Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Roshambo-Style Theatre of the Mind Combat
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="volanin" data-source="post: 7260276" data-attributes="member: 69817"><p>I agree with you. I also have to write an "extended actual play" example to make it more comprehensible. This will probably come soon, but right now one of my goals was to keep this PDF limited to 2 pages, to make it a short read, and also to avoid feature-creep that leads to bloat.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No sweat, that's exactly the kind of feedback that improves these rules, be they harsh or not!</p><p></p><p>About the commonality of Opportunity Attacks... well... maybe I didn't make it clear enough, but the intention is that if you can engage a creature and beat it, you are still free to move and engage another one. If you can kill creatures with one attack, and have enough extra attacks, you can basically wipe the battlefield without taking a single Opportunity Attack.</p><p></p><p>1. In your example, you would be able to engage one orc and beat it, then engage the second orc and beat it, then engage the lever and pull it. All in the same round, if you can kill the orcs fast enough.</p><p></p><p>2. Or alternatively: you move directly to the lever in order to engage it, but is intercepted by an orc. You know that you could attempt to engage the lever anyway and take an OA, or you could use your Action to engage the lever cleanly... but you're probably going to the intercepted by the second orc whichever option you choose. So you decide to simply attack. On the orcs turn, one is already engaged and attacks; the other engages you and also attacks. The next round, you use your Action to engage the lever and activate it (the orcs are engaged and can't intercept any longer). You're now engaged with both orcs and the lever.</p><p></p><p>3. Or even: you see two orcs protecting a lever, they are ready to interrupt you. You use your Action to Dash into the lever, engage and activate it. (The unengaged orcs though, taking advantage of your desperation to use the lever, move and engage the cleric that stayed behind... and you can't intercept them. It's a trade off with stakes that change accordingly to the situation at hand).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Indeed, racial speed bonuses are gone, and this is by design. Racial bonuses to speed are usually "tiny", and this implementation of the rules make the bonuses to speed much more considerable and perceptible (Dash becomes a Bonus Action). Making concessions in the rules to include these "tiny" differences was not worth it (added complexity for little gain) and that's why they are ignored. And since they are ignored, they don't stack with Class Abilities, as in your Wood Elf Monk example.</p><p></p><p>Something else is also implied, but important: Class Abilities don't stack if you multiclass. So your Wood Elf Monk/Barbarian/Rogue only ever gets one Dash as a Bonus Action... which a Haste Spell or Potion of Speed can improve to "Dash once per turn as part of your movement" until the effect ends.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That was also my fear, that it would be OP. But you must remember that you only get the "free attack" if a creature engages you, and if you're unengaged. During playtest, two things happened: monsters would avoid long pointy things, and you don't get a "free attack" if YOU engage the creature... or they would engage anyway, the player would get the "free attack", and that was it... he would stay engaged until the end of the combat with the current creature, or with additional creatures that engaged him while he was already engaged.</p><p></p><p>So I stopped worrying and added the rule.</p><p></p><p>Of course, any DM is free to limit the rule to monsters only, or remove it completely.</p><p>If you ever playtest this as well, I'd honestly really like your feedback.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yep, I agree.</p><p></p><p>In practice, a radius around the caster would work exactly as the Burning Hands example: The spell range is 0 feet (Self) so it only affects Near creatures. Supposing a radius of 20 feet (circle), you check the table and see that it can affect up to 4 creatures (radius ÷ 5). So you choose 4 Near creatures at will and blast away.</p><p></p><p>Actually, this method is described in the DMG 249.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'd rule that the ranger can attack all engaged enemies, and it averages to the same.</p><p>In grid combat, if enemies are close together, you can get adjacent to them easily and unleash the attacks... but if they are far apart, you're toast. In these rules, it takes more effort to engage many enemies (unless they engage you), but you can choose to actively use your Action to force engagement, independent of the enemy position (as long as it's Near). Both systems have their pros and cons.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="volanin, post: 7260276, member: 69817"] I agree with you. I also have to write an "extended actual play" example to make it more comprehensible. This will probably come soon, but right now one of my goals was to keep this PDF limited to 2 pages, to make it a short read, and also to avoid feature-creep that leads to bloat. No sweat, that's exactly the kind of feedback that improves these rules, be they harsh or not! About the commonality of Opportunity Attacks... well... maybe I didn't make it clear enough, but the intention is that if you can engage a creature and beat it, you are still free to move and engage another one. If you can kill creatures with one attack, and have enough extra attacks, you can basically wipe the battlefield without taking a single Opportunity Attack. 1. In your example, you would be able to engage one orc and beat it, then engage the second orc and beat it, then engage the lever and pull it. All in the same round, if you can kill the orcs fast enough. 2. Or alternatively: you move directly to the lever in order to engage it, but is intercepted by an orc. You know that you could attempt to engage the lever anyway and take an OA, or you could use your Action to engage the lever cleanly... but you're probably going to the intercepted by the second orc whichever option you choose. So you decide to simply attack. On the orcs turn, one is already engaged and attacks; the other engages you and also attacks. The next round, you use your Action to engage the lever and activate it (the orcs are engaged and can't intercept any longer). You're now engaged with both orcs and the lever. 3. Or even: you see two orcs protecting a lever, they are ready to interrupt you. You use your Action to Dash into the lever, engage and activate it. (The unengaged orcs though, taking advantage of your desperation to use the lever, move and engage the cleric that stayed behind... and you can't intercept them. It's a trade off with stakes that change accordingly to the situation at hand). Indeed, racial speed bonuses are gone, and this is by design. Racial bonuses to speed are usually "tiny", and this implementation of the rules make the bonuses to speed much more considerable and perceptible (Dash becomes a Bonus Action). Making concessions in the rules to include these "tiny" differences was not worth it (added complexity for little gain) and that's why they are ignored. And since they are ignored, they don't stack with Class Abilities, as in your Wood Elf Monk example. Something else is also implied, but important: Class Abilities don't stack if you multiclass. So your Wood Elf Monk/Barbarian/Rogue only ever gets one Dash as a Bonus Action... which a Haste Spell or Potion of Speed can improve to "Dash once per turn as part of your movement" until the effect ends. That was also my fear, that it would be OP. But you must remember that you only get the "free attack" if a creature engages you, and if you're unengaged. During playtest, two things happened: monsters would avoid long pointy things, and you don't get a "free attack" if YOU engage the creature... or they would engage anyway, the player would get the "free attack", and that was it... he would stay engaged until the end of the combat with the current creature, or with additional creatures that engaged him while he was already engaged. So I stopped worrying and added the rule. Of course, any DM is free to limit the rule to monsters only, or remove it completely. If you ever playtest this as well, I'd honestly really like your feedback. Yep, I agree. In practice, a radius around the caster would work exactly as the Burning Hands example: The spell range is 0 feet (Self) so it only affects Near creatures. Supposing a radius of 20 feet (circle), you check the table and see that it can affect up to 4 creatures (radius ÷ 5). So you choose 4 Near creatures at will and blast away. Actually, this method is described in the DMG 249. I'd rule that the ranger can attack all engaged enemies, and it averages to the same. In grid combat, if enemies are close together, you can get adjacent to them easily and unleash the attacks... but if they are far apart, you're toast. In these rules, it takes more effort to engage many enemies (unless they engage you), but you can choose to actively use your Action to force engagement, independent of the enemy position (as long as it's Near). Both systems have their pros and cons. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Roshambo-Style Theatre of the Mind Combat
Top