[3.P] Skirmish + Pounce + full BaB = too powerful on higher levels?

[ImperatorK]

Then what the fuck are you even talking about? You're not worried about ubercharging, you're not worried about Pounce, but you DO think that +5d6 damage per attack is too much at 20th level? If all of that is true, then, yes, you are really, really stupid.

Read again what I wrote. I don't want it to be free. With Spirit Lion Totem it is free. And therefore taking Spirit Lion Totem is a no-brainer. One ACF (which really isn't a big investment, because it's good even without Skirmish) and you deal more damage. Doesn't matter if ubercharging deals 100 times more, because with ubercharging you invest to get that damage. I simply don't want pouncing/charging to be an option that overshadows other options by adding a big amount of damage for free.
I would be thankful if you could stop calling me stupid.

I'd allow it all.  Any part of the damage combination being described can be eliminated with tactics and terrain, so let the character have the advantage of having *something* working for it at any given time.  If the person invests in ways to help him overcome any terrain difficulties and his teammates help him lockdown an enemy so it's not able to use any of the numerous ways to avoid a full attack, he deserves his high damage.

The thing is that the Hunter has more options than Skirmish. I don't want one option to be much better than others. And if I have to deny the player his best ability just so he at least looks at other options, well, that's not cool. I'd rather like it to work without DM fixing it in-game.

But sometimes (like in the OP), you talk about how you don't like them getting skirmish damage

I said that I don't want the Skirmish damage to be free, which it is if you have Spirit Lion Totem. You can get pounce somewhere else, true, but then you invested something to get it, so it's not free and I have no problem with that.

I've never actually looked at an ubercharger - is there something in its build that means the uberdamage only applies to the first attack, and not the 2nd and following?

IIRC, with pounce an ubercharger deals biiiiig damage on each attack. But as I said I have no problem with that.

An ubercharger can get over 6000 damage on a full attack at level 20, without crits.  Skirmish is 10d6 per attack or so, so let's go with 6 attacks for 60d6, which turns into 210 average damage.

Now add the Skirmish damage to the uberchargers damage.
Or another way: Why should the player even invest in ubercharging (for example) if he's already dealing this much damage with almost no investment?

No, it's not overpowered even for being "free."  You're calling it free because the character gets the damage from simply moving?

No. I'm calling it free because you don't have to invest anything to get it and you deal the damage on top of any other damage the PC will deal.

I honestly have to ask if you're trolling with this.  The damage Skirmish does with a couple feats invested is similar to or even less than PA with two or three feats used.  At high optimization, PA blows Skirmish out of the water.

No, I'm not trolling. I just foolishly thought that I can get some helpful insights.

So several hundred is ok, but several hundred+35 is overpowered?

You get several hundred with an investment. You get the Skirmish damage (doesn't matter how much) for free. I don't want it to be free. What's so hard to understand here?

[Mooncrow]

You get several hundred with an investment. You get the Skirmish damage (doesn't matter how much) for free. I don't want it to be free. What's so hard to understand here?

Because you're grossly misusing the word "free", and your sense of cost/benefit ratio seems to be seriously out of whack. 

[Sinfire Titan]

First, Skirmish is not a free +10d6/attack. It takes a feat investment, 3/4 levels, several magic items, another feat, and Pounce to make it work that way. That's a Hefty investment.

Second, even if it were, why does it matter? Enemies not specifically tailored to resist Chargers almost never have the HP it takes to survive a Charger, so the extra damage/attack is just unnecessary hoops the player jumped through in order to be sure whatever he hits dies. There is very little reason to be concerned with this because the same methods of stopping Chargers can also deal with Skirmish.

[ImperatorK]

Because you're grossly misusing the word "free", and your sense of cost/benefit ratio seems to be seriously out of whack.

I explained how it is free.

First, Skirmish is not a free +10d6/attack. It takes a feat investment, 3/4 levels, several magic items, another feat, and Pounce to make it work that way. That's a Hefty investment.

That's actually something that Risada come up with. I'm basing my opinion on unoptimized Skirmish of +5d6 per attack. +20d6 (or more) Skirmish damage on 20th level is too much for me if it's free.

[Ziegander]

You are babbling incoherently. You want to ban Spirit Lion Totem. Cool. But you've gestalted the Barbarian with Ranger, so he gets Pounce "for free" anyway, because he has it as a spell. Or, you mentioned something about a Rage Power, so maybe you're talking about Pathfinder, in which case, yeah, he also gets it "for free" that way. The only issue with Spirit Lion Totem is that it comes at 1st level, and it doesn't even matter then, because you have to jump through hoops to even get multiple attacks at 1st level and who cares because you could just kill stuff in one attack anyway. Your concern, as you've stated multiple times, is with high level play. You have already built in at least two ways for the "Hunter" to grab Pounce before high level, and grab it "for free," so are you going to ban that stuff too?

I reiterate, Skirmish + Pounce is not the problem.

[ImperatorK]

But you've gestalted the Barbarian with Ranger, so he gets Pounce "for free" anyway, because he has it as a spell.

What level and how long does it last? If it's too low level, I ban it. If it's higher, then there's no problem, he didn't get it automatically after all.

Or, you mentioned something about a Rage Power, so maybe you're talking about Pathfinder, in which case, yeah, he also gets it "for free" that way.

Yes, I'm talking about Pathfinder. The [3.P] in the title should tip you off.
No, it's not for free. He has to take the Rage Powers. And it doesn't even matter, because you don't get precision damage while raging.

I reiterate, Skirmish + Pounce is not the problem.

And I reiterate, getting so much Skirmish damage for free is the problem.

[Halinn]

But you've gestalted the Barbarian with Ranger, so he gets Pounce "for free" anyway, because he has it as a spell.

What level and how long does it last? If it's too low level, I ban it. If it's higher, then there's no problem, he didn't get it automatically after all.

Lion's Charge, SpC 133, ranger 2. Also consider if Rhino's Rush (SpC 176, ranger 1) is a problem for your game. Both swift action to cast, lasting one round.

[Jackinthegreen]

And I reiterate, getting so much Skirmish damage for free is the problem.

Then get rid of the skirmish damage.  It's that simple.  Part of the reason you're seeing such bitching about this is if you've got a problem with such a simple solution then you might as well fix it.  You wanted feedback on it?  You got it, even if you don't like most of it.  Your option at this point is to fix it the way you want to since the advice you're going to get on this is skirmish is trivial, even if it's "free" compared to a typical charger with a couple feats.  You're dealing with a major gestalt, of course there's going to be free damage!  Don't like it?  Don't do the gestalt.

Also, I see nothing in the PF rage version or 3.5 rage that prohibits precision damage while raging.  Likewise, nothing in the PF rogue or 3.5 rogue says anything about whether precision damage works while raging.  What's your source?  If it's a house rule then why even start the discussion?  Any barbarian worth his salt will be raging while charging, which means skirmish won't come into play at all.

[ImperatorK]

Then get rid of the skirmish damage.  It's that simple.

It's not that simple, because I want Skirmish to be an option. But not a totally free option.

Also, I see nothing in the PF rage version or 3.5 rage that prohibits precision damage while raging.  Likewise, nothing in the PF rogue or 3.5 rogue says anything about whether precision damage works while raging.  What's your source?  If it's a house rule then why even start the discussion?

It's not a houserule. Rage states that: "While in rage, a barbarian cannot use any Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills (except Acrobatics, Fly, Intimidate, and Ride) or any ability that requires patience or concentration." I consider precision damage as requiring enough concentration to fall under this ruling.

Also I posted this so I could get some insights. Arguments here presented didn't convince me to change my mind, but at least I learned about the spells. I'm AFB, so I can't yet make a decision concerning them, but it looks like I'll be fine with them, picking a spell over another is an investment.

[Jackinthegreen]

Also, I see nothing in the PF rage version or 3.5 rage that prohibits precision damage while raging.  Likewise, nothing in the PF rogue or 3.5 rogue says anything about whether precision damage works while raging.  What's your source?  If it's a house rule then why even start the discussion?

It's not a houserule. Rage states that: "While in rage, a barbarian cannot use any Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills (except Acrobatics, Fly, Intimidate, and Ride) or any ability that requires patience or concentration." I consider precision damage as requiring enough concentration to fall under this ruling.

It is technically a house rule because SA and other precision damage options save for Death Attack are not called out as requiring patience or concentration.  They just happen.  The fact that you say "I consider..." further reinforces the point of it being a house rule, though a logical one in your case.  By RAW, they are usable during rage.  RAI is a bit trickier to take into account

Then get rid of the skirmish damage.  It's that simple.

It's not that simple, because I want Skirmish to be an option. But not a totally free option.

Because of the gestalt you've done, it's pretty well going to be a free option.  It's already nerfed compared to SA because it's typically easier to move 10 feet than it is to flank or deny the opponent Dex to AC, though I don't think the designers had pounce in mind when they made it.  You also have to contend with many skirmish options not working while using PA and vice versa.  Crescent Knives and TWF for instance, though I suspect you'd ban crescent knives because two attacks per hit is "overpowered" for skirmish or SA/SS.

Skirmish will always be a totally free option if you allow pounce in any form.  5d6 per attack for moving 10+ feet means every pounce will be 20d6 or so.  You could limit skirmish to only working once per movement, but 5d6 once per round isn't really much of an option at 20 is it?  An average of 17.5 or even max of 30 at that level is laughable.  If that's what you want it to be, have at it.

[weenog]

Biting into someone's throat rather than their face or their shoulder is a precision attack (or a critical hit, if you do it by dumb luck rather than intentionally).

[skydragonknight]

Why not simply limit the Skirmish damage to light weapons? Then PA and Skirmish wouldn't stack. Then give a choice between Skirmish and something with utility (non-damage)...like Blindsense with a range of 10 ft per however many skirmish dice they would normally have (Scouts have Blindsense anyhow so kill two birds with one stone). Then they can choose to go for a skirmish build or a non-skirmish (probably 2-handed) build.

[linklord231]

Couldn't you already do this within the rules with Scout 3/Barb 1/Ranger 16?  Take Swift Hunter in addition to your normal Ubercharger feats and swing away. 

[ImperatorK]

Sure, but that's an investment of levels and feats.

[linklord231]

So, would I be accurate in saying that you don't think Skirmish damage on a Charger build is overpowered in and of itself, but it is overpowered if there isn't any kind of trade off required for a character to get it? 

Isn't this the same issue that full casting PrC's have, in that there's no reason not to take one because your most powerful class feature is progressed at exactly the same rate?  It seems to me that if you're OK with 10/10 casting classes, you should be OK with giving Skirmish to melee characters for "free."  It's a minor power boost, but compared to your main shtick it's not really that noticeable. 

[ImperatorK]

It seems to me that if you're OK with 10/10 casting classes, you should be OK with giving Skirmish to melee characters for "free."

I'm not okay with 10/10 casting classes. I even made an attempt at a houserule to even the playing field by making all the PrCs (mundane or caster) something like a 10/10. But that doesn't matter, because the Hunter is already getting big boosts by being 4 classes in 1.
Skirmish is supposed to be a damage source for those that want to go the Mobile Combatant path (other than Ubercharger, but that's not really a Mobile type of warrior, it's more like a missile), but if you'll get the Skirmish damage even when ubercharging then why would you not ubercharge?
It's one class, but it is supposed to support multiple themes.
You want to be a scout/mobile dude. Okay, here's some Skirmish so you won't have to worry about damage. It's not that much, but it's always something and of course you can always optimize it further.
You want to be a barbarian/brute dude. Okay, here you have your Rage and d12 hit dice.
You want to be a ranger/nature warrior dude. Okay, here you have your spells and animal companion.
Etc.
But if the Brute dude gets the Skirmish then why would you not make a Brute dude? That's why I'm banning Spirit Lion. Because then one of the bigger benefits of being a mobile dude aren't really limited to him and the theme gets obsoleted.
It's something like this: You have an arcane caster. And then you have a divine caster that can get arcane spells almost for free. Wouldn't you ban the thing that gives the divine caster arcane casters shtick?

[weenog]

It's more like blending bard, expert, commoner and healer, and then taking away the expert's ability to have a selection of any skills as class skills, because you think folding four classes into one is necessarily powerful, and needs to be punished somehow.  You've got three classes that overlap each other, plus a class that's just garbage.  It's more like 1.5-2 classes than 4, and none of them is a power class.

[linklord231]

In that case, I second the idea of making Skirmish only work with light or 1-handed weapons.  That way you force the character to choose whether they want to Ubercharge or Skirmish.  They can still do both by just carrying around an extra weapon, but they can only do one or the other on any given round. 

It's something like this: You have an arcane caster. And then you have a divine caster that can get arcane spells almost for free. Wouldn't you ban the thing that gives the divine caster arcane casters shtick?

You mean like an Archivist?  No, I wouldn't ban it.  But that's only because it doesn't really matter how many spells he knows, because he can only prepare so many of them on any given day, and more importantly can only cast one or two of them per round.  The power boost he gets from having an astoundingly broad spell list is insignificant compared to the power he already has from just being a caster.

[ImperatorK]

I meant spells and slots of the arcane caster.
And it doesn't matter how much power he will get from it, only that he gets it for free.

[weenog]

So, you don't care about overall power, you don't care about balance, you care about "free" and you've already made up your mind, even when it's pointed out that your definition is warped at best.

What was the point of making this thread again?