D&D 5E Telegraphing Attacks

Xeviat · Jul 7, 2019

Hi everyone.

I've been working on a lot of homebrew things lately, looking at balance and trying to bring in some 3E and 4E concepts to round things out, add options, and address perceived imbalances. While I've been working on those, I've been toying with more complex ideas that I don't think would really work in 5E D&D, but I'd like to discuss a little anyway.

The idea I'd like to go over here grew out of me thinking about the Controller Role in 4E, but it quickly melded with some thoughts I had on making more compelling set piece/boss encounters.

How do you think telegraphed attacks would work out? Spells that don't fire off until the start of your next turn (meaning they could be disrupted). Big wind up attacks like an ogre bringing a tree trunk high up, a spellcaster chanting a spell, or a dragon inhaling. Characters and enemies would have the opportunity to try to disrupt the oncoming action, or more pragmatically to defend against the action. You could get out of the area of the oncoming attack, take cover, or go all out on offense to try to prevent the attack.

If done well, I think it could lead to making combat more dynamic. What do you think?

Teulisch · Jul 7, 2019

some systems already do this- the slowest initiative declares their action first, and the fastest last. then actions try to resolve. I dont think it would work very well for D&D however, as a slow fighter would see his declared target run away too often, and make things less heroic. it would also either screw the slowest initiative over for the combat, or need an initiative roll every round.

in the DMG, there is a speed mechanic in place for actions changing initiative. look at the dmg, pages 270 and 271. light or finess is faster, higher level spells are slower. creature size means the small heroes are faster, and larger creatures are slower.

Satyrn · Jul 7, 2019

It's an excellent idea.

You can also have spells that activate immediately (so they can't be disrupted) but they don't have any negative effects until a round or two pass. Like, a spell called Satyrn's Gathering Storm could immediately fill a 20 foot radius with a roiling wind and light fog that has no effect at first. Then 2 rounds later, BOOM! Thunder and lightning kills everyone stupid enough to stay in the area.

Or something a little less fatal, like 12d6 damage.

5ekyu · Jul 7, 2019

"If done well, I think it could lead to making combat more dynamic. What do you think?"

Well, as dynamic is in the eye of the beholder, my bet is you are right for some and not for others. Usually changes just swap the old "here is how to..." with a new one.

This is the kind of thing practically impossible to add after-markrt and have work. Systems need to be built around and balanced around the basic nature of play. So many things are scaled based on "what they do" that making a fundamental change to the mechanics changes a lot.

So, if a lot of the vote design had been built around slow vs quick options - with a lot more detailed sequencing of sctions - this would be part of that and do fine.

But, a lot of things go into overdrive if you just add this.

Premise - the slow choices thst hit next turn and allow interruption on other folk's turns have to be better than similar quick options thst happens now. Otherwise, the slow options wont be used.

Given that premise, the adding in a variety of slow options adds value to all the "deny response" and "interrupt" options.

Hold Person or Hypnotic Pattern now begs for slow attacks. So foes grapple. Meanwhile, sight blockers like wall if fog or silent image get big, as does sanctuary.

Almost certainly instead of a variety of options you wind up with "get the combos in" as a primary goal, leading to less variety, not more.

DEFCON 1 · Jul 7, 2019

I suspect before you telegraph the attacks, you'll need to telegraph the idea that these attacks can be interruptable in the first place. Otherwise, if they see an ogre wind up a tree-trunk to swing it but not actually follow through in the same round, they'll probably just assume it's an "every other round" attack and just make two rounds of attacks themselves in the meantime... not that they can actually use their actions to disrupt the swing or dodge out of the way.

Heck, even if they do know they can interrupt or dodge telepgraphed attacks... they'll still probably just use their actions to attack twice. Because two offensive maneuvers are usually more effective in the long run than one offensive and one defensive one.

Satyrn · Jul 7, 2019

DEFCON 1 said:
. . . if they see an ogre wind up a tree-trunk to swing it but not actually follow through in the same round, they'll probably just assume it's an "every other round" attack . . .

Oh, that reminds me of the other suggestion I had, @Xeviat. In this case, you could have "winding up a tree-trunk to swing" be a bonus action that the ogre takes at the end of his turn. This would let the act of take a normal weaker attack on round 1 and begin his wind up.

On round 2, he can compete his devastation blow . . . or if his wind up is interrupted, make a normal weaker attack. Then, either way, he can begin another wind up attack.

In this way, the ogre could still get to attack every round - but do a lot more damage of he's ignored. Getting the balance right between the heavy hit and the weak one would give the players an interesting choice whether they want to risk the heavy hit, or take the time to interrupt him.

Edit: I should add, I think interrupting the wind up would have to be pretty near automatically successful to get the players to bother. As DEFCON said, offensive actions are far more tempting for players than defensive ones. If the defense isn't real likely to work, I don't tend to bother with them.

Krachek · Jul 7, 2019

If I consider the standard player behavior, telegraphed attack will be interrupted most of the time.
To compensate this you will need to give those attacks devastating effect, that players will complaint about.
maybe a not so good idea.

TwoSix · Jul 7, 2019

.. / - .... .. -. -.- / .. - / .-- --- ..- .-.. -.. / .-- --- .-. -.- / ..-. .. -. .

Xeviat · Jul 7, 2019

The idea isn't to make something every other round, though that could be part of such a system with more work. The idea is that certain attacks won't go off until the start of the creature's next turn, but they still get actions on their turn.

It would be a little different than the variant initiatives, but not entirely so. I've done some thinking on the "declare action lowest initiative score to highest, roll initiative, then perform actions". You're definitely right, that slow melee characters would have a very tough time, but movement could still allow that to be less of an issue.

Another thing I've been thinking about is having active defenses. When someone attacks you, you declare your reaction. Simple things would be like Dodge, block, party, but reaction spells or special actions could come in here too. If you are unaware of an attack, you wouldn't be able to react to it, and multiple reactions would come at a penalty (which would bake in a big penalty for getting ganged up on).

But you're right, big changes like this would require a system built for the ground up around them.

Garthanos · Jul 7, 2019

Xeviat said:
How do you think telegraphed attacks would work out? Spells that don't fire off until the start of your next turn (meaning they could be disrupted). Big wind up attacks like an ogre bringing a tree trunk high up, a spellcaster chanting a spell, or a dragon inhaling. Characters and enemies would have the opportunity to try to disrupt the oncoming action, or more pragmatically to defend against the action. You could get out of the area of the oncoming attack, take cover, or go all out on offense to try to prevent the attack.

If done well, I think it could lead to making combat more dynamic. What do you think?

Reminds a bit of the difference between the striker and the Defender .... the 4e fighter has a form of telegraphed attack that says if you do not pay attention to me thing I will be dishing out even more damage in extra attacks but if you engage with me of course that is much more under control but my allies are safe to tear you up. A little sharper form of this could be like having an extra attack against a target you are scanning but you always use up in defense if they attack you... when they do not they regret it. The striker does not provide the opportunity to be interrupted in a sense. (this defender model doesn't care who they attack just whether they attack you). The extra attack might be seen as a saved option.

Not exactly the same obviously but it has an interesting feel.