D&D 4E The Intelligent Fighter , Thibault's Circle / La Destreza.

Garthanos · Jun 27, 2019

[MENTION=996]Tony Vargas[/MENTION] normally whatever fighter I am building I want to think of how they deal with 2 enemies in basic attacks. (cleave,dual strike, slash and pommel)

Cleave is good for a two handed weapon use... Dual strike is better for pretty much everything else but if you arent building up your off hand weapon at low levels where at wills are mostly used a Brawler might take slash and pommel but cleave still works.

Now realistic fencing is often seen as not likely to deal well with the situation of being swamped by minions but on the other hand being able to do just that is common of heroic fencing types like zorro.

The above use weapons as limits (not always) So my thought is I might not need anything more

But I have an idea called "using one against the other." which might be closer to attack one and he basic attacks his ally.

Garthanos · Jun 27, 2019

Garthanos said:
But I have an idea called "using one against the other." which might be closer to attack one and he basic attacks his ally.

I think the only question is should it be written specifying both enemies are marked by this trick.

Garthanos · Jun 27, 2019

jgsugden said:
* Tactical Strikes: Add your Int Bonus to Damage Up to (Int) number of times per SR.

That comes out very similar to the at-will one I just designed Surgical Strike. Surgical strike is at-will and penalizes to hit and focuses on the 1 handed weapon use. This is more limited than other usage cases I am tempted to allow an extra shift prior to the attack this emphasizes how superior positioning awareness is part of the idea and makes up for the limit of being 1 handed only (the power it was patterned after had no such limit).

Garthanos · Jun 28, 2019

Garthanos said:
I think the only question is should it be written specifying both enemies are marked by this trick.

Using One Against the Other or Diverting Strike is an example of a power which I would like Fighters / Warlords and Rogues to share. Buy how?

Nuances could be in there
Maybe for a fighter both are marked ... perhaps others Intelligence/Charisma/Wisdom adds to damage?

Perhaps a variant or feat enhancement can move the enemy so they are adjacent? - Dual Strike and Twin Strike have feat support.

Tony Vargas · Jun 28, 2019

Garthanos said:
Using One Against the Other or Diverting Strike is an example of a power which I would like Fighters / Warlords and Rogues to share. Buy how?

For the Fighter & Rogue, extend the class feature: The Fighter marks both targets; the can choose which one takes his SA damage. For the Warlord? Maybe a bonus to allies to hit both targets, or they provoke OAs from allies if they shift...? For a hypothetical martial controller: they both lose the ability to make OAs, or they can't count eachother as allies (until both save)…?

Garthanos · Jun 28, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
For the Fighter & Rogue, extend the class feature: The Fighter marks both targets; the can choose which one takes his SA damage. For the Warlord? Maybe a bonus to allies to hit both targets, or they provoke OAs from allies if they shift...? For a hypothetical martial controller: they both lose the ability to make OAs, or they can't count eachother as allies (until both save)…?

Sweet.

Well I am definitely making Martial Controller (Warlord) - AND I am inclined to include any fully done martial controllers

"they can't count each other as allies (until both save)" = that is fun but how often would it come up?

Tony Vargas · Jun 29, 2019

Garthanos said:
"they can't count each other as allies (until both save)" = that is fun but how often would it come up?

There's a few general combat rules that differentiate between ally and enemy (which it turns out, is pretty close to just "not-ally," including not counting as your own ally, which is funny, but I digress), for instance, they lose their cover exemption when shooting past eachother, which I doubt comes up much.

But, some creatures do gain benefits, sometimes pretty significant ones, from having allies around, and if one is a leader-secondary creature, that could mess it up.

Garthanos · Jun 29, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
There's a few general combat rules that differentiate between ally and enemy (which it turns out, is pretty close to just "not-ally," including not counting as your own ally, which is funny, but I digress), for instance, they lose their cover exemption when shooting past eachother, which I doubt comes up much.

But, some creatures do gain benefits, sometimes pretty significant ones, from having allies around, and if one is a leader-secondary creature, that could mess it up.

Sounds pretty corner case I am thinking it could be added along with the lose opportunity attacks and it will never get noticed.

Tony Vargas · Jun 29, 2019

Garthanos said:
Sounds pretty corner case I am thinking it could be added along with the lose opportunity attacks and it will never get noticed.

I missed what the usage on the original idea was. You don't want encounters to be too 'corner case,' for instance. Since at at-will is always available, and you have an alternate, it can sometimes have a rider that only occasionally comes up, if it's otherwise OK. Dailies can be a tad specialized.
JMHO.

Garthanos · Jun 29, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
I missed what the usage on the original idea was. You don't want encounters to be too 'corner case,' for instance. Since at at-will is always available, and you have an alternate, it can sometimes have a rider that only occasionally comes up, if it's otherwise OK. Dailies can be a tad specialized.
JMHO.

This particular is an at-will idea because of its competitors and I agree but it seems like marking is a lot less corner case