My improved trip is being nerfed [3.5]

27 posts / 0 new
Last post
Hello all

In my friends campaign I am playing a disarming/trip fighter. Now things are going kind of badly (I died twice at level 1 than died again at level 3) but through it all I still managed to assist my party by keeping enemies at bay with my disarming and tripping.

The problem is that the DM has understandably got tired of my tripping attempts and has told me that he is going to modify the rules as it's "overpowered". Now although I am fine with recreating my character as something else I still think its a bit unfair as from my searches of the interwebs it seems like improved trip is quite commonly seen as overpowered yet most replies to the forum posts have concensus that it is fine and does not need changing.

So I am wondering what I can do as he is saying that the guy that wrote the rulebook commented that the rule should be nerfed but I am as yet to find evidence of that from my searches.
My arguments are


  • I need to succeed in three seperate rolls to do my improved trip

  • I have invested 5 feats into it to make it as effective as it is

  • I have died three times so clearly its not that overpowered

  • I need to wield special weapons to use it efficiently

  • I am not boring in combat (he said it was but I think it's better than "I hit them")

  • I assist the weaker party member with my crowd control

  • The power attack paladin does more damage and has more influence than me in the fights

  • Our sorcerer spams grease yet that isn't being nerfed

  • Last of all against a lot of enemies it becomes useless (flying or 4 legs+)


It just seems kind of annoying that I am loosing out because I chose to specialise in something.

Also on a seperate note I was also told that being intimidated by someone meant that I am subserviant to them.
Basically we captured a werewolf and handed her over but the guards wanted to behead her. I decided that was a bit harsh and tried to prevent it so the paladin intimidated me into handing her over.
The roll succeeded but I still refused to hand her over as intimidation just makes me friendly to the paladin and does not mean that I am now dominated to do as he says. Yet I still got told that I have to compromise with him since he intimidated me.

I still refused but got a bit of an argument because of it.

What is all your takes on this. Should I just recreate my fighter or fight me ground? Should intimidate, diplomacy and bluff be used to control other characters?
What is all your takes on this. Should I just recreate my fighter or fight me ground? Should intimidate, diplomacy and bluff be used to control other characters?



No.  Never.
DM advice: 1. Do a Session Zero. 2. Start With Action. 3. Always say "Yes" to player ideas. 4. Don't build railroads. 5. Make success, failure, and middling rolls interesting. Player advice: 1. Don't be a dick. 2. Build off each other, don't block each other. 3. You're supposed to be a badass. Act like it. Take risks. My poorly updated blog: http://engineeredfun.wordpress.com/
What is all your takes on this. Should I just recreate my fighter or fight me ground? Should intimidate, diplomacy and bluff be used to control other characters?



No.  Never.



This.
I'd remake your PC. You are right, it isn't particulalrly overpowered, and more just "solid and fun tactic" but if your DM is set to hate it, its worth the change. Way easier than fighting it, and you can probably find a few other tactics that seem fun. Look towards the Tome of Battle maybe?

As for social skills vs other PCs, no they are not supposed to work against other PCs. Alternatively, they work, but you the PCs player gets to decide what "Im intimidated" means. As in "im scared of him sure, but still not doing what he said."

 

"In a way, you are worse than Krusk"                               " As usual, Krusk comments with assuredness, but lacks the clarity and awareness of what he's talking about"

"Can't say enough how much I agree with Krusk"        "Wow, thank you very much"

"Your advice is the worst"

Play a druid.  Your DM will be begging for the days of you tripping things.
Was thinking of druid actually. Hopefully I won't have to switch a second time.

If you go druid in 3.X, then you best get a third character ready as backup. If the DM is complaining about tripping and such, druid is going to cause him to have a meltdown.

No amount of tips, tricks, or gimmicks will ever be better than simply talking directly to your fellow players to resolve your issues.
DMs: Don't Prep the Plot | Structure First, Story Last | Prep Tips | Spoilers Don't Spoil Anything | No Myth Roleplaying
Players: 11 Ways to Be a Better Roleplayer | You Are Not Your Character     Hilarious D&D Actual Play Podcast: Crit Juice!

FREE CONTENT: Encounters With Alternate Goals | Full-Contact Futbol  |  Pre-Gen D&D 5e PCs | Re-Imagining Phandelver | Three Pillars of Immersion | Seahorse Run

Follow me on Twitter: @is3rith

I loved the Expertise fighter build, and dreamed of getting to Whirlwind Attack with Improved Trip.

But the idea of a fighter being a "trip" fighter is ridiculous. Even without house rules, there are plenty of plausible ways to disrupt tripping, and even without any disruption at all, it's a silly and fairly unheroic way to fight. But other than just focusing on damage, or getting in some ranged feats, it's pretty much the only viable approach for a fighter. And once you're down a given path, there's no real way to get off it.

No need to torture your DM with a druid, but talk to him, and see if there's a way you can play a fun fighter without having to resort to annoying tricks.

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

I loved the Expertise fighter build, and dreamed of getting to Whirlwind Attack with Improved Trip.

But the idea of a fighter being a "trip" fighter is ridiculous. Even without house rules, there are plenty of plausible ways to disrupt tripping, and even without any disruption at all, it's a silly and fairly unheroic way to fight. But other than just focusing on damage, or getting in some ranged feats, it's pretty much the only viable approach for a fighter. And once you're down a given path, there's no real way to get off it.

No need to torture your DM with a druid, but talk to him, and see if there's a way you can play a fun fighter without having to resort to annoying tricks.



He shouldn't have to change characters because his DM can't build an encounter.  And yes, when trips shut down all your encounters, you're not doing it right.  The DM in this case needs to adapt and overcome.
He shouldn't have to change characters because his DM can't build an encounter.  And yes, when trips shut down all your encounters, you're not doing it right.  The DM in this case needs to adapt and overcome.

The fact remains that "tripping" is a silly one-trick pony to build a character around, and it locks the DM into walking a fine line between providing too much and too little opprortunity for this particular fighter to shine. Better to make a character that makes its own opportunities, rather than hoping the DM provides them.

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

He shouldn't have to change characters because his DM can't build an encounter.  And yes, when trips shut down all your encounters, you're not doing it right.  The DM in this case needs to adapt and overcome.

The fact remains that "tripping" is a silly one-trick pony to build a character around, and it locks the DM into walking a fine line between providing too much and too little opprortunity for this particular fighter to shine. Better to make a character that makes its own opportunities, rather than hoping the DM provides them.



With the martial-spellcaster disparity, however, that was the only way to play a fighter or most non-spellcaster classes.  While they could handle anything, your best bet was to pick one schtick and throw all your resources into it, and hope your DM played along often enough to make it worth your while.
With the martial-spellcaster disparity, however, that was the only way to play a fighter or most non-spellcaster classes.  While they could handle anything, your best bet was to pick one schtick and throw all your resources into it, and hope your DM played along often enough to make it worth your while.

Agreed. From time to time, I would think that a good melee-ranged balance, perhaps with a weapon specialization in both (or in a thrown weapon), and a decent arsenal to cover the main resistances would do okay. Then I'd wake up.

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

I still refused but got a bit of an argument because of it.

What is all your takes on this. Should I just recreate my fighter or fight me ground? Should intimidate, diplomacy and bluff be used to control other characters?



You should have called his bluff "I refuse to allow the prisoner to be murdered and unless you plan on murdering me in cold blood we will look for an alternative solution" and then ask the DM for a +30 bonus against his intimidation because you know the can't murder you in cold blood.

But alternatively, as much as I dislike a player using intimidate/diplomacy/bluff etc against other players to force their hands. You were really doing much the same against the Paladin, only without a roll, when you refused to allow the werewolf to be handed over.

You created a stalemate situation, at what point in the disagreement between your Fighter and the Paladin would one or the other of your characters back down?

-Paladin, Draws sword "Look the werewolf is going to this prison, if you try to interfere I will cut you down if need be" Rolls intimidate, suceeds.

Now your character is clearly under the impression that if you don't back down you will have to fight the Paladin and possibly the rest of the party, plus the prison guards etc. At what point do you player your charracter as he would act under that situation and what point are you metagaming?

At a certain pont the DM has to intervene and say "Hey, you have to play in character and not meta-game" Because you are forcing the Paladin's hand as well, and his only real option is to carry through with the threats he is intimidating you with
Was thinking of druid actually. Hopefully I won't have to switch a second time.



Oh god.  Upgrading from fighter to druid. 

DM: God fighter was so overpowered, he could trip all these humanoids with 2 legs.

Druid: I'll summon 1d3 Bears with like a 28 Grapple check, and send them and my animal companion to lock down every medium sized creature in the area.  I'll use blinding spittle on the ogre, because he looks like the biggest threat.  Is your "challenging encounter" over yet? 

DM: What!?!

Druid: Oh it's not.  I'll enable my entire party and my animal companion to make an extra attack.  And send my animal companion into a berserker rage (same as Barbarian).  Now is it over? 

DM: WHAT?!?

Druid: Oh you have some more stuff waiting in the wings?  I suppose I can transform into a venom-spitting dinosaur, and cast venomfire on myself, so I can fireball as a standard action without using a spell slot once per round.  For 1 hour/level, of course, because that's not OP.  Did I mention these are all 1st through 3rd level spells?  

DM: wut
Thank god someone else has seen Snake's Swiftness...my party was confused when I broke it out (the first time...then they all clamoured for it).
Hello all

In my friends campaign I am playing a disarming/trip fighter. Now things are going kind of badly (I died twice at level 1 than died again at level 3) but through it all I still managed to assist my party by keeping enemies at bay with my disarming and tripping.

The problem is that the DM has understandably got tired of my tripping attempts and has told me that he is going to modify the rules as it's "overpowered". Now although I am fine with recreating my character as something else I still think its a bit unfair as from my searches of the interwebs it seems like improved trip is quite commonly seen as overpowered yet most replies to the forum posts have concensus that it is fine and does not need changing.

So I am wondering what I can do as he is saying that the guy that wrote the rulebook commented that the rule should be nerfed but I am as yet to find evidence of that from my searches.
My arguments are


  • I need to succeed in three seperate rolls to do my improved trip

  • I have invested 5 feats into it to make it as effective as it is

  • I have died three times so clearly its not that overpowered

  • I need to wield special weapons to use it efficiently

  • I am not boring in combat (he said it was but I think it's better than "I hit them")

  • I assist the weaker party member with my crowd control

  • The power attack paladin does more damage and has more influence than me in the fights

  • Our sorcerer spams grease yet that isn't being nerfed

  • Last of all against a lot of enemies it becomes useless (flying or 4 legs+)


It just seems kind of annoying that I am loosing out because I chose to specialise in something.

Also on a seperate note I was also told that being intimidated by someone meant that I am subserviant to them.
Basically we captured a werewolf and handed her over but the guards wanted to behead her. I decided that was a bit harsh and tried to prevent it so the paladin intimidated me into handing her over.
The roll succeeded but I still refused to hand her over as intimidation just makes me friendly to the paladin and does not mean that I am now dominated to do as he says. Yet I still got told that I have to compromise with him since he intimidated me.

I still refused but got a bit of an argument because of it.

What is all your takes on this. Should I just recreate my fighter or fight me ground? Should intimidate, diplomacy and bluff be used to control other characters?

PROBLEM 1: Does improved trip give a free attack once you trip them? I can't remember. I do remember that once the person is tripped, they get -4 to attack, you get a +4 to hit them, they're prone and can't run or charge. They also lose their dex bonus to armor class. This means that all attacks on them are eligible for sneak attack damage if anyone in the party has it. The grease spell on a person allows a save. As an area effect it is much less effective, requiring a very easy balance check. And can only be used a few times a day, at any rate. And is also less effective or useless against flying and many-leg creatures, except to disarm them.
And in combat, the sorcerer often has to make a concentration check, may have to overcome something's spell resistance and the opponent generally gets a (easy) saving throw.
I'm with the gimmicks-are-overpowered camp. But not way deep in that camp. I'd read the trip and disarm rules to make sure the DM is giving the guy being tripped a fair deal. He may just THINK it's overpowered because the opponents you are using it on aren't getting a fair chance to avoid the gimmick. If I were the DM, I would probably follow your lead and occasionally throw some NPCs who use the same fighting style and trip feats that you chose for your character. I'm sure you two would learn a lot from seeing it from the other's perspective. The DM may be thinking over-powered when he means over-used. And that's why he thinks it's boring. I've seen a hundred tripper/disarmer characters and they sometimes drag out a combat for no reason other than to make their turn last longer. You know... spend a round tripping the guy, another round disarming him and then 6 guys stand around kicking him while he is down. Very heroic. That might not be your deal, but it happens. And it's lame. Still. Stand your ground. The guy has risen from the dead three times. He must have a destiny.

PROBLEM 2: Intimidate doesn't control a character. In my campaign, I do allow the shaken effect to take effect, but allow the player to continue to act as they will, albeit with with penalties. This isn't a magical effect. Just one character trying to influence another, sometimes with threat of physical violence, sometimes not. HOWEVER, if the player being intimidated wants to roleplay that he does as the intimidator wants him to do, then that's fine as well. It's often (but not always) good role-playing to do so.

Diplomacy, does not work on player characters the same as it does on NPC characters, because the player controls their actions. The DM should let the diplomat make his case (some players are very charismatic and may give a rousing "Braveheart" speech; other players are more wall-flowery and will simply say "I try to get your character to come fight on our side because winning this fight will give our people freedom". The player might simply go along because the speech was good or he could have the player roll a check. But this is clearly a case of player being able to control his character the way he wants.

Bluff, is a bit different. This is a good example where meta-gaming is a temptation. If the bluff is believable and the bluffer's roll vs. your sense motive is successful, you should play the character as if he or she believes the bluff to be true until some new information presents itself. Bluff can work as a feint in combat as well. However, believing a lie and acting on it are two different things. For instance... one character could bluff "I need your help with something." Even though the character falls for the lie, he may not care "Help you? Wha do I look like, yer bloody maid? Bugger off. I just got back to town and I'm drinkin' me ale" I may have let those threats you made at me early today slide, but I ain't forgot."

PROBLEM 3, the paladin and the werewolf:  Nope. not dominated. Glad you held your ground. I had a reverse situation once. I was the paladin but the werewolf was a friend of mine before he turned. So I had him run into the church and ask for sanctuary after I brought him back to town in silver manacles that I had to sell my armor to get. Once secured, I sold the manacles and used the money to pay for his upkeep. The party wanted him killed. But my character earned the name "The Merciful" after I stood my ground and the curse was removed from my friend.
A rogue with a bowl of slop can be a controller. WIZARD PC: Can I substitute Celestial Roc Guano for my fireball spells? DM: Awesome. Yes. When in doubt, take action.... that's generally the best course. Even Sun Tsu knew that, and he didn't have internets.
Was thinking of druid actually. Hopefully I won't have to switch a second time.



Oh god.  Upgrading from fighter to druid. 

DM: God fighter was so overpowered, he could trip all these humanoids with 2 legs.

Druid: I'll summon 1d3 Bears with like a 28 Grapple check, and send them and my animal companion to lock down every medium sized creature in the area.  I'll use blinding spittle on the ogre, because he looks like the biggest threat.  Is your "challenging encounter" over yet? 

DM: What!?!

Druid: Oh it's not.  I'll enable my entire party and my animal companion to make an extra attack.  And send my animal companion into a berserker rage (same as Barbarian).  Now is it over? 

DM: WHAT?!?

Druid: Oh you have some more stuff waiting in the wings?  I suppose I can transform into a venom-spitting dinosaur, and cast venomfire on myself, so I can fireball as a standard action without using a spell slot once per round.  For 1 hour/level, of course, because that's not OP.  Did I mention these are all 1st through 3rd level spells?  

DM: wut

A 6th level fighter could quite possibly dispatch of all those bears and the ogre in one round... on his first attack. Without having to make concentration checks to swing his sword to prevent attacks of opportunity. And he can do that exactly 14,400 times a day at +6 base to hit (not counting fatigue) and another 14,400 times a day at +1 base to hit. Just sayin'..
A rogue with a bowl of slop can be a controller. WIZARD PC: Can I substitute Celestial Roc Guano for my fireball spells? DM: Awesome. Yes. When in doubt, take action.... that's generally the best course. Even Sun Tsu knew that, and he didn't have internets.
Thank god someone else has seen Snake's Swiftness...my party was confused when I broke it out (the first time...then they all clamoured for it).


Mass Snake's Swiftness is an amazing nuke, especially if you have a lot of summons up.  As a 2nd level spell... it's unbelievable.  The tons of animal companions that really make it break the action economy means you tend to want to save it for really big fights, but hey, it's second level, giving your companion, a Warblade, and a Rogue an extra attack is just fine for a second level spell.

A 6th level fighter could quite possibly dispatch of all those bears and the ogre in one round... on his first attack. Without having to make concentration checks to swing his sword to prevent attacks of opportunity. And he can do that exactly 14,400 times a day at +6 base to hit (not counting fatigue) and another 14,400 times a day at +1 base to hit. Just sayin'..



You mean he crits hard enough to kill a bear, and gets a cleave chain going?  Weeee, incredibly unlikely events.

Meanwhile the Druid is going to be busy shutting down an entire encounter with a handful of spells.

Don't pretend that a Fighter belongs anywhere near a Druid in power level.  We're talking about 3E here, not 4E.
Thank god someone else has seen Snake's Swiftness...my party was confused when I broke it out (the first time...then they all clamoured for it).


Mass Snake's Swiftness is an amazing nuke, especially if you have a lot of summons up.  As a 2nd level spell... it's unbelievable.  The tons of animal companions that really make it break the action economy means you tend to want to save it for really big fights, but hey, it's second level, giving your companion, a Warblade, and a Rogue an extra attack is just fine for a second level spell.

A 6th level fighter could quite possibly dispatch of all those bears and the ogre in one round... on his first attack. Without having to make concentration checks to swing his sword to prevent attacks of opportunity. And he can do that exactly 14,400 times a day at +6 base to hit (not counting fatigue) and another 14,400 times a day at +1 base to hit. Just sayin'..



You mean he crits hard enough to kill a bear, and gets a cleave chain going?  Weeee, incredibly unlikely events.

Meanwhile the Druid is going to be busy shutting down an entire encounter with a handful of spells.

Don't pretend that a Fighter belongs anywhere near a Druid in power level.  We're talking about 3E here, not 4E.

I hear what you're saying. I'm just saying that the druid may not use all his powers in one round and might want to save some for the next encounter. The fighter doesn't have that to worry about at least. The creatures also likely provoke an attack of opportunity getting near the fighter. His first attack after that could cleave. His second attack getting the second bear. Neither ogre nor bear is particularly hard to hit. Worse case scenario is to focus on the ogre and wait for the spell to end. Six rounds for a level 6 druid. We're talking brown bears, not grizzlies. The fighter gets his base attack during the grapple, right? And his strength modifier. And he's got a spare feat for improved grapple in there somewhere, possibly.

I'm saying it's different, but still fairly balanced, at this level. If a fighter were facing off with a druid and he didn't like the druid casting spells, he could just spring attack over and chop up the druid (or otherwise attack him). Just make sure the druid hasn't spent a few rounds buffing. In that case. The druid's going to eat the fighter for breakfast.

Now, once you make it to higher levels and the druid gets some of those uber-bad abilities, it's a different ball game.
A rogue with a bowl of slop can be a controller. WIZARD PC: Can I substitute Celestial Roc Guano for my fireball spells? DM: Awesome. Yes. When in doubt, take action.... that's generally the best course. Even Sun Tsu knew that, and he didn't have internets.
It's funny you say level 6, because that's the exact level I chose for the "Druid Challenge" in the D&D Next Forums, when people would say "3E Fighters are perfectly acceptable until very high levels."  I'd challenge them to make a fighter and slam through 5 different CR 6 encounters while I made a Druid and slammed through the same 5 CR 6 encounters (only resource recovery being healing to full after each encounter using wands of CLW/LV).  

Yes, level 6 is a little low for some of the Druid things, such as Natural Dragonhide Plate or Clasped monk bracers, and the druid is also missing 4th level spells, but of all the spellcasting classes, the Druid gets the farthest with their low level spells.  

From level 1 to level 16 the Druid is the best class in D&D, although the Cleric walks in to match around level 10ish. (minus certain extreme cheese builds, like Hulking Hurler/Pun Pun and some Prestige Classes).   
It's funny you say level 6, because that's the exact level I chose for the "Druid Challenge" in the D&D Next Forums, when people would say "3E Fighters are perfectly acceptable until very high levels."

That is the most chilling thing I've heard in connection with D&D Next. I thank you for any work you're doing to dispell that myth. I tried hard to love 3E fighters, goodness knows I tried. 4th Edition saved me from going insane over the issue.

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

It's funny you say level 6, because that's the exact level I chose for the "Druid Challenge" in the D&D Next Forums, when people would say "3E Fighters are perfectly acceptable until very high levels."

That is the most chilling thing I've heard in connection with D&D Next. I thank you for any work you're doing to dispell that myth. I tried hard to love 3E fighters, goodness knows I tried. 4th Edition saved me from going insane over the issue.




There are reasons I said 'The fighter has precisely two levels, then it's over.  You want more melee stuff, play a Warblade' when I ran 3e.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Improved Trip has caused problems, namely because it is THE MOST powerful feat in the "Improved x" series of feats.  Improved Disarm only nets you a +4 bonus to the attempt, and removes the AoO.  Improved Sunder, and Improved Grapple, same thing.  Improved Feint allows feinting as a move action, whch allows for ONE attack to be made without the target getting his DEX bonus.  Improved Trip, on the other hand, removes the AoO for a trip attempt, gets you a +4 bonus to the attempt, AND gets you a free attack.

Now, one of the most OP builds in 3.x was the "Spiked Chain Trip-Monkey" Fighter.  Having reach and being able to trip as an attack action (which includes an AoO), means excellent crowd control.  Combined with feats like Combat Reflexes, you have a very optimal character. I assume, even though you did not say so, that you are using a spiked chain, since you mentioned your build requiring a specific weapon.

Now, OP, a question: Since standing up from prone provokes an AoO, do you also do a trip attempt for that?  A lot of DMs allow this, and then recant their decision when it becomes brokenly overpowered.  Here's a tip: An attack of opportunity actually takes place BEFORE the event that triggered it, an Immediate Interrupt, to use 4e terminology.  Which means that, RAW, you CANNOT use the spiked chain/Improved Trip combo to keep a foe prone.  If he was allowing that, perhaps you could bring this to his attention, and agree to adhere to that in the future, your fighter will not be as overpowered, and he will not require you to re-make him.

Another rule frequently overlooked in my experience is that even if someone can take multiple AoOs in one round (due to Combat Reflexes), he or she can still only take one AoO per creature's turn.  So a creature that takes multiple AoO provoking actions on its turn only recieves one AoO per character threatening it.

Also: someone here mentioned that being prone makes the prone creature lose its DEX bonus.  This is incorrect.  A prone target takes a -4 penalty to all melee attacks, and can only use a crossbow for ranged ones.  Attackers get a +4 bonus to melee attack prone targets, while taking a -4 penalty to ranged atatcks against them.  That's it.  Nowhere does it say they lose their DEX bonus.

Also, a smart DM will occasionally throw things against you that your tactic is ineffective against.  Quadrapeds are very hard to trip, creatures with reach will never leave a threatened space, and never provoke the tripping AoO in the first place.

And finally, your point on social skills being used against other players:  Other posters have been correct in that Diplomacy and Intimidate cannot be used to control other players.  Diplomacy because the payer controls the reactions and actions of their character.  Intimidate works in a similar fashion, and has the added benefit, that a creature adds his/her its Hit Dice to the opposed roll.  Even if the paladin successfully intimidated your character, the only appropriate reaction would be to act succesfully cowed, but that does not mean he gets to dictate your actions.  Bluff should only be used against other characters sparingly, because it can lead to inter-party conflict.

In closing, talk to your DM about what his problems are with your fighter.  If he has been allowing things he should not have been (which are common mistakes with those particular rules), then maybe you could move forward in keeping with RAW.  If that's a deal-breaker for you, then go ahead and re-roll your character.
Whow had no idea this post was still going heh.
I got told that trip was not going to be nerfed until he thought of a replacement so I just made a druid instead as I would rather not have the chance of mechanic change lingering over my head.

My Fighter/Druid is not conventional though as I quite like janky combos. My animal companion is a heavy horse, I have all the mounted combat feats and saddleback (as Faerun campaign).
Taking 10 on my ride check and getting 24 for my reflex save/mounts AC on command is pretty damn tasty.
Also packing a large lance (as counts 1h when mounted so large lance is 2h) and than smashing for 6d6 on a spirited charge is a lot more dangerous than my 2d4 trip me thinks.
Things do a get a bit tense when I start linking all my spells into my horse to do ridiculous things but so far nerfing hasn't been mentioned yet (meld into stone and just charging in a wall to heal was quite hilarious).

Now, OP, a question: Since standing up from prone provokes an AoO, do you also do a trip attempt for that?


Well I told the DM that it doesn't allow a trip attempt as I assumed I was smashing the guy as he was getting up and so took a -4 to armour but was not technically standing (it would prevent me from locking a single enemy down which seems fair as that would be ridiculous against a single boss creature). Also I told him about one creature only provoking 1 AoO no matter how many combat reflexes I get so I could not smash a guy multiple times.

Still i'm quite happy with druid now although I do miss the chance of whirlwind trip attacking.
The intimidate thing has been rectified a bit as I did bring up the fact that we can be intimidated into handing over all our loot but thankfully when that happened it was reigned in and was stopped. Still I can't help but feel that if the skill is stacked to high heaven than you can probably break the campaign.
While I'm glad you're liking your new character, I feel compelled to caution about putting so much of your character into riding skills/feats.  They'll work fine as long as you are in a situation that allows you to be mounted, such as not inside a building or a dungeon.  Depending on what your DM likes to put in place for the PCs to explore, you might find yourself off your mount a lot more often than you'd like.  I'm not saying that doing what you did with your focus on mounted combat is a bad thing, I just wanted to make you aware of potential problems you might have with it later.  Best of luck.
While I'm glad you're liking your new character, I feel compelled to caution about putting so much of your character into riding skills/feats.  They'll work fine as long as you are in a situation that allows you to be mounted, such as not inside a building or a dungeon.  Depending on what your DM likes to put in place for the PCs to explore, you might find yourself off your mount a lot more often than you'd like.  I'm not saying that doing what you did with your focus on mounted combat is a bad thing, I just wanted to make you aware of potential problems you might have with it later.  Best of luck.



Thanks for the advice.
Yeah i've had situations where i'm dismounted but I like the duality of it as feeling vulnerable without my horse is a nice change of pace and causes cool situations where the others need to cover me while I regroup with my companion.
For dungeons though I anticipated this when I was allowed to convert my fighters magic items at a 1:1 cost conversion, so I bought a ring of reduce person and a bridle of reduce animal [2/day for 6 hours]
That way when fighting in houses or 5ft hallways I can miniature myself and still go rampaging around.
It causes great mental images.

It's only a matter of time before animal affected magic is brought into the fray, but eveything has a weakness so I guess enemy druids will be mine.
One thing to keep in mind when dealing with trip/knock prone and disarm is that even though it is not overly powerful, it can be extremely frustrating on the DM. It controls the monster's movement to an extreme extend, narrowing the use of terrain and any potential tactical manouvers.

What is worse in 3e is that it either works extremely well or not at all, causing players to be frustrated if you use a lot of opponents on which it does not work and through those choices force the DM in a particular opponent selection. At least your DM asked you to change your PC instead of simply switching to another set of opponents ;) At least with spellcasters the DM can change things regularly so that the spellcaster will simply prepare another set of spells.