D&D 5E Move Attack Move: Issues with The New Standard for Combat

[jodyjohnson]

I think it's a mechanic that's only going to be broken for some people. It just depends on what you want the rules to do.

Options
1. Not broken
2. Tweak OA rules - remove 1/round limitation (1/turn) or not require use of Reaction
3. Tweak movement rules - moving through allies costs movement, etc.

My personal preference would be to value story (the narrative) over the rules. Use the rules to resolve actions in the narrative, not use the rules as world physics and then try to describe that in the narrative.

The whole scenario only makes sense to me as a game/mechanical construct and its not something I can see starting with a declared action in the story - it starts with the mechanics and then a story needs to be contrived from the mechanics.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

It's actually less a problem with MAM specifically, but rather with the discrete turns used in D&D combat generally. As others have noted up-thread, the way it should really work is that everyone is moving at the same time, both duergar and PCs.

You could always borrow Star Fleet Battles' Impulse Chart if you want to model simultaneous movement. You'd have to hash out some rules since people don't move like starships of course.

 

[SkidAce]

You could always borrow Star Fleet Battles' Impulse Chart if you want to model simultaneous movement. You'd have to hash out some rules since people don't move like starships of course.

Love Star Fleet Battle and its movement chart.

Sadly, the excel like spreadsheets of power allocation have driven my friends away.

Fun game...in its day.

/tangent off

 

[frogimus]

Simple solution might be in rewriting the opportunity attack.

When a creature disengages you may make a free strike at the opponent. If you hit, you may choose to do damage, or elect to keep that creature engaged in combat.

This, I like. Turn the fighter into what miniatures gamers call a 'tarpit' unit. I had thought the same about using Knock Down, which is already a usable combat action.

 

[Thaumaturge]

So someone asked Mearls on twitter. His replies:

It's definitely by design - if it's too easy to create choke points, monsters that rely on numbers are hosed.

OTOH, the monsters that hit & run are giving the characters a lot more options than if they pack in close.

IMC, gobs back off, PC wizard walked up, burning hands 2/3 of the goblins w/o oppy, moved back behind fighter

Feature not a bug.

Thaumaturge.

 

[Dausuul]

Feature not a bug.

While I generally like Mike Mearls's approach to design, he's way off the beam here. Of course monsters that rely on numbers are hosed by choke points. So what? Why is that bad?

The whole idea of choke points is to let defenders negate (or drastically reduce) an attacker's numeric advantage. Players faced with a swarm of monsters should be looking for a choke point, and should be rewarded for finding and holding one. It is not bad if the PCs are able to punch above their weight class by using smart tactics. It's this sort of thing that makes for epic encounters. It's only a problem if the PCs are able to pull the same trick in every single encounter; and that isn't the case here. If you as DM don't want the PCs choking off your horde of monsters, all you have to do is not provide a convenient choke point... or include a monster with the ability to force the PCs back from the choke.

Furthermore, the "conga line" requires a specific scenario with monsters just the right distance away from the fighter. If you really do feel that large groups of monsters should not be hosed by choke points, "conga line" is a terrible solution, because in many cases it won't work. It's common enough to be a problem, but not common enough to be consistent in its impact.

 

[Obryn]

I'm with [MENTION=2525]Mistwell[/MENTION], it's a bug. And I'm with [MENTION=58197]Dausuul[/MENTION] that this is what choke points should be for.

I'd say give back opportunity attacks on a per turn basis as a deterrent to this kind of tactic.

 

[DMZ2112]

While I generally like Mike Mearls's approach to design, he's way off the beam here. Of course monsters that rely on numbers are hosed by choke points. So what? Why is that bad?

Yeah, I have severe immersion issues with this whole thing, trying to picture a fighter blocking a doorway and a dancing line of duergar moving in and out to hit him in turn. When has anything like that ever happened in a movie? I appreciate that the rules have mechanical balance value, but the effect on the mind's eye is unappealing.

On a battlemat, this must be a real pain, keeping track of which duergar have danced with the fighter and which have not as they all file in and out.

 

[frogimus]

Ok, I'm thinking Knock Down or Grapple could effectively clog the lane. Since each Duergar needs to stop in the gridspace next to the Fighter to make a melee attack, making sure that space is occupied breaks the conga line.

Does this work or am I missing an interpretation somewhere?

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Yeah, I have severe immersion issues with this whole thing, trying to picture a fighter blocking a doorway and a dancing line of duergar moving in and out to hit him in turn.

Not that I agree with the way they've designed this, but it wouldn't be a "dancing line" necessarily. It could be to model that a mob of duergar can move in en masse to attack the fighter, while he only effectively gets to swing at one as the mob backs off. It only seems like a "dancing line" because D&D is turn-based while at the same time assuming things happen simultaneously.