Combining Combat Challenge and Combat Superiority

[Keenberg]

Naszir I just read your latest update in which you have
1: Made combat challenge an OA instead of immediate
2: Granted it Wis to hit
3: Granted movement stopping on a hit
3: Allowed the fighter to use it on any adjacent target, regardless of mark

Just talking from my fighter experience here, this is heavily overpowered. Fighters are already one of the best classes in the game. One of the only things stopping them from shutting down the entire enemy team is that combat challenge attacks are limited to once a round. Switching to an OA removes this limitation and powerfully buffs the fighter class. Adding wisdom mods to all these attacks (which fighters make very often) is another powerful buff. Allowing the fighter to do this without marking is just another minor buff on top of that, making an already powerful ability more versatile. Finally the movement stopping with combat challenge attacks now makes it impossible for enemies to escape from you, since even shifting movement is now cancelled. That's 4 significant buffs with no real drawbacks. Its also worth noting that when an adjacent enemy tries to escape or move you get to attack them, so they become marked for free.

I don't know what problem with the system you're trying to address here. Consider the warde. Their niche is being able to shut down multiple enemies, as they can mark (-2 to hit) every adjacent enemy every turn. Your fighter variant gets to completely shut down (free attack, denied movement, -2 to hit) every adjacent enemy every turn. This defender mechanic is strictly better than the warden's.

With my fighter I was only able to shut down large portions of the enemy team occasionally (using encounter powers like 'get over here') and even then could only use combat challenge on one marked enemy. It was still pretty darned effective.

I think the reason that OA and combat challenge are kept separate is that fighters can make as many OAs in a turn as they want, but punishing an enemy for shifting or ignoring a mark is very powerful, so limited to once a turn. There is a lot of strategy to the way a fighter and a monster decide what to do with a turn. The fighter needs to decide which enemy (or enemies) to mark and the monsters need to decide whether to attack the fighter or ignore his marks. I think the balance on the current system is fine.

This is exactly what I was trying to say in my first post, though I lacked a personal example. Thank you for putting it all so poignantly.

Naszir, why exactly is it that you "don't like the 'marking' mechanic that much?" I don't think we ever addressed this issue, which is the real cause of this whole thread. If we can address that, perhaps there will be no need for more rules. In my experience, most new rules create confusion when players are used to the old ones. This complicates the game and slows it down. The only reason I would suggest new rules is if I believe they would help balance the game, and as Erik has demonstrated, your suggestion is taking the fighter's abilities far out of balance. Why would anyone want to be a warden, or a paladin for that matter when they could be a broken fighter?

"Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily." -William of Ockham

 

[Naszir]

This is exactly what I was trying to say in my first post, though I lacked a personal example. Thank you for putting it all so poignantly.

Naszir, why exactly is it that you "don't like the 'marking' mechanic that much?" I don't think we ever addressed this issue, which is the real cause of this whole thread. If we can address that, perhaps there will be no need for more rules. In my experience, most new rules create confusion when players are used to the old ones. This complicates the game and slows it down. The only reason I would suggest new rules is if I believe they would help balance the game, and as Erik has demonstrated, your suggestion is taking the fighter's abilities far out of balance. Why would anyone want to be a warden, or a paladin for that matter when they could be a broken fighter?

"Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily." -William of Ockham

It stems mainly from having to track the mark. Is this enemy marked, did the fighter forget to mark him but meant too, did the mark end etc. I realize that marking is not THAT complicated but it did seem to me it could still be simplified.

My hope was to simplify the fighter feature and instead create more of a fighter melee zone. Anyone in that zone would have to pay attention to the fighter because that's where the fighter lives and where he is at his best. He has his head on a swivel and he knows when the enemy has slipped up.

I ramped up Combat Prowess because Nifft thought it was nerfing the fighter. Maybe there is no way to actually simplify the fighter features but I was giving it a shot. It's nice to have a sounding board to see if I might be making a mistake.

 

[Keenberg]

It stems mainly from having to track the mark. Is this enemy marked, did the fighter forget to mark him but meant too, did the mark end etc. I realize that marking is not THAT complicated but it did seem to me it could still be simplified.

My hope was to simplify the fighter feature and instead create more of a fighter melee zone. Anyone in that zone would have to pay attention to the fighter because that's where the fighter lives and where he is at his best. He has his head on a swivel and he knows when the enemy has slipped up.

I ramped up Combat Prowess because Nifft thought it was nerfing the fighter. Maybe there is no way to actually simplify the fighter features but I was giving it a shot. It's nice to have a sounding board to see if I might be making a mistake.

To me it sounds a bit like treating a symptom instead of the cause. If there is a problem with tracking conditions, you can always use condition markers.There are a lot of good ideas in threads here if you do a little digging. I'd post links but I don't have much time right now.

 

[Naszir]

For the quirkiness of a fighter marking someone let's take a look at an example:

A fighter uses Sweeping Blow. Let's say he's now able to mark three combatants with Combat Challenge. During the enemy combatants turn all three decided to attack someone else other than the fighter. All three take -2 to their attacks but only one suffers an immediate interrupt melee basic attack that the fighter gets to use and he still has to hope he successfully hits (btw, if the fighter hits with the immediate interrupt does he interrupt the enemies attack?)

After they attack all the enemies decide to shift away from the fighter. With this case the fighter does not get to take any opportunity attacks because they all shifted and combat challenge cannot be used because it was already used.

Now all the enemies are still marked even though they are out of the fighters melee range. If the enemies for some reason get an opportunity attack against one of the fighters allies why is it still suffering a -2 to its attack?

Sorry that I'm all over the place with this but I just tend to ask things as they come up.

 

[Naszir]

Naszir I just read your latest update in which you have
1: Made combat challenge an OA instead of immediate
2: Granted it Wis to hit
3: Granted movement stopping on a hit
3: Allowed the fighter to use it on any adjacent target, regardless of mark

Just talking from my fighter experience here, this is heavily overpowered. Fighters are already one of the best classes in the game. One of the only things stopping them from shutting down the entire enemy team is that combat challenge attacks are limited to once a round. Switching to an OA removes this limitation and powerfully buffs the fighter class. Adding wisdom mods to all these attacks (which fighters make very often) is another powerful buff. Allowing the fighter to do this without marking is just another minor buff on top of that, making an already powerful ability more versatile.

Good points. I do not want to overpower the fighter.

However, I would like to note the fighter already gains Wis bonus to all his opportunity attacks because of Combat Superiority.

The thing I was trying to do is combine Combat Challenge and Combat Superiority. I thought it could be done. I might be wrong.

Finally the movement stopping with combat challenge attacks now makes it impossible for enemies to escape from you, since even shifting movement is now cancelled.

Nothing is cancelled. You only get to make one oppurtunity attack per combatant turn. If the combatant tries to move and if the fighter successfully hits, then the combatant can just decide to take another move and not be impeded by the fighter.

I think the reason that OA and combat challenge are kept separate is that fighters can make as many OAs in a turn as they want, but punishing an enemy for shifting or ignoring a mark is very powerful, so limited to once a turn. There is a lot of strategy to the way a fighter and a monster decide what to do with a turn. The fighter needs to decide which enemy (or enemies) to mark and the monsters need to decide whether to attack the fighter or ignore his marks. I think the balance on the current system is fine.

Any class can make as many OAs in a turn as they want. The wisdom bonus granted by Combat Superiority is what differentiates fighters. An enemy that ignores a mark is not automatically punished. The fighter still has to be able to hit.

 

[Saeviomagy]

A fighter uses Sweeping Blow. Let's say he's now able to mark three combatants with Combat Challenge. During the enemy combatants turn all three decided to attack someone else other than the fighter. All three take -2 to their attacks but only one suffers an immediate interrupt melee basic attack that the fighter gets to use and he still has to hope he successfully hits (btw, if the fighter hits with the immediate interrupt does he interrupt the enemies attack?)

When a foe ignores the fighters mark, the fighter does relatively high-end striker-level damage (if he wasn't already...) for that round. That's a pretty hefty trade-off for getting to attack someone else at -2.

The defender role does not state "automatically locks down every foe he moves adjacent to". Arguing along your lines, and with the level of power that you're shooting for, striker bonus damage should take the form of an automatic kill, and any minion entering a battlefield containing a controller should simply die, while anything else is continuously dazed.

I don't think that game would be anywhere near as fun as the current game, where a player has to put some thought into tactics beyond selecting his or her character class.

 

[Naszir]

When a foe ignores the fighters mark, the fighter does relatively high-end striker-level damage (if he wasn't already...) for that round. That's a pretty hefty trade-off for getting to attack someone else at -2.

The defender role does not state "automatically locks down every foe he moves adjacent to". Arguing along your lines, and with the level of power that you're shooting for, striker bonus damage should take the form of an automatic kill, and any minion entering a battlefield containing a controller should simply die, while anything else is continuously dazed.

I don't think that game would be anywhere near as fun as the current game, where a player has to put some thought into tactics beyond selecting his or her character class.

If a foe ignores a fighters mark the foe is only going to take basic melee attack damage (if the fighter hits). How is that high-end striker level damage?

And in the case I put down only one of the three foes takes on the basic melee attack damage if the fighter manages to connect.

 

[eriktheguy]

I can see where you're going with the marking issue. Fighter's marks can start to get numerous as combat goes on.
At the least, most combats don't involve more than 5 or 6 real targets. Minions can increase this number, but they tend to die fast anyways. At the most my fighter has had 5 marks on the board at once. That can be tough to track...

What if they fighter forgets to mark when he attacks? I've never dealt with that issue. At my games we have always just assumed that fighters mark with every attack without having to declare it.

What if you can't remember whether a specific foe was marked? Make a decision and move on. Combat is fraught with quick, stupid decisions. Sometimes your opponent leaves an opening and you don't take advantage, sometimes an opportunity arises and you land a lucky blow. If 7 minions are scattered everywhere, and the fighter can't remember which ones were marked, you could just say 'that one' or simply 'you lost track'.

Try to keep the game flowing rather than worrying about being completely accurate. This is why I don't allow rules books at the table during combat.

Remind your fighters that they are in charge of tracking their own marks. You can handle 10 creatures at a time, so they can deal with it. If they can't handle it make the calls yourself (because they probably won't be able to handle a house rule either). If they aren't trustworthy, then maybe they need to find a new table.

 

[Nifft]

I can see where you're going with the marking issue. Fighter's marks can start to get numerous as combat goes on.

A Fighter's mark should only last 1 round.

He'll have only a few critters marked at any one time, and the number he has marked depends only on his previous round's actions.

They don't accumulate.

Cheers, -- N

 

[eriktheguy]

Oh right, my mistake. Yeah those marks shouldn't be tough to track.