D&D 5E Roshambo-Style Theatre of the Mind Combat

[Mistwell]

It makes having some meat shields along pretty valuable

You can engage more than one creature at a time, and it's free. IE meat shields cannot help much to block this from happening. It makes no sense that a PC who stays out of melee combat range will routinely have disadvantage from something that realistically should not be anywhere near them most of the time.

 

[jaelis]

Well, I assume that the wizard and archer try to stay in the far zone.

 

[volanin]

Hard at work today, so I am not being able to give the topic the attention I wanted.
But let me clear some points that are easy to answer!

This seems very harsh on ranged and spell casting PCs. They will essentially always be at disadvantage, because all someone needs to do is engage them (which is basically free), and they cannot escape being engaged without essentially skipping a turn.

Maybe yes, maybe not.
The Engage, Dash, Intercept triad was created with the Rock, Paper, Scissors concept in mind. Strong against one, weak against the other. Melee combatants have the option to Intercept, so they can actively protect ranged attackers and spellcasters. It's becomes a problem (intentionally) if there are a lot of enemies, or if one enemy wins initiative (so it can't be Intercepted).

OK, so it work something like this?
- You can only melee attack a creature you are engaged with.
- You can engage with a creature in the Near zone as a free action.
- An intercept prevents you from engaging with a creature unless you dashed.
- You engage a creature you intercept
- When you take the disengage action, you disengage from all creatures engaging you
- When you dash you disengage from all creatures engaging you, but provoke OAs from each.
- Also when you dash, you can engage with creature(s) of your choice, and can't be intercepted
- Finally when you dash, you can move to the Far zone if you want.

Is there a limit to how many creatures you can engage with on your turn? So in your example the fighter could have (and basically should have) engaged with both goblins and the giant on his first turn?

If you engage with a creature, is it automatically engaged with you? I would think so. Perhaps that is the reason not to engage everyone you can. Similarly for disengaging?

I think these sound like good rules, just want to make sure I'm understanding.

You summed it up very well. That's exactly it!
There is a limit to how many creatures you can Engage: it's one at the end of your Movement/Dash, and one if you Intercept. Indeed I should make this clearer on the document. And yes, when someone Engages, both parts are Engaged. When you use the Disengage action, you Disengage from everybody (and they are also no longer Engaged with you).

Well, I assume that the wizard and archer try to stay in the far zone.

If it's a big melee with many enemies, staying in the melee combat zone is asking for death.
They indeed should stay in the Far range.

 

[jaelis]

There is a limit to how many creatures you can Engage: it's one at the end of your Movement/Dash, and one if you Intercept.

That is a significant restriction for a character with many attacks. I am troubled by it. What if you could engage a new creature any time your attack drops an opponent?

 

[Mistwell]

Hard at work today, so I am not being able to give the topic the attention I wanted.
But let me clear some points that are easy to answer!




Maybe yes, maybe not.
The Engage, Dash, Intercept triad was created with the Rock, Paper, Scissors concept in mind. Strong against one, weak against the other. Melee combatants have the option to Intercept, so they can actively protect ranged attackers and spellcasters. It's becomes a problem (intentionally) if there are a lot of enemies, or if one enemy wins initiative (so it can't be Intercepted).

Maybe I don't understand how this works. So let's use an example of a solo creature - eliminate the horde issue you raised. We can use am Owlbear.

So party enters the cave of the Owlbear. Melee type engages the Owlbear. Owlbear tries to engage the wizard (he can do this, at no penalty, for free, even though he's already been engaged by the melee type). Melee type tries to intercept using their reaction...but they're already engaged with the Owlbear. You cannot engage the same foe again. So...now what?

 

[jaelis]

So party enters the cave of the Owlbear. Melee type engages the Owlbear. Owlbear tries to engage the wizard (he can do this, at no penalty, for free, even though he's already been engaged by the melee type). Melee type tries to intercept using their reaction...but they're already engaged with the Owlbear. You cannot engage the same foe again. So...now what?

If the cave is a 20x20 foot room, then indeed, there is no way to avoid melee with the owlbear without leaving the room. That is true in the normal rules as well, no?

If the room is 40x40, then it is still very difficult in the normal rules to stay out of melee. You can of course move away from the bear on your turn to avoid disadvantage, but you will usually take an OA for it. Perhaps the ToM rules here could be modified to say that you can avoid the disavantage penalty at the cost of triggering an OA? I think though that most characters won't like that option.

In a 60x60 room, you have a far zone and the wizard should be OK.

But also, I think that you can intercept even when you are engaged already. I don't see a reason to disallow it.

 

[Lidgar]

You could also introduce a "guard" as a bonus action. Requires the character taking the bonus action to engage with an ally. That character then gets to automatically intercept any hostile creature trying to engage the ally as a reaction, thereby keeping the enemy from engaging the ally. Very traditional meat shield.

 

[Mistwell]

If the cave is a 20x20 foot room, then indeed, there is no way to avoid melee with the owlbear without leaving the room. That is true in the normal rules as well, no?

The normal rules don't allow you to engage two people, with one person next to you and another person up to 30' away from you, simultaneously. You'd have to make a choice between the two in the normal rules. In these rules the melee types always have their cake and eat it too. The ranged types virtually never can maneuver in a way that allows them to benefit from being at range. Colanin said it was an issue with hordes but as I just demonstrated, it's an issue with even a solo creature. There are zero scenarios I can think of where the ranged types won't almost always be at disadvantage. I assume that's not the intended result.

But also, I think that you can intercept even when you are engaged already. I don't see a reason to disallow it.

You can engage more than one person at a time, which is what causes the issue. You're already engaged with that combatant. Why couldn't they engage the wizard as well? It's not like you can double engage them.

 

[jaelis]

There are zero scenarios I can think of where the ranged types won't almost always be at disadvantage. I assume that's not the intended result.

I guess I don't understand your point here. In a large space, ranged types can take advantage of their range, while in a small space they cannot. That aligns pretty well with my experience in the normal rules. The details are different, here the fighter can outright stop the owlbear from attacking the wizard, while in the normal rules he would probably just get an OA. But in a small space, how would you keep the owlbear away?

You can engage more than one person at a time, which is what causes the issue. You're already engaged with that combatant. Why couldn't they engage the wizard as well? It's not like you can double engage them.

You can't double engage them, but you can still stop them from engaging with a new creature. So if the owlbear tries to attack the wizard, you can simply prevent it with your intercept (or force the owlbear to dash and eat the OA like normal).

I think it is kind of important that you can intercept a creature you are engaged with, and I guess you disagree about that?

 

[volanin]

So party enters the cave of the Owlbear. Melee type engages the Owlbear. Owlbear tries to engage the wizard (he can do this, at no penalty, for free, even though he's already been engaged by the melee type). Melee type tries to intercept using their reaction...but they're already engaged with the Owlbear. You cannot engage the same foe again. So...now what?

You can't double engage them, but you can still stop them from engaging with a new creature. So if the owlbear tries to attack the wizard, you can simply prevent it with your intercept (or force the owlbear to dash and eat the OA like normal).

That's the intention.
If better wording is necessary:
"When you Intercept, you prevent the enemy from Engaging an ally. If you weren't previously Engaged with this enemy, you are now Engaged with it."