D&D 5E Legends & Lore Article 4/1/14 (Fighter Maneuvers)

[Balesir]

The movement doesn't look optional at first glance, but it might be buried in the general rules, I suppose.

The latest specific quote is in the Rules Compendium, pp.212, lines 6-8.

Things are what they are in the gameworld. Changing the nature of something on the fly to suit narrative concerns IS a problem with the system. It means engaging in illusionism BS instead of running an honest game.

If the GM specified, in advance, that this specific location was a bare, 20' square courtyard with no steps, no doorways, no braziers or torch sconces, no barrels or crates or other impedimentia in it whatsoever, this objection might stand. I doubt, however, that this was the case. It was simply a generic "20' square court", and as such it might reasonably have had all manner of detritus, street furniture and other obstacles in it. The GM simply, in effect, chose to make it bare and boring on the fly.

Either the mugger was a L1 brute or he wasn't. Assuming he was, then the system says 10 rounds of combat to take him down isn't uncommon. If you enjoy a long fight with a thug then the system is working as intended. If you don't, then once again there is a system problem.

If he was a L1 brute then the fight was always going to be long. That's the way the world works. If "muggers" are generally L1 brutes* then so be it. If "normal folk" are minions then they probably expect an easy win - so I would imagine they would run away from a real fight. Make him try that and the fighter might get some reasons to push him into a corner...

* As a complete aside, I would think most muggers would be better seen as Skirmishers than Brutes, but whatever.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Every single time you describe hit point loss you're taking into account the amount of hit points the target has remaining, the amount they started with, etc; and you're taking that into account on the fly to suit narrative concerns.

I am? I don't usually track hit point loss "on the fly", there is generally going to be a proximate cause in the game. Tracking damage as it occurs isn't a narrative concern.

Illusionist BS, part of D&D since the 1970s.

I won't argue that some haven't run their games like that since then. It is by no means universal then or now.

If the GM specified, in advance, that this specific location was a bare, 20' square courtyard with no steps, no doorways, no braziers or torch sconces, no barrels or crates or other impedimentia in it whatsoever, this objection might stand. I doubt, however, that this was the case. It was simply a generic "20' square court", and as such it might reasonably have had all manner of detritus, street furniture and other obstacles in it. The GM simply, in effect, chose to make it bare and boring on the fly.

I was talking about the nature/ stats of the mugger not so much the dungeon dressing of the alley.

 

[Derren]

These details bring the environment to life

Some people prefer the environment to be sensible instead of being a WWE arena where there is clutter everywhere which, against all common sense, is effective during combat just so that things look "cool".

If waste buckets would really be effective in combat they would be standard issue in an army. But guess what, they are not. Thats because knocking over random items is in nearly all cases less effective than hitting someone with an implement designed to kill.

 

[pming]

Hiya.

After reading up on it and all, once again, I'm going to have to go with Mr.Horse on this one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=8JNuqEz_GCQ

Of course, I'm *assuming* that all this "maneuver dice" stuff is OPTIONAL and will not be the base assumption in other suplements/adventures....but I'm not holding my breath.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Wulfgar76]

That can be prevented by giving such creatures a large enough bonus against it.
But apparently something like this is now considered "unfun".

There was a day, not too long ago, when the DM could say "no you can't trip the [insert 10-ton creature here], it's too big" and that was the end of it. The players agreed and were cool with it. The game rolled on. Everyone was happy.

What happened?

 

[Nagol]

There was a day, not too long ago, when the DM could say "no you can't trip the [insert 10-ton creature here], it's too big" and that was the end of it. The players agreed and were cool with it. The game rolled on. Everyone was happy.

What happened?

Movies.

 

[DEFCON 1]

There was a day, not too long ago, when the DM could say "no you can't trip the [insert 10-ton creature here], it's too big" and that was the end of it. The players agreed and were cool with it. The game rolled on. Everyone was happy.

What happened?

Players became completely arbitrary on which rules they would houserule without issue to make them work the way they wanted, and which ones they decided they HAD to play as written down in the book... all the while complaining that the rule was stupid.

"By the book it says I can trip an ooze? Well, I guess I'm tripping that ooze EVEN THOUGH IT'S COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS AND HOW COULD ANYONE LIKE THIS DAMN GAME AND IT'S STUPID STUPID STUPID!!!

Oh, and Eladrin don't exist in my game... they're just High Elves."

 

[ExploderWizard]

Oh, and Eladrin don't exist in my game... they're just High Elves."

Call'em what you want, long as they get to teleport all the time. (That's the important bit after all)

 

[I'm A Banana]

I'll argue that every system has that.

There's a continuum, right? You can even see it within 4e to a certain degree.

If you want to play a vampire in 4e, there's a bunch of different ways to do it, and though there might be some mechanical quibbles, all of them basically deliver that experience of playing a vampire (in slightly different ways).

If you want to run a fight with a dude in an alley in 4e that's quick and dangerous....eeeeeeeh, that becomes an iffier proposition. There's one way to kind of do it (plunk down a minion), but even that might not be satisfying for an array of reasons (it's not dangerous enough to be noteworthy, it requires you to be OK with minions, whatever).

Modularity and adaptability and customization help mitigate that "my way or the highway" vibe. I don't feel like 4e is telling me that I have to be a vampire like this. It's happy to oblige. It's not so happy to oblige me running that fight.

It's like 4e is saying, "Why are you having this one-on-one fight in an alley, anyway? This is a group game about adventures, this kind of thing is something you can narrate away or do a quick check about and call it good, it doesn't involve the whole party anyway. Stop having badwrongfun and make it the whole party with some thieves in the twisted, broken city streets with a well to push things down and some NPC's you can save and then we are talking, my friend! Or just roll a skill check and subtract a surge on a failure, because that's what's going to happen, anyway."

Which is fair enough, but also not what I necessarily want to do. I want to have this quick and dangerous fight with some punk in an alleyway and one PC. Why can't you just do that for me, man?

5e's embrace of modularity is looking a bit like 4e vampires all over the place. "You wanna have a quick fight with a rogue in an alleyway? GREAT, here's a way to do a quick check and subtract some HP, here's a way to run it quick and dirty with the combat rules, here's a way to make it an epic struggle with the whole gang and the whole party, how would YOU like to run it?"

...with maybe just a quick default answer for the newbies (run it with the combat rules).

Which won't put an end to the problems, but will at least accommodate new solutions well!

 

[Derren]

"By the book it says I can trip an ooze? Well, I guess I'm tripping that ooze EVEN THOUGH IT'S COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS AND HOW COULD ANYONE LIKE THIS DAMN GAME AND IT'S STUPID STUPID STUPID!!!

Thats what you get by making the system more gameist. In such a system the rules as written count and not common sense. After all, when so many rules are written in such a way that they violate common sense in favor of a tight gameist framework, why should you apply common sense now?