Level Up (A5E) Curious about the differences in maneuvers known and degrees gained for different classes

I'm very curious about whether some of the differences in these variables are intentional design, or just the results of different designers working on different classes leading to some design inconsistencies. This is important, because if there are actual mechanical (or even conceptual) reasons for some of these unexpected differences, I want to know about them before I change anything. If they are actually just inconsistencies then I might house rule some more uniform progressions.

Let me show you the table so you can see exactly what I'm talking about.

Maneuversbyclass.png


As you can see, the Herald and Rogue use exactly the same table for both variables, and that's where clear matches end.

The Fighter of course has the most in both categories. The Marshal has the same degree availability as the Fighter, except they don't get them at Level 1.

The Berserker and Ranger have the exact same number of maneuvers known as each other, but their degree availability differs at precisely one level. That really makes it look like a mistake in one class or another (probably Berserker based on the overall look of the table).

On degree availability, the Adept is kind of between the Marshal and Ranger doing its own thing. And the Berserker is really weird in getting 2nd-degree maneuvers later than the Adept, but 4th-degree maneuvers sooner.

The Marshal knows the same number of maneuvers as the Berserker and Ranger, but the Adept does it's own thing.

Also, the numbers in bold magenta indicate levels where a class gains access to a new maneuver degree but does not gain access to any new maneuvers. However, those are all on levels where feats are gained, so for at least one of them you could pick up with a feat. But it happens every time for the Marshal, and there is only one feat. This makes me wonder if the rule about replacing maneuvers was supposed to be when you gain a level (like spontaneous casters) rather than when you gain a new maneuver. However, in that case, the rule would also have to be different about replacing it with a maneuver of the same level as the original, and instead allow them to be upgraded. Without that rather substantial change, the Marshal effectively has the same degree availability as the Ranger, with the option to use a feat to jump ahead at one of those levels.

So I'm not sure what to do here. If there were just that odd Berserker access to 4th-degree maneuvers at 12th level and 1 or 2 other things like it, it would look like there were just a couple mistakes that missed editing. But because of how much difference there is, even if there are some mistakes, there is obviously something else going on.

Just as a thought experiment, toying around with the numbers:
-If you remove all of the degree upgrades that aren't accompanied by an additional maneuver known, the Marshal, Berserker, and Ranger then use exactly the same progression on both charts.
-In context of the above matching classes, this puts Adept as the only really odd class. They would then get 2nd-degree maneuvers at the same level as the Fighter but otherwise use the same degree availability table as the Marshal, Berserker, and Ranger. But they would get less maneuvers known than the Marshal, Berserker, and Ranger's chart. But, it is worth pointing out that their degree availability does match up with their maneuvers known, so both are unchanged in this experiment.

Could any of the designers who worked on the maneuvers known and degree availability for these classes weigh in on the design philosophy? Did everyone do their own thing and an editor just made sure nothing looked completely bonkers afterwards? Was there detailed discussion amongst the designers where everyone was looking at this chart and deciding it was how it worked out the best? Are there particular reasons certain levels have numbers higher or lower than others based on specific class features in those classes? Is there any particular insight on the new degrees without new maneuvers known conundrum?

Thanks for any help understanding this. As much as I house-rule, I actually don't like doing it, and I want to make very sure that I'm not losing something important that I'm unaware of by doing so.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mike Myler

My best work ⬇️ tinyurl.com/mists-of-akuma-2024
This came up during the playtesting phase (link) but it's intentional. Access to combat maneuver degrees, how they can be swapped, and how they function with multiclassing all have a part to play. As the Narrator though you are welcome to change whatever rules you like!
 

MegaloRob

Explorer
I built the A5e classes into shard vtt. The players in my campaigns then have access to anything I built into the character builder.

There were limitations in this. Shard vtt is o5e oriented which works out great for most things. But of adding in the resources and maneuvers there wasn't something in place for this.

I ended up building the maneuvers as 1st-5th level spells with the spell school categories of the combat traditions.

Then when I built the classes I was able to use the 1/3 pact caster format for the classes. I am able to add spell slots at any level I wanted so I could reflect the exertion pool.

What I could not do was set what level the different degrees became available to the characters.

So by necessity I needed to change the degrees learned format.

Do what works out best for you and your group.
 

xiphumor

Legend
I'm very curious about whether some of the differences in these variables are intentional design, or just the results of different designers working on different classes leading to some design inconsistencies. This is important, because if there are actual mechanical (or even conceptual) reasons for some of these unexpected differences, I want to know about them before I change anything. If they are actually just inconsistencies then I might house rule some more uniform progressions.

Let me show you the table so you can see exactly what I'm talking about.

View attachment 154603

As you can see, the Herald and Rogue use exactly the same table for both variables, and that's where clear matches end.

The Fighter of course has the most in both categories. The Marshal has the same degree availability as the Fighter, except they don't get them at Level 1.

The Berserker and Ranger have the exact same number of maneuvers known as each other, but their degree availability differs at precisely one level. That really makes it look like a mistake in one class or another (probably Berserker based on the overall look of the table).

On degree availability, the Adept is kind of between the Marshal and Ranger doing its own thing. And the Berserker is really weird in getting 2nd-degree maneuvers later than the Adept, but 4th-degree maneuvers sooner.

The Marshal knows the same number of maneuvers as the Berserker and Ranger, but the Adept does it's own thing.

Also, the numbers in bold magenta indicate levels where a class gains access to a new maneuver degree but does not gain access to any new maneuvers. However, those are all on levels where feats are gained, so for at least one of them you could pick up with a feat. But it happens every time for the Marshal, and there is only one feat. This makes me wonder if the rule about replacing maneuvers was supposed to be when you gain a level (like spontaneous casters) rather than when you gain a new maneuver. However, in that case, the rule would also have to be different about replacing it with a maneuver of the same level as the original, and instead allow them to be upgraded. Without that rather substantial change, the Marshal effectively has the same degree availability as the Ranger, with the option to use a feat to jump ahead at one of those levels.

So I'm not sure what to do here. If there were just that odd Berserker access to 4th-degree maneuvers at 12th level and 1 or 2 other things like it, it would look like there were just a couple mistakes that missed editing. But because of how much difference there is, even if there are some mistakes, there is obviously something else going on.

Just as a thought experiment, toying around with the numbers:
-If you remove all of the degree upgrades that aren't accompanied by an additional maneuver known, the Marshal, Berserker, and Ranger then use exactly the same progression on both charts.
-In context of the above matching classes, this puts Adept as the only really odd class. They would then get 2nd-degree maneuvers at the same level as the Fighter but otherwise use the same degree availability table as the Marshal, Berserker, and Ranger. But they would get less maneuvers known than the Marshal, Berserker, and Ranger's chart. But, it is worth pointing out that their degree availability does match up with their maneuvers known, so both are unchanged in this experiment.

Could any of the designers who worked on the maneuvers known and degree availability for these classes weigh in on the design philosophy? Did everyone do their own thing and an editor just made sure nothing looked completely bonkers afterwards? Was there detailed discussion amongst the designers where everyone was looking at this chart and deciding it was how it worked out the best? Are there particular reasons certain levels have numbers higher or lower than others based on specific class features in those classes? Is there any particular insight on the new degrees without new maneuvers known conundrum?

Thanks for any help understanding this. As much as I house-rule, I actually don't like doing it, and I want to make very sure that I'm not losing something important that I'm unaware of by doing so.
I’ve tried to get answers regarding these weird inconsistencies before and never found any compelling answers. The lack of symmetry bothers me too.
 

I’ve tried to get answers regarding these weird inconsistencies before and never found any compelling answers. The lack of symmetry bothers me too.
Totally agree. I do believe there were balancing discussions and trade-offs, but the result of having a separate table for each class bothers me quite a bit.
One solution I like more is to create unified progression tables (which can be very useful to design new classes/archetypes as well), and then match the discrepancies with class/level specific features.
I'll post a detailed solution later today
 

Ok, yesterday I was more busy then expected, but I managed to create this pair of tables

These tables were generated starting from the ones posted by OP since it was easier for me, I didn't check they are exact but any inconsistency can easily be fixed. This could be an interesting project, btw.

General part
Basically I created 3 different progressions: full (fighters and marshals), half (adepts, berserkers and rangers) and 1/3rd (heralds and rogues).
As you can see in terms of max maneuver degree, half is identical to full but it just delays the increase of max degree by 1 level. 1/3rd instead is more inconsistent, because degree 2 and 4 maneuvers are delayed by 2 levels wrt half progression, but 3rd degree maneuvers are delayed by 4, so that when a ranger gets 4th degree maneuvers a herald gains access to 3rd degree maneuvers. This asymmetry irks me to the point where I'd rewrite the 1/3rd progression so that degree increase happens 2 levels after the half progression, but I'll need to check if this change negatively interacts with known maneuvers.

Regarding known maneuvers, we have also 3 progressions. The the neat ones are for full, where they get a new maneuver every odd level, and the 1/3rd, where we get a new maneuver every 3 levels. Half progression would be like full delayed by 1 level, except that we have a skip at level 12. This also irks me, so I'll think of a house rule to make it more consistent

Class Specific Part
Once the progressions are estabilished, there's just a few adjustments needed to match core LU rules.

Max maneuver degree
Fighters: at level 1 they get access to 1st level maneuvers
Adepts: at level 4 they get access to 2nd level maneuvers. At level 8 they get access to 3rh degree maneuvers
Berserkers: at level 12 they get access to 4th degree maneuvers

Known maneuvers

Fighters: they get A LOT of maneuvers. Not super happy with how complicated this entry of table is, so maybe it makes sense to just use the original table for them
Berserkers/Rangers: they gain one additional maneuver wrt the progression when the table specifies so. This "+1s" are not cumulative. Simply put, at every level you check their known maneuvers progression table and if at that level a "+1" is specified, they gain an additional maneuver, otherwise they don't. The effect of this is simply to speed up the progression. Edit: this could be simplified by just giving 1 extra known maneuver at level 5. They will know 1 more maneuver than RAW at level 20, but the solution is so much simpler that who cares..

Let me know what you think
 
Last edited:



Now that I check my tables again, it looks way simpler if the Marshall uses the full table for the degrees, but the half for the known maneuvers, and uses a few adjustments. Then the full progression for known could simply be the one of the fighter.
I'll post an update later on
 


Remove ads

Top