop that move, as though your moves were used up, with all that implies (legal space, etc.) but that if you have another move action, you'd be free to use it, and as you can't get hit for two AoOs for the same thing, you'd be free to move.

Any thoughts? There is no clarification in the errata or the faq. One of my group has sent the question to Customer Service, but a) I don't know if they are still answering 3.5 questions, and b) I don't know that I'd trust their answer anyway. :smallwink:

EDITED: for clarification

Mongoose87
2010-02-21, 11:59 PM
1) It's just that awesome.

2) I'm pretty sure they're just supposed to "Stand Still." The idea is to keep the character from moving.

Flickerdart
2010-02-21, 11:59 PM
This only triggers on AoO movement, so a 5ft step won't activate it. If he does start moving, and fails the save, it counts as if he'd wasted his move action to move in place. Likewise, Tumble negates it.

Tinydwarfman
2010-02-22, 12:01 AM
RAI and RAW, it would be your damage on the AoO normally, so practically impossible to make. Also, it says move actions, so they can not move again.

BenTheJester
2010-02-22, 12:01 AM
1) He still has to hit the target.

I know it's not THAT hard. It is a powerful feat.

arguskos
2010-02-22, 12:03 AM
There is a reason that Stand Still trippers are considered very strong (if dreadfully boring). You hit upon them above. :smallsigh: I personally really dislike Stand Still, for being waaaay too easily broken, but that's just me.

drengnikrafe
2010-02-22, 12:44 AM
Thicket of Blades to fix the 5-ft step problem.

TheOOB
2010-02-22, 01:20 AM
It's a powerful feat, but not broken. A wizards level 1 grease is nearly as effective at low levels, and it hits a group. Fighters need some loving to stand alongside casters.

Tyger
2010-02-22, 05:46 AM
While I like the Grease spell too, I don't think its even remotely comparable, nor does it scale up as quickly to the "impossible" realm that this feat appears to.

Level 1 casting of grease means that the monsters get to make a DC ~ 15 Reflex save even without a bonus they will make it 25% of the time. Then a 50% chance to make the Balance check to get out of the grease. Yes, its good, but not nearly as good as Stand Still.

That same level 1 barbarian can lock down almost all level 1 creatures. Halberd (for reach), with 10 damage total (easy to hit!) means the monster gets to move if it rolls a 20, and only if it rolls a 20.

And it just gets worse the higher you go. Combined with something like Thicket of Blades, this means that you can effectively lock down any creature that doesn't have reach equal to or greater than yours and without ranged attacks.

Hydras, purple worms, hell, half the monster manual now is completely ineffective without rolling a 20??? That's arguably the most broken feat I've come across. Sure it requires a rather specific build, but that build is a very effective melee build for all kinds of other reasons too, so its not like you are building a complete one-trick-pony...

Yes, its not the power of a full caster, but in some instances, its actually more powerful than most casters can pull off, and this build can do it all day long, with no loss of effectiveness or power. That's pretty ugly in my books.

PhoenixRivers
2010-02-22, 05:56 AM
So, you're telling me that against the big dumb creatures (lower threats), it's very strong?

And against the smarter foes, it's less effective?

I don't see the problem.

Ernir
2010-02-22, 07:07 AM
It is a strong feat that in certain scenarios can win you the fight. It does not win you every fight, and neither does it win the fights it does win without investment or specialization.

A melee feat doing something a spellcaster can't precisely replicate at the same level is unusual, but... it's just giving the melee some form of battlefield control. =/



EDIT: I wouldn't use the feat on CR 1 opponents, as you did in your example. If I have the ability to deal 10+ damage/hit, I'd rather use it to kill them instead. :smalltongue:

Tyger
2010-02-22, 07:26 AM
So, you're telling me that against the big dumb creatures (lower threats), it's very strong?

And against the smarter foes, it's less effective?

I don't see the problem.

No, actually, against anything that doesn't have reach as great as the feat user's or a ranged attack, it is a show stopper. Particularly if combined with something like Thicket of Blades.

Its not that its "very strong" so much as it is a 95% guarantee of victory against such critters. If it gave an edge, I'd probably like it. But eliminating threats completely? That's a bit over the top.

And yes, I am all in favour of increasing melee class advantages. Casters rule the roost, and this doesn't, per se, change that. But this feat, can essentially remove a creature (or creatures if you have Combat Reflexes, and what build incorporating this isn't going to have that) from the fight - completely, with no real chance for the creature to escape. Yes, there are save or die and save or suck, but none of them have anywhere close to the same save DC as this feat, which is available at first level, and just gets stronger through the entire game.

For 7 power points, a Psychic Warrior Spiked-chain wielder can lock the Tarrasque down, with its only hope a natural 20 on the Reflex role. Note, I didn't say he could kill it, just that he could prevent it from moving.

Purple worms are dead too, probably by level 3 or 4. Trolls? Not a problem by level 2, maybe 3.



One level seven physic warrior can reliably lock down the Tarrasque. This doesn't bother people??

Amphetryon
2010-02-22, 07:34 AM
One level seven physic warrior can reliably lock down the Tarrasque. This doesn't bother people??Given that a Warlock - not the strongest class, either - can fly over the Tarrasque and pew-pew it to death with impunity before that level? Nope, not so much. :smallsmile:

PhoenixRivers
2010-02-22, 07:48 AM
No, actually, against anything that doesn't have reach as great as the feat user's or a ranged attack, it is a show stopper. Particularly if combined with something like Thicket of Blades.Really? So there's no miss chance? Let's take a creature with a SLA of teleport or dimension door. Let's take a creature that displaces itself, or becomes invisible. Let's take the incredibly large number of creatures with ranged attacks, or spells.


Its not that its "very strong" so much as it is a 95% guarantee of victory against such critters. If it gave an edge, I'd probably like it. But eliminating threats completely? That's a bit over the top.The only thing I find "over the top" is your exaggeration of the feat. Yes, there are many creatures that lose vs this. At a similar level of optimization, can't the same be said of casters?


And yes, I am all in favour of increasing melee class advantages. Casters rule the roost, and this doesn't, per se, change that. But this feat, can essentially remove a creature (or creatures if you have Combat Reflexes, and what build incorporating this isn't going to have that) from the fight - completely, with no real chance for the creature to escape. Yes, there are save or die and save or suck, but none of them have anywhere close to the same save DC as this feat, which is available at first level, and just gets stronger through the entire game.There are also "no save, just suck". There are many, MANY abilities that trump this tactic. I know. I've used most of them, and fought trippers.

Heck, low visibility nerfs it. Darkness, fog, etc.
Several ToB maneuvers nerf it.


For 7 power points, a Psychic Warrior Spiked-chain wielder can lock the Tarrasque down, with its only hope a natural 20 on the Reflex role. Note, I didn't say he could kill it, just that he could prevent it from moving.Really? 7PP?
Because it sounds like: 7pp, a successful hit, and a damage roll of 49 or higher, along with enough feat investment to have the feat, and to overcome a 20 foot reach, while penetrating AC 35.


Purple worms are dead too, probably by level 3 or 4. Trolls? Not a problem by level 2, maybe 3.
Really? REALLY?
Level 3-4, you're talking greater than 15 feet of range, along with maintaining the entire chain trip feats, negating tremorsense, reliably hitting the AC, and dealing enough damage?

Because frankly? I think your argument is suspect.



One level seven physic warrior can reliably lock down the Tarrasque. This doesn't bother people??
Well, provided a level 7 warrior can reliably hit AC 35 from 25+ feet away, while expending a couple feats for thicket of blades, and deal 40 or so damage per hit.

Personally, without TO levels of optimization, I find your argument to hold as much water as a collander.

Greenish
2010-02-22, 10:10 AM
I am also on the opinion that a control-focused meatshield being able to prevent (1+dex bonus) of creatures from moving most of the time is not terribly overpowered.

[Edit]: 7th level psychic warrior with Expansion augmented to become Huge would have a reach of 15 feet (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/movementPositionAndDistance.htm#bigandLittleCreatu resInCombat), double that with a reach weapon, so 30 feet. Tarrasque has the reach of 20 feet and an area of 30 feet, so it could easily reach the poor psychic warrior without provoking AoOs.

So, what am I missing?

Mongoose87
2010-02-22, 11:22 AM
I am also on the opinion that a control-focused meatshield being able to prevent (1+dex bonus) of creatures from moving most of the time is not terribly overpowered.

[Edit]: 7th level psychic warrior with Expansion augmented to become Huge would have a reach of 15 feet (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/movementPositionAndDistance.htm#bigandLittleCreatu resInCombat), double that with a reach weapon, so 30 feet. Tarrasque has the reach of 20 feet and an area of 30 feet, so it could easily reach the poor psychic warrior without provoking AoOs.

So, what am I missing?

He would also need to make the DC 35 save against fear.

Zanatos777
2010-02-22, 11:34 AM
And survive its full attack. Also DR 15/epic tends to reduce damage. In fact to lock down the Tarrasque in the way you suggest one would have to be able to deal 54 damage every attack. The Tarrasque has a lot of Hit Dice and therefore a very good Reflex save (+29).

Draz74
2010-02-22, 11:44 AM
(Nitpick: Halberds aren't even reach weapons. Sadly.)

Yeah ... most of the examples you're giving are critters that have pretty good reach.

Beating a troll at level 2? Trolls have 10-foot reach. How are you beating that? Just a reach weapon won't do it. Just a reach weapon and Expansion will work ... for two rounds. A reach weapon and Deformity feats? OK, now we're talking a very heavy feat investment for this level.

And you're still assuming that all of these lockdown builds' attacks will do enough damage to make Reflex DCs "impossible." I doubt that. And hitting the monsters' AC ... there are just a lot of things that can go wrong here.

And you can't have Thicket of Blades until Level 5 at the very earliest, probably later. Until then, the five-foot step will still keep the Troll functional.

AtwasAwamps
2010-02-22, 11:51 AM
Random note...couldn't anything with tumble and either decent ranks or high dex just slip right on by?

Zanatos777
2010-02-22, 11:57 AM
Random note...couldn't anything with tumble and either decent ranks or high dex just slip right on by?

That is a constant question I have. Does Thicket of Blades trump Tumble? Otherwise yes they could completely negate AoOs from moving.

Mongoose87
2010-02-22, 12:04 PM
That is a constant question I have. Does Thicket of Blades trump Tumble? Otherwise yes they could completely negate AoOs from moving.

Thicket of Blades says any movement. To me, that trumps tumble.

Draz74
2010-02-22, 12:06 PM
That is a constant question I have. Does Thicket of Blades trump Tumble? Otherwise yes they could completely negate AoOs from moving.

It's been discussed before. Answer: both abilities are written as absolutes (an "unstoppable force vs. immovable object" paradox), and nothing in the rules makes it really clear which rules have higher priority. So ask your DM.

Personally I rule Thicket of Blades trumps, because Tumble's immunity-to-AoO clause is already stronger than I'd like it to be. (Game design-wise. Don't get me wrong, as a player I'll still abuse Tumble mobility all I can.)

Vampire D
2010-02-22, 12:11 PM
For anyone who is considering using this lock down technique i would advise using the mage slayer feat (from the Complete Arcana or Mage) and possiably the run feat. If i remember correctly the Mage slayer feat will not allow enemys within your AoO range to cast defensivly, thus making the concentration check null and void.

Melamoto
2010-02-22, 12:11 PM
Interesting fact: When jumping, you have to use up your move actions to fall. So if you can constantly hit a target with Stand Still AoOs and they're jumping over you, then you can get them to levitate above you, as they have no more move actions to jump and fall with.

Greenish
2010-02-22, 12:15 PM
For anyone who is considering using this lock down technique i would advise using the mage slayer feat (from the Complete Arcana or Mage) and possiably the run feat. If i remember correctly the Mage slayer feat will not allow enemys within your AoO range to cast defensivly, thus making the concentration check null and void.They can still cast normally, eat your AoO and make a concentration check against it. Still, Mage Slayer is decent, even though a Stand Still lockdown build is more for keeping the melee enemies off of your squishies than delivering punishment yourself.

CockroachTeaParty
2010-02-22, 12:23 PM
Yes, Stand Still is a strong feat, but depending on the situation it's not quite as powerful.

For instance, thinking of the Red Hand of Doom module, there are many minion-heavy fights. Most fighters aren't likely to have a DEX modifier of +5 or so, assuming they really focus on getting a lot of AoO's. In fights like that, enemies are going to slip through the cracks no matter what they do. It's more powerful versus single, big monsters, but really, a party of adventurers fighting one big stupid thing are usually much easier than an encounter using mixed tactics (casters, archers, etc.)

Person_Man
2010-02-22, 12:31 PM
When your target provokes an AoO because of movement you make an attack roll. All damage bonuses apply (Power Attack, weapon enhancements, etc). Yes, if you can reliably hit the enemy and deal 40ish+ damage, this makes the Reflex Save 95% unpassable. If your enemy fails their Save, they do not move, and their Move action is wasted. It's a very effective tool. But consider:

1) You're giving up the damage from the attack of opportunity. In many cases, this damage could have been used to kill your enemy.

2) You can avoid the AoO with Tumble, a Withdraw action, or various magical/psionic modes of transportation (Dimension Door being the most obvious).

3) A 5 ft step does not provoke in most cases.

4) You have to hit your enemy. So if they have a high AC and/or Miss Chance, it's largely ineffective.

5) If the enemy has reach equal to or greater then your reach, then the enemy does not need to move in order to attack you.

6) They lose their Move action. But they still have their Standard Action. They can use this action to use an ability, attack you, or attempt to Move again (in which case you need to hit them again).

Stand Still is a good feat, but it has many limits.

RE: Mage Slayer - instead of Stand Still, consider using a net with a trailing rope. Don't even bother with proficiency, as it's a touch attack to use. Once you hit your enemy, their movement is limited, their Dex/AC is debuffed, and the have to beat you in a Str check if they want to move away from you.

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-22, 12:44 PM
Teleportation is fairly easy to get (considering two feats get it), and many Outsiders all ready have it. This is a considerable problem even with Standstill.

Draz74
2010-02-22, 12:48 PM
Interesting fact: When jumping, you have to use up your move actions to fall. So if you can constantly hit a target with Stand Still AoOs and they're jumping over you, then you can get them to levitate above you, as they have no more move actions to jump and fall with.

Sometimes, strictly-RAW physics just remind me of a really buggy, really poorly-programmed video game. :smallyuk:

jiriku
2010-02-22, 12:51 PM
Let's look at the last ten monsters I've used for my EL10 party and see what Stand Still would have done. No one in the group has the feat, so you can't make any argument that I've optimized the monsters against it.


umbral dark naga mindbender - incorporeal, so easily able to avoid AoO by flying or moving through walls. Also able to has blacklight, greater mirror image, and wings of cover for protection.
sand creature - burrows, so ditto
greater air elemental - flies and gains concealment when in whirlwind form, so again no use
scorpion swarm - immune to weapon damage
death scarab swarm - immune to weapon damage
mummy sorcerer - somewhat useful, but the mummy can cast spells from a distance
large pack of tomb motes - somewhat useful, but the tomb motes can overwhelm a lockdown tank through sheer numbers
brass golem - pretty useful here, although the golem has 10' reach and can use maze against a troublesome foe
crocosphinx - quite useful here, although the crocosphinx is an intelligent opponent with superior mobility. It has options.
small pack of skirrs - modestly useful since skirrs are stupid, but they do fly and have 10' reach.


So by my count, Stand Still would be entirely useless against half of these opponents, and of decent value against the other half. With optimization, I could see a lockdown tank controlling several of these encounters, but only if he has at least 15 feet of reach. A Wizard Could Do It Better.

This also doesn't consider the assorted scything blade, poisoned spear, rolling boulder, and pit traps my players have faced recently, which can inflict serious harm in their own right. Stand Still isn't applicable against them.

Greenish
2010-02-22, 01:00 PM
greater air elemental - flies and gains concealment when in whirlwind form, so again no use
scorpion swarm - immune to weapon damage
death scarab swarm - immune to weapon damage
It would work for the air elemental, if said elemental tried to move out of a threatened square. Concealment would give it a decent chance to not be affected, but it still could work.

As for swarms, I don't think RAW says anything about having to be able to actually damage the enemy. Though Stand Still doesn't stop projectiles such as books, so one should be careful.

Eldariel
2010-02-22, 01:08 PM
It would work for the air elemental, if said elemental tried to move out of a threatened square. Concealment would give it a decent chance to not be affected, but it still could work.

Well, over 5' away he's right; Total Concealment means you can't take AoOs. Standard Concealment does not tho; it's any degree of Cover that stops AoOs, but Concealment has to be Total.

Greenish
2010-02-22, 01:20 PM
Well, over 5' away he's right; Total Concealment means you can't take AoOs. Standard Concealment does not tho; it's any degree of Cover that stops AoOs, but Concealment has to be Total.…Except I missed this:
The elemental’s movement while in whirlwind form does not provoke attacks of opportunity, even if the elemental enters the space another creature occupies.Oh well.

Tyger
2010-02-22, 01:35 PM
Moments after I posted my "lock down the Tarrasque" comment, I walked away from the computer. Within 20 feet, I went "Doh! Still needs to hit the ridiculous AC!!!" Whoops. So yes, the hitting of the AC is a problem.

I pose though, that many of the problems with my argument that have been listed here are not actually problems. Lets start with the reach one. If you are building a lockdown build, you are going for the most reach you can. Which means you are using a reach weapon, and have some way to reliably get even greater reach. Which is why I used the example of the level 7 psi-war. Using Augmented Expansion power, he has a reach of 30 feet. The Tarrasque (as a pure example only) has only a 20 foot reach. So if the psi-warrior can hit, he can use this feat without the Tarrasque being able to hit back.

The damage requirement. Yes, you have to do a bit of (potential) damage in order to pull this off. But you do not need to be in the 50s by any stretch. I couldn't find many creatures with Reflex saves over mid-20s (using only the SRD, I didn't feel like pulling out the MMs), so you need to do damage in the 30s to lock down most. Remember, the DC is 10 + the damage you would have dealt. So doing 35 damage per hit (which we can all pull off in our CO sleep), means that the Reflex save DC is a 45. If you have +25 Reflex (the Tarrasque was the only one I found in a cursory examination of CR 20+ critters), you need to roll a 20 to save. So you don't need to reliably do damage in the 50s, not by a long shot. Hell, at lower levels, if you can crack the high teens, you are set.

Monsters with ranged attacks. Yup, this is a weakness, and one which I noted in my very first posts. And yes, this is a good tactic against a Stand Stiller. Though in a lot of cases, that will still provoke an AoO, but that's a whole other discussion (and not one which I disagree with per se).

You need greater reach than the monster. Yes, agreed implicitly. But how easy is that? Enlarge person with durations in the minute / level, easily available in potion form too. Expansion is only rounds per level true, but by 6th or 7th level, most fights are long over by the 7th round. Greatreach Bracers give you an extra 10' of reach for one round, three times per day. There are races with reach, magic items that grant reach, and I seem to recall reading maneuvers and feats that grant reach. So really, the reach is a non-issue. Getting it over 20 feet may be more challenging, but not remarkably so.

Some monsters are immune. Ummm... which ones exactly? Sure, having concealment is going to make them harder to hit, but it doesn't make them immune (or if it does, I don't immediately see how). Some are immune to weapon damage, such as swarms and the like. This one requires more discussion than I am prepared to get into, because its a questions unto itself... the Stand Still attack doesn't deal damage, so I am not sure if the immunity counts... but again, that's another discussion.

Flying doesn't matter, so long as the creature is in mid air. Hell, for creatures that can't hover, this feat is even more potentially damaging as they might plummet from the air for failing to move a certain distance.

Burrowing still is movement, and thus still engages an AoO doesn't it? So that's out.

I think Person Man summed up the weaknesses of this feat the best, and provided the best arguments for its working as suggested as well. But I wanted to discuss his point (6). The argument is not that it costs you a move action, but rather all your move actions. So if you have taken a move action, and you get stopped by this, then the argument is that you can not take another move action. Sure, you hopefully have your standard, and hopefully its of use to you, but the concern areas for me are for those that have no use for their standard action when they aren't within melee reach of an opponent. This can completely, and relatively reliably, lock down such a monster, and the user, and/or their party, can then kill the creature with impunity.

Therein lies the problem for me. If the DC was lower, it would make more sense. There are no spells that are essentially save or die that have such incredibly escalating DCs. There are no spells at level one that have a DC in the 20+ range. And there are none at level 20 that have DCs in the 100+ range (barring some extreme cheese maybe?).

Anyway, just my thoughts. Person Man's arguments sum up the weaknesses pretty well, and have taken it from the "obscenely overpowered" category and put it straight into the "what reach / trip build wouldn't take this" category... I still think its too much, but that's just me apparently.

DragoonWraith
2010-02-22, 02:02 PM
put it straight into the "what reach / trip build wouldn't take this" category... I still think its too much, but that's just me apparently.
Well, Knock-Down can achieve a similar effect, plus they're prone, which has its own advantages.

And if Stand Still is an auto-choice, then that is more likely due to weak alternatives, not because Stand Still is too powerful. More feats should be as powerful as Stand Still, seeing as you get so few of them (as compared to spells or maneuvers or whatever).

Greenish
2010-02-22, 02:08 PM
Which means you are using a reach weapon, and have some way to reliably get even greater reach. Which is why I used the example of the level 7 psi-war. Using Augmented Expansion power, he has a reach of 30 feet. The Tarrasque (as a pure example only) has only a 20 foot reach. So if the psi-warrior can hit, he can use this feat without the Tarrasque being able to hit back.No, he can't. Tarrasque can move to 20' away without leaving a threatened square.

[Edit]:
Burrowing still is movement, and thus still engages an AoO doesn't it? So that's out.Burrower would have cover or total cover, I should think.

Draz74
2010-02-22, 02:15 PM
Lets start with the reach one. If you are building a lockdown build, you are going for the most reach you can. Which means you are using a reach weapon, and have some way to reliably get even greater reach.
OK, but as soon as you make this comment, you are now talking about the overpoweredness of an entire build, not just the Stand Still feat. That's fine, it just needs to be acknowledged.


The damage requirement. Yes, you have to do a bit of (potential) damage in order to pull this off. [snip] So doing 35 damage per hit (which we can all pull off in our CO sleep), means that the Reflex save DC is a 45. [snip] Hell, at lower levels, if you can crack the high teens, you are set.
Even if CO can do this in their sleep, that doesn't mean that normal games will ever see this kind of damage without serious effort. I was assuming this was a thread about PO, not TO. And in terms of PO, I don't see how a "low-level" build will be "cracking the high teens." Even a raging barbarian will only be "cracking the high teens" if he rolls well on damage at these levels. And note that Power Attack, CO's favorite damage-enhancer, isn't a great choice in this situation: it makes you less likely to hit the target's AC in the first place, and you can't use Shock Trooper to mitigate that. (Hmmm ... well, I guess you can, if you already used Shock Trooper on your turn. But you can't keep that up all battle.)


Expansion is only rounds per level true, but by 6th or 7th level, most fights are long over by the 7th round. Greatreach Bracers give you an extra 10' of reach for one round, three times per day. There are races with reach, magic items that grant reach, and I seem to recall reading maneuvers and feats that grant reach. So really, the reach is a non-issue. Getting it over 20 feet may be more challenging, but not remarkably so.
Right, my comment about Expansion's short duration was specifically aimed at your claim of beating a Troll at Level 2. By Level 7, the duration isn't much of an issue anymore.

Incidentally, it's remarkably hard to get reach with Maneuvers except on your own turn (i.e. they don't work for AoOs).


Some monsters are immune. Ummm... which ones exactly? Sure, having concealment is going to make them harder to hit, but it doesn't make them immune (or if it does, I don't immediately see how).
You can't make an AoO against things with Cover or with Total Concealment.


Burrowing still is movement, and thus still engages an AoO doesn't it? So that's out.
You can't make an AoO against things with Cover. Burrowing certainly counts as having Cover ... Total Cover, even.


Anyway, just my thoughts. Person Man's arguments sum up the weaknesses pretty well, and have taken it from the "obscenely overpowered" category and put it straight into the "what reach / trip build wouldn't take this" category... I still think its too much, but that's just me apparently.
My limited experience with the feat has actually been pretty underwhelming, so I'm kind of glad to hear that other people have seen it as overpowered. :smallsmile:

Honestly, though, my biggest problem with the feat is that I don't see how it makes much sense fluff-wise. "Hey, I just whacked you in the chest with a mighty swing of an axe blade ... but don't worry, it didn't hurt you at all, it just made you stop walking!" :smallconfused:

Greenish
2010-02-22, 02:23 PM
Honestly, though, my biggest problem with the feat is that I don't see how it makes much sense fluff-wise. "Hey, I just whacked you in the chest with a mighty swing of an axe blade ... but don't worry, it didn't hurt you at all, it just made you stop walking!" :smallconfused:It's magic psionic! :smallwink:

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-22, 02:30 PM
It's magic martial arts! :smallwink:

Fixed. Stand Still is a General feat.

Tyger
2010-02-22, 02:37 PM
Dang, really need a multi-quote feature here! Or if we have one, I have to learn how to use it.

Greenish: Damned fine point on the large size creatures (or colossal as the case may be) not leaving threatened squares in quite the same manner as their smaller bretheren. Hadn't caught that one before.

Draz: Couple things:

1) Burrowing critter has to surface to attack usually. Once said burrower is up, he's just as readily attacked with this feat. In fact, its a damned fine choice for any hunter type with burrowers on his target list. They come up, you make sure they don't go back down.

2) Damage isn't even that far off for a completely non-optimized game. Raging barbarian, first level. 24 Strength while raging. Glaive. 10+1d10 (average 5 rounding down) is 15 damage. That means your save is a 25. Not a lot of creatures with +5 Reflex saves at first level. And it scales horribly disproportionately... there are practical builds which can hit 40 or 50 damage on an attack easily and reliably by level 5 to 7.

3) Cover and total concealment - Agree 100%. Relatively rare at low levels though. And at higher levels, there are ways around it too... so its a factor, and a significant one I'll grant you.

4) Fluffwise - Man, do I ever agree with you there! "Hey, I just hit you for no damage! Aren't you afraid? Cower in fear!"

Frosty
2010-02-22, 03:26 PM
It's good. It does what it is supposed to do. Giving up damage for battlefield control is a fair trade. Remember...35 damage is like making your opponent 1/3 dead or something. Think carefully on what you wish to trade.

Person_Man
2010-02-22, 04:00 PM
Therein lies the problem for me. If the DC was lower, it would make more sense. There are no spells that are essentially save or die that have such incredibly escalating DCs. There are no spells at level one that have a DC in the 20+ range. And there are none at level 20 that have DCs in the 100+ range (barring some extreme cheese maybe?).p

Have your seen:

Boomerang Daze: Any creature taking damage from your Boomerang attack must Save (DC = 10 + damage dealt) or be Dazed for 1 round. Can apply to both targets in the case of a Boomerang Ricochet. A Master Thrower's best friend. Races of Eberron pg 108.

Acheron Flurry: You can spend a Standard Action to restrict your enemy to a single Move or Standard action on his next turn. No To-Hit roll, no Save, it just happens. There are various little restrictions on this, but it has a ton of applications. Requires Improved Unarmed Strike and 15 Wis and Dex. Planar Handbook pg 37.

Staggering Strike: When you Sneak Attack with a melee weapon, your enemy must Save (DC = total damage dealt) or be Staggered (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Staggered) for 1 turn, which prevents them from making a full attack or any other action that requires a full round action (summoning, metamagic for spontaneous casters, etc). Although this is clearly useless against anyone immune to Sneak Attack, it adds a very strong level of control against any enemy that isn't. Comp Adventurer pg 112.

Dire Flail Smash: If you hit an enemy with both ends of your dire flail, they must Save or be Dazed (DC = 10 + 1/2 char level + Str mod) for 1 round. Str is the easiest stat in to boost - magic items, anything that increases Size, Alter Self, Polymorph, Warhulk, etc. It also has a nifty synergy that increasing your Str increases your To-Hit and damage. Although the pre-reqs are annoying and the the Save DC isn't nearly as obnoxious as other things, when combined with the Double Hit feat (2 attacks on an AoO) this feat can be absolutely deadly, because almost nothing is immune to Daze. There's also Shield Slam and Anvil of Thunder, which have similar effects. Champions of Ruin pg 16.

Net (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Net): Touch attack. If you hit, the target is entangled (No Save). An entangled creature takes a –2 penalty on attack rolls and a –4 penalty on Dexterity, can move at only half speed, and cannot charge or run. If you control the trailing rope by succeeding on an opposed Strength check while holding it, the entangled creature can move only within the limits that the rope allows. If the range limit it too short for you, use a lasso instead (Book of Exalted Deeds). I'd add that there are probably DOZENS of other Entangle effects out there that occur automatically (although sometimes Evasion can save you).

Grapple: Re-read the Grapple mechanics. I know, it's painful. A build which is optimized to Grapple can easily beat non-Colossal+ enemies every time. Although this tactic doesn't work against groups of enemies very well, it is absolutely devastating against single enemies.

I would add the caveat that even the most powerful melee combos a joke compared to spells. There are dozens (hundreds?) of No Save or ridiculous Save effects out there.

Draz74
2010-02-22, 04:06 PM
Dang, really need a multi-quote feature here! Or if we have one, I have to learn how to use it.
It's annoyingly not automatic, you just have to copy/paste different quotes.


Greenish: Damned fine point on the large size creatures (or colossal as the case may be) not leaving threatened squares in quite the same manner as their smaller bretheren. Hadn't caught that one before.
I'm not sure I'm convinced about this one. When a big creature moves, I think it counts as leaving a square, even if a different part of its body is now occupying that same square. I'd be interested in any conclusive game rule explanation, though.


Draz: Couple things:

1) Burrowing critter has to surface to attack usually. Once said burrower is up, he's just as readily attacked with this feat. In fact, its a damned fine choice for any hunter type with burrowers on his target list. They come up, you make sure they don't go back down.
That's true, it's good for keeping the burrower from going back down. But in the meantime, while they can't go back down, they're free to whack you (if they came up next to you).


2) Damage isn't even that far off for a completely non-optimized game. Raging barbarian, first level. 24 Strength while raging. Glaive. 10+1d10 (average 5 rounding down) is 15 damage. That means your save is a 25. Not a lot of creatures with +5 Reflex saves at first level. And it scales horribly disproportionately... there are practical builds which can hit 40 or 50 damage on an attack easily and reliably by level 5 to 7.
I object to 24 Strength on a "completely non-optimized" Level 1 character. But I see your point ... 20 Strength is completely reasonable for a typical Level 1 raging barbarian, and DC 23 is still pretty hard for most CR 1 critters to make on a Reflex Save.

Then again, how many CR 1 critters wouldn't just be dropped by a 13-damage blow? What's the point of just locking down their movement instead of killing them?


4) Fluffwise - Man, do I ever agree with you there! "Hey, I just hit you for no damage! Aren't you afraid? Cower in fear!"

Exactly.

Greenish
2010-02-22, 04:19 PM
I'm not sure I'm convinced about this one. When a big creature moves, I think it counts as leaving a square, even if a different part of its body is now occupying that same square. I'd be interested in any conclusive game rule explanation, though.Turning around will cause a different part of your body to occupy the same square, when you're Large+. I don't see how not leaving a square counts as leaving a square, but then, there is much counterintuitive stuff in the rules. *shrug*

Susano-wo
2010-02-22, 04:19 PM
I see it as the idea of harrying them with the threat of getting hit; you make it so they cannot effectively pass. The rolling damage is just a way to see if you were successful. they could have also made it based on 10+BAB, or some other means.

Tyger
2010-02-22, 04:46 PM
That's true, it's good for keeping the burrower from going back down. But in the meantime, while they can't go back down, they're free to whack you (if they came up next to you).

But you are free to five foot step back, whilst they are screwed.


I object to 24 Strength on a "completely non-optimized" Level 1 character. But I see your point ... 20 Strength is completely reasonable for a typical Level 1 raging barbarian, and DC 23 is still pretty hard for most CR 1 critters to make on a Reflex Save.

Half-orc barbarian that put an 18 into Strength. +2 from race, +4 from Rage. That's no cheese at all, that's a stereotype. :)


Then again, how many CR 1 critters wouldn't just be dropped by a 13-damage blow? What's the point of just locking down their movement instead of killing them?

Which is a good point, but I just used that to illustrate the point. The damage the character is capable of doing escalates far faster than the Reflex saves of his targets, so while it may not make much sense for a level 1 character to do it, it makes a lot of sense for a level 10 character to do it.

Draz74
2010-02-22, 05:01 PM
But you are free to five foot step back, whilst they are screwed.
If you have Thicket of Blades, yeah. True.


Half-orc barbarian that put an 18 into Strength. +2 from race, +4 from Rage. That's no cheese at all, that's a stereotype. :)
No, I got that. Just, starting 18s are pretty rare in my games. And rage is only 1/day at these levels ... and not every melee combatant will be a half-orc ...

Still, overall I was conceding that Stand Still DCs are indeed formidable.

Amphetryon
2010-02-22, 05:05 PM
stuffAgain, the complaint appears, from my vantage point, to boil down to 'those that heavily invest in this particular combination become good at it.' That's an underwhelming argument against a particular feat, in my opinion.

As an aside, starting with an 18 in a stat before racial adjustments means either the Dice Gods were kind to you, or you spent heavily in the point buy for the priviledge; the former is a relatively rare phenomenon given the bell curve nature of roll distributions, and the latter is optimising toward a specific goal.

PhoenixRivers
2010-02-22, 05:07 PM
Some monsters are immune. Ummm... which ones exactly? Sure, having concealment is going to make them harder to hit, but it doesn't make them immune (or if it does, I don't immediately see how). Some are immune to weapon damage, such as swarms and the like. This one requires more discussion than I am prepared to get into, because its a questions unto itself... the Stand Still attack doesn't deal damage, so I am not sure if the immunity counts... but again, that's another discussion. Any creature that can't be targeted reliably, or that has an alternate movement method. Many outsiders. Any creature that states that its movement does not provoke.


Burrowing still is movement, and thus still engages an AoO doesn't it? So that's out.Ground provides total cover and concealment. You cannot execute AoO's against opponents with either. Thus, you can't stand still.


I think Person Man summed up the weaknesses of this feat the best, and provided the best arguments for its working as suggested as well. But I wanted to discuss his point (6). The argument is not that it costs you a move action, but rather all your move actions. So if you have taken a move action, and you get stopped by this, then the argument is that you can not take another move action. Sure, you hopefully have your standard, and hopefully its of use to you, but the concern areas for me are for those that have no use for their standard action when they aren't within melee reach of an opponent. This can completely, and relatively reliably, lock down such a monster, and the user, and/or their party, can then kill the creature with impunity. We're not arguing that it's not GOOD. We're just saying it's not as busted as you think. It's not hard to crack a chain tripper wide open. Any number of effects, including a smokestick, will do it.

Tyger
2010-02-22, 05:21 PM
Again, the complaint appears, from my vantage point, to boil down to 'those that heavily invest in this particular combination become good at it.' That's an underwhelming argument against a particular feat, in my opinion.

One feat is "invest[ing] heavily" now? A level one fighter with a 13 STR can take this as one of their two or three feats. They are already proficient with reach glaives and guisarmes. That's hardly any investment at all. Granted, if you go whole hog (well, partial hog anyway) and get Thicket of Blades, that is a further investment. But show me a ToB build that doesn't try to fit in that stance, so again, its not a huge or unwieldy investment.


Ground provides total cover and concealment. You cannot execute AoO's against opponents with either. Thus, you can't stand still.

Already discussed above. Wasn't referring to the movement below the ground, but noting that burrowers have to surface to become... well... threats.


We're not arguing that it's not GOOD. We're just saying it's not as busted as you think. It's not hard to crack a chain tripper wide open. Any number of effects, including a smokestick, will do it.

Smokestick? I assume you mean getting total concealment by having one down and being more than five feet away? In which case, yes, but concealment and its like were already pointed out, several posts ago.



I do have to say, I am glad I brought the question here. I agree, after seeing the posts here, that it may not be quite as broken as I originally thought. Or rather, it is as broken as I thought, but only in a relatively small set of circumstances.

Greenish
2010-02-22, 05:27 PM
One feat is "invest[ing] heavily" now? A level one fighter with a 13 STR can take this as one of their two or three feats. They are already proficient with reach glaives and guisarmes. That's hardly any investment at all.You'll want combat reflexes and dex to feed it, at least. Then a method to become larger to keep up with enemies.
But show me a ToB build that doesn't try to fit in that stanceNon-crusader?

Amphetryon
2010-02-22, 05:31 PM
One feat is "invest[ing] heavily" now? A level one fighter with a 13 STR can take this as one of their two or three feats. They are already proficient with reach glaives and guisarmes. That's hardly any investment at all. Granted, if you go whole hog (well, partial hog anyway) and get Thicket of Blades, that is a further investment. But show me a ToB build that doesn't try to fit in that stance, so again, its not a huge or unwieldy investment.
If it's only got Stand Still, it's not making efficient use of AoO; that needs Combat Reflexes. Add a reach weapon for better utility. Your earlier complaint specifically mentioned 18 base STR and 1/2 Orc Barbarian, which is a very individualized focus. Now, that's morphed (above) to only needing a 13 STR, at which point the high DCs that you expressed concern over become considerably harder to achieve. The goal post appear to be moving a bit in support of your thesis.

PhoenixRivers
2010-02-22, 05:39 PM
Already discussed above. Wasn't referring to the movement below the ground, but noting that burrowers have to surface to become... well... threats.And if it surfaces 5 feet away? Before it's surfaced, it has total cover, so you can't execute your AoO.


Smokestick? I assume you mean getting total concealment by having one down and being more than five feet away? In which case, yes, but concealment and its like were already pointed out, several posts ago.If you're 5 feet away, I think the point is moot. You're in melee range.


I do have to say, I am glad I brought the question here. I agree, after seeing the posts here, that it may not be quite as broken as I originally thought. Or rather, it is as broken as I thought, but only in a relatively small set of circumstances.
I really hate how broken is used as a buzzword now. It's powerful. It's effective.

But this is not on par with anything widely regarded as "broken", such as Incantatrix, Hulking Hurler, or its ilk.

In other words, there are many, many effective defenses against this. It's great, when it works, but it is by no means even close to guaranteed to work.

DragoonWraith
2010-02-22, 05:53 PM
I really hate how broken is used as a buzzword now. It's powerful. It's effective.

But this is not on par with anything widely regarded as "broken", such as Incantatrix, Hulking Hurler, or its ilk.

In other words, there are many, many effective defenses against this. It's great, when it works, but it is by no means even close to guaranteed to work.
Completely agreed. Referring to Stand Still as "broken" is just ridiculous. It's not even close.

Draz74
2010-02-22, 05:58 PM
I don't know. If everything lines up the way the OP details, it seems like this build could certainly "break" an encounter that was supposed to be much harder.

It won't "break" a campaign, of course. But it could "break" an important fight.

Greenish
2010-02-22, 06:04 PM
It won't "break" a campaign, of course. But it could "break" an important fight.If the GM didn't see it coming from the character creation.

Frosty
2010-02-22, 06:14 PM
It's ok for someone to really shine once in a while even in a BIG fight. What's wrong with having the Fighter shine (yes, the Fighter can shine) against a big dumb muscled brute of a 10-headed Hydra or Purple Worm? The Wizard get sto Ray of Stupidity one but a one-turn KO but the Fighter doesn't get to feel awesome?

Now, really smart enemies in your campaign (especially recurring ones) will have plans to counter this. For example, he can have a friend bullrush him out range. How many AoOs you got? He can use Anklets of Translocation. He can have cast that Dimensional Hop or something spell that lets you basically teleport short distances as a move action for up to rounds/caster level. He can use Greater Mirror Image. He can have a friendly cleric cast Shield Other so the DC is now reasonable. Lots of things one can do.

Amphetryon
2010-02-22, 06:21 PM
This isn't the only build that can break an important fight. The vast majority use casting to do so. Just sayin'.

PhoenixRivers
2010-02-22, 06:40 PM
I don't know. If everything lines up the way the OP details, it seems like this build could certainly "break" an encounter that was supposed to be much harder.

It won't "break" a campaign, of course. But it could "break" an important fight.

Fights don't break.

"Broken" refers to something so fundamentally powerful, it derails and unbalances everything around it.

Planar Shepard is a great example. Free wishes, 10 actions a round, and that's just getting started on what it can do.

Hulking Hurler? Anything that the tripper can lock down until party members get to it? A hulking hurler can kill in one shot. From greater range.

Incantatrix? See Hulking Hurler, except multiply by 5.

These are broken. They fundamentally unbalance the game and the party in normal play.

Tripping/stand still lockdown? Does not.

Tyndmyr
2010-02-22, 06:41 PM
I don't know. If everything lines up the way the OP details, it seems like this build could certainly "break" an encounter that was supposed to be much harder.

It won't "break" a campaign, of course. But it could "break" an important fight.

By this logic, the following spells are broken:

All of them.

PhoenixRivers
2010-02-22, 06:48 PM
By this logic, the following spells are broken:

All of them.

In fairness, Virtue (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/virtue.htm) likely wouldn't be.

Juk
2010-02-22, 06:50 PM
Even if you have thicket of blades, some times you're going to miss with the AoO and thus this is no lock. If you don't have thicket of blades you need to have the creature out reached by 10' else they can 5' step into you or out of your range in all instances.

It's definitely got some utility but it's not as overwhelming as the OP asserts. A lot of creatures will have a method for dealing with this situation.

Tyndmyr
2010-02-22, 06:51 PM
In fairness, Virtue (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/virtue.htm) likely wouldn't be.

Encounters on the positive energy plane: Broken.

I kid, I kid...cantrips are relatively harmless, but there's no possible way you can justify stand still as broken without choking horribly when you get to the spells section of the Phb.

Tyger
2010-02-22, 07:02 PM
Perhaps broken isn't the appropriate word. And no, I am not attempting to compare this to the real cheese out there.

The only thing in particular I wanted to address directly though, is this:


If it's only got Stand Still, it's not making efficient use of AoO; that needs Combat Reflexes. Add a reach weapon for better utility. Your earlier complaint specifically mentioned 18 base STR and 1/2 Orc Barbarian, which is a very individualized focus. Now, that's morphed (above) to only needing a 13 STR, at which point the high DCs that you expressed concern over become considerably harder to achieve. The goal post appear to be moving a bit in support of your thesis.

To truly maximize this sort of build, yes, you would have to make a few choices. But to get the basics, you don't need anything other than the feat and a reliable source of reach and damage. As both reach and damage are contained in one weapon, and a high strength build is all but required for any two handed weapon build, the rest follows. I wasn't "moving" the goal posts, I was refuting a previous statement that the use of this feat required significant investment. It does not. It can be effective with the bare minimum, and reasonable, well rounded choices. It becomes even more effective if you build for it true, but that's certainly not required.

For the record, a STR 13 level one fighter, with that same glaive, can still make it challenging for most CR appropriate critters. 10 + 5 (average glaive damage) + 2 STR bonus = DC 17. The mage isn't throwing out that DC at that level... And most CR 1 critters are not making that save.

And yes, casters trump melee... we can all agree on that. My only point was, and remains, that this is an extremely effective tactic for a warrior to use, to the point that many other choices for warriors seem to pale in comparison. A warrior using this tactic can, and will, end fights with it. And he can, and will, do so all day long.

Yes, there are effective counters. But in your average fight, not specifically tailored to overcome this tactic, it will be extremely effective. Sure, every orc the party encounters can be packing a smokestick. Every mage can have cast mirror image and blur. Every burrower will automatically come up immediately beside this warrior. Every flier will stay out of range, not using their (frequently better) melee attacks.

But if the DM throws in fights without specific counters to abilities like this, they will dramatically alter the course of that encounter. And if every single fight is built with those counters in place... that's, quite frankly, not going to be a lot of fun for any of the people playing.

Tyndmyr
2010-02-22, 07:06 PM
For the record, a STR 13 level one fighter, with that same glaive, can still make it challenging for most CR appropriate critters. 10 + 5 (average glaive damage) + 2 STR bonus = DC 17. The mage isn't throwing out that DC at that level... And most CR 1 critters are not making that save.

I see nothing wrong with the idea of the tanks actually being able to tank.

Frosty
2010-02-22, 07:11 PM
Perhaps broken isn't the appropriate word. And no, I am not attempting to compare this to the real cheese out there.

The only thing in particular I wanted to address directly though, is this:



To truly maximize this sort of build, yes, you would have to make a few choices. But to get the basics, you don't need anything other than the feat and a reliable source of reach and damage. As both reach and damage are contained in one weapon, and a high strength build is all but required for any two handed weapon build, the rest follows. I wasn't "moving" the goal posts, I was refuting a previous statement that the use of this feat required significant investment. It does not. It can be effective with the bare minimum, and reasonable, well rounded choices. It becomes even more effective if you build for it true, but that's certainly not required.

For the record, a STR 13 level one fighter, with that same glaive, can still make it challenging for most CR appropriate critters. 10 + 5 (average glaive damage) + 2 STR bonus = DC 17. The mage isn't throwing out that DC at that level... And most CR 1 critters are not making that save.

And yes, casters trump melee... we can all agree on that. My only point was, and remains, that this is an extremely effective tactic for a warrior to use, to the point that many other choices for warriors seem to pale in comparison. A warrior using this tactic can, and will, end fights with it. And he can, and will, do so all day long.

Yes, there are effective counters. But in your average fight, not specifically tailored to overcome this tactic, it will be extremely effective. Sure, every orc the party encounters can be packing a smokestick. Every mage can have cast mirror image and blur. Every burrower will automatically come up immediately beside this warrior. Every flier will stay out of range, not using their (frequently better) melee attacks.

But if the DM throws in fights without specific counters to abilities like this, they will dramatically alter the course of that encounter. And if every single fight is built with those counters in place... that's, quite frankly, not going to be a lot of fun for any of the people playing.

1) The problem is, warriors get so FEW effective tactics, so the few that WORK well tend to stand out a lot and get chosen. You've really only got 3 choices: Super charging, Arrow Spam, and Lockdown.

2) At level 1, a Greatsword is a save-or-die. Lockdown is less impressive at that level since your average HP of enemies is anywhere from 4 to 12. If you get an AoO on a mage, make it EAT damage and kill it for gods sake at level 1.

3) Mirror Image and Blur are kind of standard bread and butter for arcane casters. Why WOULDN'T a caster want to bring Mirror Image into most fights? That's like asking why wouldn't most strength fighters bring Power Attack.

Amphetryon
2010-02-22, 07:15 PM
For the record, a STR 13 level one fighter, with that same glaive, can still make it challenging for most CR appropriate critters. 10 + 5 (average glaive damage) + 2 STR bonus = DC 17. The mage isn't throwing out that DC at that level... And most CR 1 critters are not making that save.Most casters aren't trying to first hit an armored opponent's (non-Touch) AC before their spell's DC matters; there are precious few spells that are exceptions. So, there are fewer chances for the opponent to make the save, even if the save is somewhat easier.

lsfreak
2010-02-22, 07:15 PM
1) The problem is, warriors get so FEW effective tactics, so the few that WORK well tend to stand out a lot and get chosen. You've really only got 3 choices: Super charging, Arrow Spam, and Lockdown.

AoO builds like Jack B. Quick and Stormguard Warrior-based TWF are two other ones. You'll note that so far, all of five of these builds come down to "massive damage" or "trip/standstill on AoO."

Tyndmyr
2010-02-22, 07:20 PM
For the record, a STR 13 level one fighter, with that same glaive, can still make it challenging for most CR appropriate critters. 10 + 5 (average glaive damage) + 2 STR bonus = DC 17. The mage isn't throwing out that DC at that level... And most CR 1 critters are not making that save.

Actually...can any CR 1 creature take 17 slashing damage? Zombies are among the highest, and they have a mere 16...and the DR is ignored by slashing.

I can't imagine a situation at low levels where keeping something next to me is preferable to killing it. Perhaps in capture scenarios, but that's quite specialized. Nah, by the time this is a viable option, CC is widely available to other characters as well, in at least equally powerful forms. Not at all unbalanced.

CockroachTeaParty
2010-02-22, 07:32 PM
Stuff

That sounds like a damn fine session you run. I'm jealous.

Roderick_BR
2010-02-22, 07:41 PM
While I like the Grease spell too, I don't think its even remotely comparable, nor does it scale up as quickly to the "impossible" realm that this feat appears to.

Level 1 casting of grease means that the monsters get to make a DC ~ 15 Reflex save even without a bonus they will make it 25% of the time. Then a 50% chance to make the Balance check to get out of the grease. Yes, its good, but not nearly as good as Stand Still.

That same level 1 barbarian can lock down almost all level 1 creatures. Halberd (for reach), with 10 damage total (easy to hit!) means the monster gets to move if it rolls a 20, and only if it rolls a 20.

And it just gets worse the higher you go. Combined with something like Thicket of Blades, this means that you can effectively lock down any creature that doesn't have reach equal to or greater than yours and without ranged attacks.

Hydras, purple worms, hell, half the monster manual now is completely ineffective without rolling a 20??? That's arguably the most broken feat I've come across. Sure it requires a rather specific build, but that build is a very effective melee build for all kinds of other reasons too, so its not like you are building a complete one-trick-pony...

Yes, its not the power of a full caster, but in some instances, its actually more powerful than most casters can pull off, and this build can do it all day long, with no loss of effectiveness or power. That's pretty ugly in my books.
Not all creatures has skills in balance, and keeping meelers from charging properly is a huge penalty. And as the CRs go higher, wizards gets meanier things than Stand Still.

Once the creature stopped, and got the pitiful full round attack from the fighter (YES! He got to roll all four attacks, too bad he missed half of them), then the CREATURE will full attack him, instead of trying to move away. Yes, the fighter can move away and expect to make another AoO. But then he can:
a) Miss: Some creatures still have high AC.
b) Be denied his AoO because the creature attacked with some long range attack after a 5ft adjust.
c) be denied his AoO because the creature used some ability to avoid AoO (tumble being the easiest one).

And it says MOVE actions. It can still do it's standard action, hitting you with it's monster attack of 40+ damage. You just did your work to stop it before it hit your caster.

Yes, it's good. VERY good. But far from broken.

Bugbeartrap
2010-02-22, 07:45 PM
Umm... assuming no thicket of blades. A simple withdraw action could help too. Retreat and change tactics. Not very offensive, mind you, but better than getting locked down and murdered.

Frosty
2010-02-22, 08:27 PM
Actually...can any CR 1 creature take 17 slashing damage? Zombies are among the highest, and they have a mere 16...and the DR is ignored by slashing.

I can't imagine a situation at low levels where keeping something next to me is preferable to killing it. Perhaps in capture scenarios, but that's quite specialized. Nah, by the time this is a viable option, CC is widely available to other characters as well, in at least equally powerful forms. Not at all unbalanced.

Note that the damage is 7, not 17, since the Ref save DC is 10+Damage that would've been dealt. Still, I'd rather whack something for 50 to 100 % of its HP at lower levels.

Roderick: A well-built fighter might actually hit with more than half of its attacks, but that's besides the point. With Lockdown, you're forcing monsters to play your game: Trading full-attacks. Note: This may or may not be desirable depending on which monster you're facing. The Terrasque? Probably not. A dragon with its 6 attacks? Probably not. The Archer with 5 arrows of doom a turn? Probably a good trade especially since you get an AoO every time the archer shoots.

PhoenixRivers
2010-02-22, 08:43 PM
While I like the Grease spell too, I don't think its even remotely comparable, nor does it scale up as quickly to the "impossible" realm that this feat appears to.

Level 1 casting of grease means that the monsters get to make a DC ~ 15 Reflex save even without a bonus they will make it 25% of the time. Then a 50% chance to make the Balance check to get out of the grease. Yes, its good, but not nearly as good as Stand Still.

Name me one printed monster that retains its dex to AC in a grease spell.

So let's see.

Grease = Reflex save or fall.
Balance Check to move, with a fall chance.

Every time thereafter that you take damage, balance check or fall.

Let's look at a base monster, the Hill Giant. CR 7.
A level 5 wizard can quite conceivably have a Int of 20. Add in 2 feats (to represent thicket of blades and stand still), Spell focus and greater spell focus. DC 18 reflex or fall. That's a 75% fall chance.

If it passes, it must then make a DC 10 balance check. With a -1 Balance mod, it needs an 11+ (50% chance of being able to move). on a 5 or less (25% chance), it's prone.

Now, party environment. The rogue throws a pair of acid vials at it, on his initiative. Both hit the giant's flat footed touch AC. Easily. Both deal acid damage + sneak attack damage (at level 5, that's 4d6 damage each, for 8d6 damage total, 28 average damage).

Now the giant must make 2 more balance checks to remain standing. Except that this one? DC 10 to remain standing, not to move. Two 50% chances to fall.

Total odds of remaining standing and being able to move?

25% (chance to pass save) x 50% (chance to be able to move) x 50% (chance to pass save from attack 1) x 50% (chance to pass save from attack 2). Total odds: 3.125% chance of being able to move.

Let's say the giant gets up next round. First, it must make that 25% save chance or fall again. Now all the wizard must do is a single acid splash to damage it. 1 more DC 10 balance check, and 2 more for the rogue next round.

Yes. I'd say grease performs pretty well, considering a pair of level 5 characters have around a 97% chance of holding it on permanent lockdown while they kill it. That's better than nat 20 odds.

That's why grease is good. Effective party synergy.

EDIT: Incidentally, a 25% save pass chance, and 50% balance chance is an 87.5% failure rate. The failure rate for stand still, assuming a 95% chance of hitting, and a 95% chance of standing still if it hits? 90.25%.

Stand Still is 2.75% more effective. Even with your numbers, grease IS nearly as good.

And that's assuming the Stand Still character has a +18 to hit, and can achieve minimum damage of 12+. The latter isn't so hard (level 5 fighter with 20 str and a glaive, for example, with a size increase would be 2d8+9, or 11 damage minimum. Make it a +1 glaive, and you've got it). +18 to hit at level 5 is somewhat more difficult.

(the above fighter would be +6 str (enlarge brings it to 22), -1 size, +5 BAB, +1 enhancement bonus. +11. Let's assume weapon focus, for +12. That's only a 60% chance to hit. With that number? 57% lockdown chance. Not nearly as good, now.

Tyger
2010-02-23, 07:40 AM
Not all creatures has skills in balance, and keeping mêlées from charging properly is a huge penalty. And as the CRs go higher, wizards gets meanier things than Stand Still.

Once the creature stopped, and got the pitiful full round attack from the fighter (YES! He got to roll all four attacks, too bad he missed half of them), then the CREATURE will full attack him, instead of trying to move away. Yes, the fighter can move away and expect to make another AoO. But then he can:
a) Miss: Some creatures still have high AC.
b) Be denied his AoO because the creature attacked with some long range attack after a 5ft adjust.
c) be denied his AoO because the creature used some ability to avoid AoO (tumble being the easiest one).

And it says MOVE actions. It can still do it's standard action, hitting you with it's monster attack of 40+ damage. You just did your work to stop it before it hit your caster.

Yes, it's good. VERY good. But far from broken.

Previously discussed, but this forgets one of the basic things that has been repeatedly discussed through this thread... reach. If the monster has less reach than the lockdowner, and no ranged attacks (which is a significant number of critters), they have zero use for that Standard action. Sure, they can attack something, but they can't reach anything... so no dice there.

Already noted as well that "broken" wasn't the right word. Just alarmingly effective at what it does. That's all.

@PhoenixRivers

Yes, in a party situation, the Grease spell is pretty good. But if we are doing a comparison, why are we comparing Grease in a party situation to Stand Still where the warrior doesn't have any backup??? Let's throw in archers to assist our warrior. Or a wizard casting a simple Flaming Sphere (which the opponent can no longer move away from), or any one of a million other party tactics.

Yes, there are hundreds of good options. And many of them are spells. Yes, casters trump melee (I think this has been said OVER 9000!!! times thus far. :smallsmile: ), and yes, melee should have nice things too (for the record, I love and promote the ToB to any of my fellow players who are looking for fighter types). All I am saying is that this is a particularly good choice for any warrior to take. To the point of questioning why any warrior class would not take this, unless a reach weapon didn't fit their concept of course. That's it. I retracted my "broken" comments about 10 comments ago. I even agreed that, based on what the folks here have said, I have changed my stance on this feat.

All that I still can't understand is why folks seem so interested in defending this. If I came to the boards and showed people a feat (available at level one) for wizards that had the potential to allow wizards to lock down a target all day long, with little to no risk, and no use of any resources other than a AoO, I can't help but wonder what the response would be.

Tyndmyr
2010-02-23, 07:46 AM
All that I still can't understand is why folks seem so interested in defending this. If I came to the boards and showed people a feat (available at level one) for wizards that had the potential to allow wizards to lock down a target all day long, with little to no risk, and no use of any resources other than a AoO, I can't help but wonder what the response would be.

Why would you waste a feat on something you can do with a spell?

Tyger
2010-02-23, 08:07 AM
Why would you waste a feat on something you can do with a spell?

A spell that you can fire off as an AoO, that you never run out of, and that has a scaling DC which you can easily get to the point that there isn't a single creature in print which can make it? Admitedly, a spell that also faces all of the previously noted challenges... but still.

Tinydwarfman
2010-02-23, 10:51 AM
I think Tyndmyr is referring to the fact that a first level fighter (and it will be a fighter if it takes Stand Still) will have max 3 feats if it's a human. A first level wizard will probably have at least 8 spells, and gains more spells faster than a fighter gains feats. A wizard already does all of that w/ grease, or sleep, or colour spray... The list goes on. Why can a fighter not do the same thing w/ ONE of it's feats?

Greenish
2010-02-23, 10:55 AM
I think Tyndmyr is referring to the fact that a first level fighter (and it will be a fighter if it takes Stand Still)Or crusader. :smallbiggrin:

ToB lovers unite!

Tinydwarfman
2010-02-23, 11:00 AM
Or crusader. :smallbiggrin:

ToB lovers unite!

Ok, yes, Crusader does make for excellent control, but I like to keep my arguments in core. If you are taking crusader and stand still chances are you are specializing in lockdown, and then we must compare to a wiz who specializes in lockdown.:smallamused:

There is no comparison.

Tyger
2010-02-23, 11:00 AM
I think Tyndmyr is referring to the fact that a first level fighter (and it will be a fighter if it takes Stand Still) will have max 3 feats if it's a human. A first level wizard will probably have at least 8 spells, and gains more spells faster than a fighter gains feats. A wizard already does all of that w/ grease, or sleep, or colour spray... The list goes on. Why can a fighter not do the same thing w/ ONE of it's feats?

Yes, I understood that. But its not a fair comparison really. Tyn's usually got my vote, but not this time.

That first level wizard does get to choose ~ 8 spells. But how many does he cast every day? The "Warrior" (and yes, ToB is better Greenish), will use that feat ~ 29,928,229 times per day, if he wants to. :smallbiggrin:

Please, don't bother correcting the math. :smallamused: That number is an arbitrary one, intended only to show that the warrior's use of the ability is limited only by the number of opponents he faces. Whereas the wizard's spells are a finite resource, particularly at low levels.

Tinydwarfman
2010-02-23, 11:08 AM
But when you get to 5th level (when it actually becomes as good as grease via thicket of blades) a wizards has 3rd level spells, and he ain't running out of first levels any time soon. How many times do you need to use grease a day anyway? I'd say 4, max. A warlock is a perfect example of long term use vs flexibility and power, and guess what tier it is? 4, maybe 3 w/ eldtrich glaive.(incidentally, a glaive lock dipping crusader gets a lot of use out of stand still)

What is your argument anyway? Do you think it should nerfed?

Tyndmyr
2010-02-23, 11:36 AM
Yes, I understood that. But its not a fair comparison really. Tyn's usually got my vote, but not this time.

That first level wizard does get to choose ~ 8 spells. But how many does he cast every day? The "Warrior" (and yes, ToB is better Greenish), will use that feat ~ 29,928,229 times per day, if he wants to. :smallbiggrin:

In practice, encounters per day are limited. Your fighter is limited by his hp, and by the resources of the rest of the party. Spells are a tight resource at first, yes, but highly effective CC is still available. Spells quickly become a very plentiful resource too. So, the feat option would quickly pale in comparison to spells.

Also, there is a significant difference in the CC. Ignoring the fact that wizard CC only gets better as they level, it's typically ranged. Much longer ranged than a reach weapon(remember, a 5ft adjust means the outer circle of squares isn't an issue). A wizard wants them trapped far away from him. A fighter may not. Regardless, a greased opponent 30ft away is much more screwed than the same opponent subject to stand still 10ft away. That opponent is much more likely to be able to do something offensive still. He's not flat footed. Hell, he could have simply 5ft stepped closer to the fighter and stabbed him in the face. There is no square in a 15ft reach where he cannot either 5ft step out, or to the fighter. Sure, it's useful....but only at stopping mobility, not at actually incapacitating someone.

PhoenixRivers
2010-02-23, 01:07 PM
@PhoenixRivers

Yes, in a party situation, the Grease spell is pretty good. But if we are doing a comparison, why are we comparing Grease in a party situation to Stand Still where the warrior doesn't have any backup??? Let's throw in archers to assist our warrior. Or a wizard casting a simple Flaming Sphere (which the opponent can no longer move away from), or any one of a million other party tactics.

Why? Because the presence of other party members for the fighter don't impact his chance to keep the enemy still. They're just damage.

The presence of other party members with grease? Does. Every time the enemy takes damage, it's another balance check or fall. Every time.

Other party members don't do that for the fighter's stand still method.

That's why. Grease has increasing synergy with other party members, that makes it improve more and more with each attack made against affected creatures.

Stand still does not. That's why grease is better, in most situations.


Please, don't bother correcting the math. :smallamused: That number is an arbitrary one, intended only to show that the warrior's use of the ability is limited only by the number of opponents he faces. Whereas the wizard's spells are a finite resource, particularly at low levels.
Yes, a fighter can swing his sword more often than a wizard can cast.

A wizard accomplishes more with each spell cast than a fighter. The game is designed around the premise of 4 encounters each day. Typical encounters last around 5 rounds.

In that, a level 1 wizard gets 1 spell per encounter. A level 5 wizard? Gets 4 spells per encounter.

At level 10, a wizard is throwing 20 (level 1+) spells a day, or about 5 per encounter. At this point? There is no effective difference to being able to cast 5 spells or 5 million. One per round for every round that matters is enough.

Yes, a level 10 fighter, in a day, assuming 24 hours of full attacks, while dual wielding, will have 57,600 attacks. Add in a dex of 16, combat reflexes, and 24 hours of 4 AoO's per round? 115,200 attacks.

That number's just about as relevant as denoting the run speed of a dead character. Because that doesn't happen.

Tyger
2010-02-23, 02:15 PM
That's why. Grease has increasing synergy with other party members, that makes it improve more and more with each attack made against affected creatures.

Stand still does not. That's why grease is better, in most situations.

So, just so I understand, Grease is better because it needs other people to help out? And because Stand Still works jsut fine, all on its own, needing no one adding anything, its lesser? Ummm... I am clearly not understanding your point there. Can you expand upon that a bit, just so I can get rid of the furrow between my brows? :smallconfused:

As for the math, yes I agree whole heartedly, which is exactly why I noted that I was arbitrarily pulling a number out of the air... doesn't matter, really. Sure, a wizard will ultimately get more and better spells. The point is that Stand Still starts out awesome, and just gets more and more powerful as the character grows. Which may well be a good thing. As a lot of people have noted, and I have repeatedly agreed with, melee does need a boost. Or maybe magic a nerf... or maybe a new system, or maybe something else... :smallsmile: But that's not the point of either my original question, nor of the subsequent discussions which have spawned from it. :)

Frosty
2010-02-23, 02:36 PM
Stand Still IS a very, very good feat that most melee warriors focused on getting full-attacks would want to get, yes.

To me, it's such a good feat that it's just below Power Attack in terms of who should get it. Does that mean it needs a nerf? No. It just means you have *an* effective option whereas you didn't really have any before. See, all of the fighter's (most of which are crappy) options should be boosted so that Stand Still isn't an auto-pick.

Tinydwarfman
2010-02-23, 02:38 PM
So, just so I understand, Grease is better because it needs other people to help out? And because Stand Still works jsut fine, all on its own, needing no one adding anything, its lesser? Ummm... I am clearly not understanding your point there. Can you expand upon that a bit, just so I can get rid of the furrow between my brows? :smallconfused:

As for the math, yes I agree whole heartedly, which is exactly why I noted that I was arbitrarily pulling a number out of the air... doesn't matter, really. Sure, a wizard will ultimately get more and better spells. The point is that Stand Still starts out awesome, and just gets more and more powerful as the character grows. Which may well be a good thing. As a lot of people have noted, and I have repeatedly agreed with, melee does need a boost. Or maybe magic a nerf... or maybe a new system, or maybe something else... :smallsmile: But that's not the point of either my original question, nor of the subsequent discussions which have spawned from it. :)

Oh come on, you can't be serious. You know as well as I do he was referring to the fact that grease not only works well, but it works well w/ others. It's like saying haste is weak cos you need to use on multiple people.

The fact is though, Stand Still doesn't start off as awesome. It doesn't get good until you can pick up some other AoO feats or abilities like thicket of blades and combat reflexes.The only way it gets better other than using more of your precious few feats is that it is more likely to work as you level up... now what does that sound like... Of course, grease! Grease also gets better using other things to augment it too. Just light is on fire using burning hands, and they have to make an additional check every round. Now, I don't know if that works by RAW, but I let my players do it. Gotta reward innovation outside of character creation:smallwink:

Tyndmyr
2010-02-23, 02:44 PM
also gets better using other things to augment it too. Just light is on fire using burning hands, and they have to make an additional check every round. Now, I don't know if that works by RAW, but I let my players do it. Gotta reward innovation outside of character creation:smallwink:

It doesn't, but there is a level 2 version of grease that is flammable.

Which I guess is a reasonable way of saying grease scales up. Slightly higher DC on it + fire. Not a bad deal for a level 2 spell.

Tinydwarfman
2010-02-23, 02:45 PM
It doesn't, but there is a level 2 version of grease that is flammable.

Which I guess is a reasonable way of saying grease scales up. Slightly higher DC on it + fire. Not a bad deal for a level 2 spell.

Where? sorry, I'm not good w/ non-core spells, can't be bothered to read all of them...:smallbiggrin:

Tyndmyr
2010-02-23, 02:48 PM
Where? sorry, I'm not good w/ non-core spells, can't be bothered to read all of them...:smallbiggrin:

SpC I believe. Which frankly, is the best non-core source of spells. It fixes scaling issues with all sorts of things, and generally, isn't nearly as broken as core.

You can find a wild variety of wizard CC though, in or out of core. Stand still has nothing on forcecage, feats or no feats.

PhoenixRivers
2010-02-23, 02:55 PM
So, just so I understand, Grease is better because it needs other people to help out? And because Stand Still works jsut fine, all on its own, needing no one adding anything, its lesser? Ummm... I am clearly not understanding your point there. Can you expand upon that a bit, just so I can get rid of the furrow between my brows? :smallconfused

Let's look with just a wizard.

75% save fail rate.
50% balance: can't move rate (25% fall down rate).

So, let's start, right off, at an 87.5% failure rate, on something at CR +2. (ECL 5 wizard, CR 7 Hill giant).Creature must both pass the save and the balance check to move.
25% x 50% = 12.5% chance of moving, which is an 87.5% chance of being unable to move.

Let's continue with: The absolute best odds a fighter can ever achieve is a 90.25% stop rate, on an AoO. Which means, roughly what? 1 in 10 times, you'll fail, even if you need a 2 to hit, and they need a 20 to save.
To Stand Still, you must both hit the target, and it must fail a save.
95% (to hit) x 95% (to fail save) = 90.25% chance of both hitting and failing a save.
Now, without anyone else:

Round 2: Magic missile (3 missiles).
So now we have a saving throw (75% fail rate), and 3 seperate balance checks. (50% fail rate each). 96.825% knockdown chance, on top of the the balance check needed to move (98.4375% chance after that check is factored). Which means, roughly what? 1 in 50 times, it'll fail.

That's without help, and assuming that the fighter's accuracy is 95%, which is not likely the case.

The point is... it's comparable with no help, and VASTLY superior as you obtain more sources of damage. The more independent sources of damage you have, the more effectively the creature is held. It starts at a comparable success rate (with no aid), and skyrockets past it (with aid).

It doesn't need outside help at all. Without help? It's still comparable in effectiveness. However, it benefits greatly from it.

So when you have something that is roughly equally effective with no outside help, and massively better with outside help? What, then, would you think is the more effective ability?

And that's a level 1 spell.

Tyger
2010-02-23, 03:17 PM
Ah. That explains it much better, thank you.

Though math and I do not speak to each other. Not since that night at the bar when math and my fiance were found alone in the booth, and math had his... well, lets just say I'll take your word on the numbers.

Koury
2010-02-23, 03:47 PM
Ah. That explains it much better, thank you.

Though math and I do not speak to each other. Not since that night at the bar when math and my fiance were found alone in the booth, and math had his... well, lets just say I'll take your word on the numbers.

Multiply indeed.

Thrawn183
2010-02-23, 03:50 PM
Yeah, Stand Still is one of those things where when you think about what it can do in the perfect scenario it's pretty badass, but the sheer number of enemies out there that aren't a perfect scenario out there for Stand Still is part of why melee fighters need so much help.

To put it another way, the monsters with the least options (ie. walk up to you and bash you in the face) are the ones Stand Still is most effective against. I'd actually put that as a mark against it!

Draz74
2010-02-23, 05:09 PM
Grease also gets better using other things to augment it too. Just light is on fire using burning hands, and they have to make an additional check every round. Now, I don't know if that works by RAW, but I let my players do it. Gotta reward innovation outside of character creation:smallwink:

IIRC, 3e Grease actually even says it's not flammable in the spell description. It's not in the SRD, but I'm sure I've seen it somewhere. Either in the PHB, or in the 3.0 PHB.

The Glyphstone
2010-02-23, 05:11 PM
that, and Incendiary Slime is a 2nd level spell in Complete Mage that is exactly the same as Grease with the explicit exception that it can be set on fire.

Draz74
2010-02-23, 05:11 PM
that, and Incendiary Slime is a 2nd level spell in Complete Mage that is exactly the same as Grease with the explicit exception that it can be set on fire.

Right, that was already mentioned (thank you for pointing out the name and source, though); I was just trying to add more on top of that argument.

Tinydwarfman
2010-02-23, 05:17 PM
Alright, alright, I'm sorry, Grease shall no longer be set alight in my games. It burnt in half the time anyway, so it really wasn't that much better...