Making combat move more -- pressing attack, lunge, losing ground, and the like

[kenjib]

D&D combat by default tends to sit in one place. What can be done to make it more like Erol Flynn versus Basil Rathbone fighting up and down the staircase in Robin Hood, or like the Dread Pirate Roberts' sword fight with Inigo Montoya?

In fencing, I believe that you fight you tend to drive your opponent back when you take an aggressive offense, and he naturally gives ground as a defense mechanism. Of course this basic mechanic gives you room for manipulation - feints, tricks, and the like. Is there any way for D&D to work more like this?

 

[KnowTheToe]

This is a tuff one. Outside of a modified bullrush attack. A new feat that with a successful hit with a neg modifier, instead of causing damage, you move your opponent backwards 5'. Although this does not really solve your issue, I kind of like it and have not seen anything similar.

 

[Sagan Darkside]

1)I think the first step is to drop AoO into a feat option instead of a base rule option- it makes players to cautious to want to risk being hit.. especially at low levels.

2)Create an option that is like power attack, but you take a negative a hit in exchange to moving the target back if you are succesful in the attack.

3)Perhaps making a bluff/intimidate check to move people in combat..

4)Be generous with circumstance bonuses- from attacking from height, dramatic jumps, swinging from ropes, etc.

Or you could just do it- as the pc attacks the npc, explain that both move five feet to the left. Make the combat dynamic without worrying about how it fits into the rules.

SD

 

[Henry]

Some suggestions for encouraging this behavior. The first two I have incorporated into my game, but the other two are extemporaneous and untested:

1) Any time someone makes a successful reflex save, they move 5' in a random direction, or the direction that makes the most sense given the attack. (if the player cannot agree, have them roll it randomly.)

2) Any time a character must make a massive damage save that comes from an attack, they are moved forcibly (1d2 x 5 feet) in the direction opposite the direction of attack, and are considered prone. If you want more of this, have it be any time the character takes a certain amount of damage (15 or 20 points of damage, let's say.)

3) Give characters a +1 dodge bonus to AC for every 15 foot or 30 feet moved on their initiative in a round. (depends on how much you wish to encourage it, and the amount of bonus you feel comfortable giving.)

4) Any time two or more characters are in melee, force them all to take a 5' step in a random direction on the second and subsequent rounds.

In short, if you wish a more dynamic battlefield, offer incentives that advocate it, or small rules adjustments that don't detract from the battle too much.

 

[barsoomcore]

I wanted to add a new combat manuver but couldn't figure out how to make it work -- something like Fighting Withdrawal: if you take a 5' step away from your opponent before making any attacks, you gain a +1 circumstance bonus to AC against that opponent for one round.

So you COULD take a 5' step back, use a Move action to move back and take a single attack with the bonus, or you could take that 5' step back, use your reach weapon. It's possibly open to manipulation.

Another possibility is this: Any time a character hits another and does damage, the character that was struck moves five feet away directly away from their attacker, who automatically follows, both movements being free actions. A character who is blocked in this retreating motion by a wall or suffers some penalty -- either an AC penalty (because they can't defend themselves by backing up) or an action penalty (no full attacks while your back is to the wall). A character who wants to resist this "pushback" has to make a Fort Save or something to stay in place. In no case do any of the motions draw attacks of opportunity. An attacking character can drive another character back five feet for each successful attack they make.

And if you allow the attacker character to decide to NOT follow their opponent, it becomes a way of disengaging without suffering an attack of opportunity -- "I strike at his face, cutting his cheek, and as he stumbles back, roaring in pain, I turn and sprint up the stairs!" You hit him, he moves back five feet, you don't so now you're not in his threatened range and can move wherever you like.

I kinda like this rule.

You could also take out the Dodge pre-requisite for Mobility, thus making Mobility much easier to get, so you can have more nimble characters without making any big rules changes. Perhaps apply armour check penalties to attacks of opportunity so that lightly armoured characters are more dangerous that way.

 

[barsoomcore]

In no case do any of the motions draw attacks of opportunity. An attacking character can drive another character back five feet for each successful attack they make.

Actually, I think I changed my mind about this one. These movements DO draw attacks of opportunity. So the bad guy can stumble back among his henchmen, which makes it dangerous for the good guy to pursue him. This would require that you allow the attacking character to decide not to follow their target.

"Curses! Foiled again!"

 

[RangerWickett]

Wait a few weeks and get Tournaments, Fairs, & Taverns. The revised print edition has a good page and a half devoted to duels and other fast paced games. I was a little surprised in writing it, but I ended up using the same rules to both to improve fencing bouts, and to represent team sports games.

What the rules mostly come down to (I'm at a computer lab and don't have my full text available) is that you can choose to 'mark' an opponent. You have better reaction time against your mark, so that if that person moves, you can move at the same time, or if they attack you, you can move back 5 ft. in reaction to get out of range of the attack. So what happens is that your opponent attacks, you back away to avoid getting hit, and then your opponent follows to try to get another hit in while you simultaneously keep moving backward. Then, when he ends his movement, it's your turn, you attack and he moves back and the back and forth cycle continues.

You can try to press your opponent into a corner so he can't back up any farther, and then if he attacks you, it's in your best interest not to back away, because that prevents him from backing away from your next attack. But as long as the fighters are being cautious, you'll weave back and forth all over the field.

The drawback is that while you've chosen a mark, you're considered flat-footed against all attacks from other sources. So it's great for duels, and useful for football players trying to keep someone else from getting the ball, but it's dangerous in a melee.

 

[clark411]

Perhaps fighting defensively could require someone to move away from an attacker 5ft and the attacker moving that same 5ft forward towards the defender as a no action after damage is assigned (unless unable due to flanking, spot occupied, etc). This adequately describes a passive fighting style that, while good for defending one's self, is inadequate for holding ground (as you're looking out for numero uno in the AC category).

Alternatively, granting a +1 dodge or circumstance bonus for declaring a similar move back (player moves back 5ft after damage is assigned, enemy may opt to move into player's original spot [ie-forward 5ft toward player character]) would not be terribly unreasonable nor overpowering. You'd find people doing this regularly- and it would almost become a routine that characters will feel safe with... which is great as you can then start some combats near perilous drops and hazards that make them feel confined and at a true tactical disadvantage as their foes may freely gain this bonus while they cannot.

 

[coyote6]

That sounds nice, RW.

OTOH, if you've got an average or worse Dex, and there are no sneak attack-capable foes around, there's not really any downside.

IMC, most of the PCs do have Dex bonuses (one advantage of GMing for generally overpowered characters, I guess ), but most fights don't involve folks with sneak attacks (aside from the odd assassin attack, of course).

 

[Zaruthustran]

My games tend to not stay in one place. The combatants move quite a bit, as you try to set up or get out of flanking situations, gain or get around cover, clear out of the way of a friend's area of effect spell, move to block a retreat, disengage to seek healing, or whatever.

So, if you want to add more combat movement to *your* game try setting up flanks, enforcing the "+1 for higher ground" rule, etc.

Or give foes with Spring Attack and other feats.

Or create a new combat action: "Drive Back". It works like a Bull Rush, except that you don't move into the defender's space and the opposed rolls are Attack rolls, not Strength checks. The loser can choose to retreat 5' (and the winner can pursue, potentially increasing this distance by 1 foot for evey point by which his attack beat the loser's) or stand his ground (and the winner gets +2 to hit him next round).

Okay, that wasn't like a Bull Rush at all. But you get the idea.

-z