D&D 5E How should combat maneuvers be handled in Next?

[Remathilis]

I'd like to start a conversation to see how common combat maneuvers (bull rush, trip, grapple, disarm, sunder, etc) should be done.

A couple of ideas...

1.) In AD&D 2nd edition, they were called shots. Basically, you took a penalty to your roll and if you hit, instead of doing damage you inflicted the maneuver. Later, Combat and Tactics set individual ACs to each stunt AND forced opposed attack rolls.
2.) In Basic/BECMI, some of these attacks (parry, disarm, smash) were fighter (or demi-human) only maneuvers. A fighter could take a penalty to hit to add his whole strength score to damage (proto power attack). Thieves, clerics, and Magic-users need not apply.
3.) 3e treated them as modified attacks with specific opposed rolls and penalties, augmentable by feats. They were very realistic, but cumbersome to use.
4.) 4e treated them as powers, some do-able at-will (grab), or as part of encounter or daily powers (3[w] + trip).

The trick here is to balance out usefulness vs. repetition. In a perfect game world, disarm, sunder, trip and a basic attack are all equal choices. In reality, they are rarely equal, either being too good (trip monkeys) or poor (sunder) and lead to a lot of "ah, F* it, I attack!" scenarios.

All of this leads to a couple of universal questions...

1.) How should combat maneuvers be resolved? Should they be modified attacks, a unique stat (something like CMB/CMD in Pathfinder), or some form of power/feat/ability?
2.) Should they be limited to fighters, fightery-types, or open to all? If the latter, should fighters get bonuses to be the "best" at them?
3.) Should they be part of an attack (do damage + trip) or replace the damage?
4.) How is the best way to resist the effects? Contests? Checks? Saving Throws? or something else?
5.) Should they be a managed resource (you can use X combat maneuvers per day), be encounter-based (you can trip a foe once per encounter) or be spammable at-will?

Any and all suggestions welcomed.

 

[Greg K]

As per Malhavoc's Book of Iron Might by Mike Mearls. The designers just need to make sure they double check that all of the sample maneuvers to ensure the right base effects are listed (BOIM had a maneuve where they listed the wrong base effect base upon the description of the maneuver. The result was a -10 net penalty to hit rather 0)

 

[Vegepygmy]

In a perfect game world, disarm, sunder, trip and a basic attack are all equal choices.

I disagree. In my perfect game world, some choices are better than others, depending on the situation. And in most situations, the basic attack should be the best choice.

Of all the editions, I think 3rd hit closest to the mark. There are situations where grappling (or bull rushing, or disarming) your enemy is just simply a better tactic than trying to kill him. And I like it that way.

 

[RangerWickett]

Option A

There should be a basic mechanic, probably Pathfinder CMB-esque, that anyone can use. And then I'd recommend that the base fighter be allowed to use these maneuvers more easily, and add them to his attacks.

Like maybe at 1st level, once per round when they hit an enemy, they add one combat trick. Stuff like trip, disarm, grab, plus some nifty stuff like “flick a dagger for tiny damage at an enemy within 30 ft.” or “cleave and deal tiny damage to an enemy adjacent to your main target.”

You'd probably have them pick two tricks that they can add this way. Other tricks they have to spend their full action doing. At higher level (or with feats) they can get access to more tricks.

Nothing adds extra damage (though you can get extra attacks), or gives you an automatic attack bonus boost (though you can inflict conditions which will help on the next turn).

At higher level, maybe you can chain stuff together, like kill an enemy, throw his weapon at another creature, then use the body as a human shield as you charge and bulrush another enemy.

Also, use the HP Threshold system. Conditions could be listed in serious and minor pairs, and if you hit with an attack that would, say, trip the opponent but they’re above the HP Threshold, they’re just slowed. Disarm’s minor version gives the foe disadvantage on an attack. Stunned’s minor is dazed, which just makes you grant advantage to everyone and prevents you from taking reactions.

As a base, the HP Threshold is equal to 5 + twice your level (and you can just mark it on your character sheet). If your foe is below your threshold after you deal damage, you get the powerful condition.

Let all those weird weapons like nets and whips raise the HP threshold, so it’s easier to trip an enemy with whip than with a greatsword.

 

[RangerWickett]

Option A is probably too complicated. How about . . .

Option B

Include a basic stunt system. It has three options: deal damage, affect multiple foes, and add condition. Like, you have a chart with three columns, and lists of what you can achieve with "easy, moderate, hard, daunting, and hellish" effort.

The player decides what options he wants to accomplish, and has to make a ability check of some sort for each option he adds. He can also choose how severe he wants to make the extra effect. Diving into a pair of enemies so you can hit them both might require a moderate check; swinging on a rope and slicing the throats of five guys in your path would be a lot harder.

A failure is always a noteworthy setback, and trying for three options but failing all three checks will really mess you up.

The most basic example? Make a Dexterity check to approach stealthily, get some extra damage on your attack.

Or I want to trip an enemy. I make a Strength check. If I succeed, I trip him.

More complicated example? I want to deal damage to multiple foes, and apply the prone and "on fire" conditions. There's a chandelier, so I cut it, drop it on my foes, knock them to the ground and catch them in flaming chandelier bits.

Anyone could do this stuff. There might be a Daredevil theme that gets bonuses to checks, so it can easily have two or three columns at once.

 

[Sunseeker]

All maneuvers should exist as available for all characters.

Characters with a more martial angle should be "proficient" in them, granting some kind of attack bonus when using a combat maneuver.

Certain classes should have certain maneuvers as riders on their attacks. Perhaps Barbarians make knock-down attempts with every swing, ya know, big hammer is your face pushed your down sorta deal.
Perhaps rogues have a "sand in eyes" for a disadvantage condition.
Maybe swashbuckler's have a "disarm" they can attach to their attacks.

Whatever the case is, martial-like classes should get a limited selection of combat maneuvers they are proficient in, or can use as "minor/free" actions or as riders on their attacks.

Fighters however, should be proficient in the full list of combat maneuvers, and should be able to use any of them as a bonus to their attacks.

---

My general sentiment is that unless combat maneuvers present something TOTALLY AWESOME, they are a fairly lackluster alternative to simply attacking more. Hence, making some of them able to be attack-riders, or allowing some of them or some classes to use them as "free" actions would be an ideal way to do things.

Attempt to trip? Fail? Well you can still stab. Succeed? You stab better!

It's not even a mundane vs magic issue(though it is related), but choosing between an ability that will at best, debuff for one round what the cleric could debuff for the whole encounter, vs dealing considerable damage(it's usually high-damage melee classes like the fighter and the barbarian that have to make these choices), really isn't a choice at all.

 

[RigaMortus2]

I'd like to see a large list of combat maneuvers that anyone can do, like charge, bull rush, grapple, sunder as well as new and creative ones. Anyone can attempt them w some sort of penalty (disadvantage? ). The fighter can do them w/o penalty (advantage? ).

No reason a wizard shouldn't be able to use a special martial maneuver if they choose to, but not as well as fighter.

 

[variant]

I think it needs to be really simplistic such as as a contest with a modifier for difficulty for most of the maneuvers.

All maneuvers should be able to be done by anyone, but the fighter should be better at it.

I also think called shots could have their place as long as it is pointed out that you don't actually take off someone's head by rolling a called shot to their head and hitting. A called shot could be an attack to a specific part of the body with a temporary effect. So if you make a called shot for the head and you are successful, they suffer some negative effect like being dazed.

 

[Stormonu]

I think there should be a basic level of proficiency for anyone to try maneuvers like bull rush, tackle, trip, disarm, sunder, sap, grapple and all of that. At the most basic level, I think I'd like to see it be an attack at no penalty, but you only perform the maneuver, not damage. An "either-or" basic solution - you can add on riders as the PCs get more experienced.

I wouldn't mind classes have "preferred" special maneuvers that they can get easier access to or can perform easier. For example, a monk having an easier time with trips or grapples, rogues getting a hamstring or sap maneuver and fighters being able to run with bull rush, disarms and sunders easier than others.

Beyond that, a few options to allow certain characters to "get fancy" with certain attacks. I think at best PCs should be able to bring these types of attacks up to par but I'm not sure I want them to be able to bring them up to a skill level where, say, with every attack the fighter is tripping his foe AND dealing full damage as well.

Perhaps a "degrees of success" thing - hit AC to AC +4, perform manuever only. Hit AC +5 to AC +9, perform manuever and deal 1/2 damage. Hit AC +10 or more, perform manuever and deal full damage. (If AC numbers are flattened, perhaps instead tie it to "Hit Dice", hit points or some other factor) This would allow an attacker to at least try maneuvers against competent opponents, and against inferior foes really put the sting on.

 

[Ahnehnois]

You can pretty much just copy-paste the basics from Pathfinder, and build new class abilities and such around them. PF has its weak points, but the CMB/CMD as a whole is one of its true innovations.

I disagree. In my perfect game world, some choices are better than others, depending on the situation. And in most situations, the basic attack should be the best choice.

XP is still off. Well said.