|
1 year ago ::
Mar 26, 2012 - 2:38PM
#1
|
|
|
various questions about how the talent works by RAW. it says you may use it 'when you fight defensively'. I'm not sure whether the fight defensively action grants you an attack along with the standard action to use it. however, I'm sure you can use Melee Defense as a standard action, and though I think it's implied, I'm not quite sure if there's a part of the rules specifying that using Melee Defense counts as fighting defensively.
Also, to negate te attack you need to make 'an unarmed attack roll', and maybe there's no need to specify at what modifier this attack is made. I assume this is full, normal bonus, but since you're fighting defensively, or if you used the Melee Defense feat, there's a modifier to your attack rolls that 'last until the start of your next turn'. so I figure you do get this penalty to your unarmed attack roll. also, it says you take 'a cumulative -2 penalty to all attack rolls for each attack roll made since the beggining of your last turn'. so, if as a standard action on your turn you made an attack with Melee Defense, say you take only a -1 penalty, then when you make the unarmed attack roll to negate an attack, the attack roll is made at a -3 penalty (1 from Melee Defense and 2 for having made an attack roll after the beginning of your last turn). if you use the Assault feat to make two attacks as a standard action, using the MD feat, then when you attempt Unarmed Parry you'd take a -5 penalty to your attack roll? (1 from MD and 2+2=4 for having made two attacks). then, each subsequent attack you try to negate with have an additional -2 penalty, right? since you technically made 'an attack roll' to negate the attack
Am I getting things right? and could someone clear up the Fight Defensively action?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 26, 2012 - 4:34PM
#2
|
|
|
As I've understood it, fighting defensively (in Saga) does not grant an attack, although Melee Defense does. However, it is a gray/houserule area where Melee Defense counts as fighting defensively. According to errata and FAQs, if you have two standard actions, Melee Defense and fighting defensively would stack.
I'd say RAW, Unarmed Parry inflicts the -5 penalty for fighting defensively, with the cumulative -2 adding on after each negated attack.
I houserule that Melee Defense can be counted as fighting defensively (and you get a free attack at -5 during fighting defensively). I also houserule that Unarmed Parry functions like Block/Deflect and need not be only with fighting defensively.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 26, 2012 - 10:33PM
#3
|
|
|
actually now that I think of it, it comes pretty much in line with the RAW and has its advantages to handle it like this:
the Fight Defensively standard action grants no attacks along with it, but it lets you make attacks of opportunity or attacks that come from other sources. if using Melee Defense, you can make a normal attack as a standard action and the feat's use makes it count as also part of the Fight Defensively action (the feats 'Normal:' entry implies that this is done as an upgrade of the Fight Defensively action; however, it doesn't say you now can't use such action)
so I take this to mean one can use the 'Fight Defensively' action to make no attacks during your turn. then when attacked, you can use Unarmed Parry at the usual penalty for fighting defensively, or at a lower penalty (only -2) if you have the Melee Defense feat but using said action to make no attacks (and forfeiting attacks of opportunity that might come your way).
if anyone thinks this would work differently or is not viable, please let me know! (all rules lawyers out there are welcome). if you believe this is more of a houserule than it is RAW, please let me know as I believe I am inclined to believe whatever I'd like to believe.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 27, 2012 - 10:30AM
#4
|
|
|
Looking at the RAW you can only use Unarmed Parry when you use your Standard Action to Fight Defensively. It also appears that the penalty you take to attack rolls when you Fight Defensively would also apply to the roll made with Unarmed Parry and it would seem that if you go full defensive you'll also be giving up the chance to make any attack rolls which prevents Unarmed Parry from working; I believe you should be able to use Unarmed Parry at your normal unarmed attack bonus despite Fight Defensively otherwise the talent goes from not so good to nearly useless.
The Melee Defense feat has no connection with the Fighting Defensively action at all although both work in similiar ways. When a character decides to Fight Defensively they are basically giving up their offensive attack options and possibly all defensive attack options as well in exchange for a better overall REF Defense score. A character who uses Melee Defense is just giving up some accuracy in their attacks in exchange for more defense. The "normal" under the Melee Defense feat is NOT saying the Melee Defense equates to Fighting Defensively but is really just pointing out your other option to get a similiar effect without spending a feat; there are several things where "normal" is a universal thing and the benefit is really something entirely different.
If you want opinions I'd consider allowing Melee Defense at a -5 attack penalty or greater to count as Fighting Defensively when it comes to things like Unarmed Parry. Looking specifically at Unarmed Parry I'd be inclined to allow its use when Fighting Defensively or when using Melee Defense at -2 or greater (the attack penalty for Fighting Defensively WILL carry over to Unarmed Parry) but this is mostly because Unarmed Parry isn't an easy talent to get.
While Unarmed Parry looks and works a lot like Block the roll used to activate them makes them two very different things. UP is attack roll vs attack roll so both increase at the same rate and theoretically maks UP usefull half the time. On the other hand Block is skill vs. attack and the issue here is that skill often starts a LOT higher then attack but it also increases a LOT more slowly; by the time UP becomes available Block's effectiveness is probably coming down towards that 50% and still falling while UP remains as effective as ever. What I'm saying is that at high levels Unarmed Parry continues to keep up while Block loses effectiveness so just be aware of that if you ever try to compare the two.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 27, 2012 - 4:05PM
#5
|
|
|
thanks StevenO, I appreciate your opinions.
and now I agree on the take about Melee Defense being, by RAW, different from using the Fight Defensively action. the 'Normal:' entry looks more like a clarification.
I've been plundering a lot about the talent. like you say, it's a hard talent to get, especially if the rest of you build isn't also centered towards unarmed combat. at really high levels it probably becomes very useful, as opposed to Block and Deflect which require you to both have a very high Use the Force modifier AND a relatively low Reflex score for your level to be useful.
however, at mid-high level I find some difficulties with it:
I've done the math for the specific build I'm working on. he's level 14, his class bonus to Defense is 2, then he adds 2 more from his Dex bonus and 2 more for having the required Martial Arts I and II feats; this adds for a total Reflex of 30. his base attack is +14, and on melee attacks he just adds +4 from his Str bonus (no Weapon Focus or other modifiers); this adds for a total unarmed attack modifier of +18. so if he attacks once with Melee Defense, (I'd allow him to take just a -1 penalty on the attack) his unarmed attack roll would be +15 (-1 Melee Defense -2 having made a previous attack roll): at his slightly increased 31 Reflex score, you'd need a natural 17, 18, 19 or 20 to beat your Reflex Defense and negate an attack that hit by a few points. also, UP doesn't grant you the ability to minimize certain area attacks (the reason I give Block and Deflect to some high level characters is because they can counter a player tactic to use area damage to steadily wear down high-Reflex NPCs).
In many instances I've seen that the difference between your bonus and a high Reflex score is such that you need very high rolls to negate attacks, and this effectively only increases your Defense by up to 5 points.
so what I'm asking is; is it worth it? is Unarmed Parry worth the investment made into having it and making it work?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 27, 2012 - 5:12PM
#6
|
|
|
I don't think Unarmed Parry is worth the investment.
There are so many feats and talents in SAGA that have their uses but over all really aren't something you should ever take for a PC. I may use them for NPCs which are designed for a single purpose but I believe things a PC takes should be usable more of the time or should really dominate the situations when they can be used. I see Unarmed Parry as being a little too conditional and the thing it does (prevent damage) can be done use other things that are easier to use.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 27, 2012 - 10:12PM
#7
|
|
|
I don't think Unarmed Parry is worth the investment.
I agree. Unless you've got a very specific build in mind (lower Reflex Defense, not trained in Acrobatics, high BAB & Str), there are many other better talents that you could invest in.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 28, 2012 - 11:22AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jul 14, 2004
|
By RAW I have to agree that UP is pretty useless. You can only use it while Fighting Defensively, which does not include Melee Defense, and because it requires a melee attack roll, you can't exercise it with the full fight defensively option for the maximum REF bonus, you can only get the option to use it if you fight defensively while holding on to the ability to make reactive attacks like AoOs. Now I don't know if that is RAI, and you could house rule it to be more broad in scope, but RAW its too restrictive for my tastes, compared to other talents that could occupy the limited resource slot.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 01, 2012 - 9:43PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Oct 25, 2009
|
Assuming a force build is what you want the primitive block talent from K.o.T.or p38 is the way to go. It's block for empowered weapons from force adept. I had an awesome undead Sith alchemy corrupted M.a.n.d.a.l.o.r.i.a.n master of T.e.r.a.s K.a.s.I NPC with force empowered impact gloves+5 damage (crush gaunt) and primitive block...it was awesome to watch the guy block all the Jedi attacks and retaliate with punches doing more damage than a lightsaber. Luckily the NPC retained enough of his honor to not kill honorable opponents...he was going to kill the smuggler that kept shooting him in the back but the Jedi (with 3 HP ) got in front and said he would have to kill him first. Unwilling to do that he left. Nothing like kicking the entire parties butt up and down the hall and at the end the group thinks it is one of the best sessions they have ever had. Hmm...so in the end you want primitive block I think. Lol.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 04, 2012 - 9:40AM
#10
|
|
|
Nope, not at all. a block-like ability for a non-Force-sensitive character is what I was looking for. Primitive Block, besides, is actually a hard talent to get; the prerequisites for the Force adept prestige class are some of the most demanding (three Force talents means you've only got one spare talent in 7 levels), and then you'll still need to wait until 3rd level in the class before taking this talent. it's still nice, pretty workable in some builds, but not what I'm looking for. but nice story! sounds really interesting to have a bare-gauntlet Sith Lord
Unarmed Parry might just work for certain builds. like awatpturwpn says, maybe if you've got one with low natural Reflex and a really high attack bonus. the build I'm working on has some degree of that, but not enough it seems, as it wouldn't be much of a boon to have such talent (and as we've said, it's a hard talent to get). for soldier types, it's probably better to go armored and simply have Improved Armored Defense for that Reflex boon (it's what I opted for, anyway).
|
|
|
