D&D 5E "Charge Up" Mechanic: A problem for D&D

[Sacrosanct]

Oh please, this is patently false dichotomy. Almost all of the "video game mechanics" stem from D&D to begin with. D&D has plenty of video-game mechanics in it already because it basically invented what we consider "video game mechanics". The only difference 4E made was that those mechanics were more obvious since the crunch had been split off from the fluff. There is no argument you can produce to demonstrate there is a functional difference between D&D mechanics and "video game mechanics" and I'm going to be honest: I'm not interested in seeing your attempts to manufacture one.

Oh, so you're going with the "I don't believe you because you can't prove it, and if you do prove it, then I'm not going to listen to it anyway" approach? How intellectually honest of you. Then again...

And yes, that is what he said. That's what anyone is saying when they start talking about how the fighter can't do X, Y or Z because IRL reasons.

No, he didn't say that. Or imply that. This is a classic (and weak) strawman argument. He never said or implied that a PC couldn't do anything cool without magic.


Since you're going to ignore this next part, I will state this for the benefit of anyone else who might be curious. There is a tremendous functional difference between a TTRPGs mechanics and a video game's, for several reasons, not the least of which is computer power, memory, and code. TTRPG mechanics do not suffer from the limitations of what actors may or may not do because of what was coded or not. You can't fire off a fireball down that hallway full of trapped poison darts (to destroy them) unless the video game was specifically code to so do. Likewise, video games are not limited to the processing power of a human brain. The video game can keep track of hundreds of different factors that a single DM cannot. Trying to implement something like a limit break meter with the complexity a video game does is impossible on a TTRPG. There is a VERY good reason why video games have completely different mechanics than TTRPGs, even with the same game. D&D video game mechanics are much different from the TT version. There are very good reasons for that.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Iron Heroes was a d20 "variant PHB" designed by Mike Mearls, for use in Conan-style lower-magic settings. It featured ~10 new martial classes, and they pretty much all worked this way. It might be worth checking out, if you can find a copy.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Unless I'm mistaken (and please correct me if I'm wrong), but there aren't any D&D classes that build up their resources over the course of an encounter is there?

I can't think of any in 5e. You start the day at full power, and become less capable as you go. In 4e there were Action Points, and the odd other mechanic keying off milestones, that'd allow you to gain something different as the day progressed, rather than recouping some of what you'd used. That's the closest I can think of.

I'm going to use the Battlemaster as an example. What if they started the day with 0 Superiority Dice, but gained them (to a max of 4) every time they hit an enemy, and then lost all remaining Superiority Dice at the end of combat?

5e is tuned for fast combat, so that'd probably equate to not seeing much use, or, once you had extra attack, seeing immediate use as soon as your first attack landed. It'd favor maneuvers that are generically useful in any situation, since you'd have a narrow window in which to burn your dice, 'waiting for the right time to use them' wouldn't be a winning strategy.

I think those sorts of mechanics were cut in favor of simplicity.

They weren't cut, since they'd never really been in the game in the first place. Though if they were considered, they'd probably have been excluded based on the fast-combat mandate, too.

The problem is that you would need to emphasize longer and larger fights, which 5E explicitly does not.

Exactly.

But that is how human body(or and other organism works).

Yeah, that's why athletes never 'warm up' before a race, for instance.

*eyeroll* here we go again. The fighter doesn't get to do "cool stuff" because he's limited by the human body, real-world physics and IRL martial training.

Now, that's not fair, here the limitation is /in spite of/ those realities.

You want cool? Be a wizard!
Why even include Fighters in the game if everything "cool" comes from magic?

Hey, if everything is cool, then nothing is. You need the mundane for the superiority of magic to be wondrous in contrast. ;P

Yep. Better if they're gained/regained on a miss. That way, although it sucks to have a 'wasted' turn, it means that when the dice turn you get to really shine.

Nice twist. Of course, it could lead to oddities. I don't just mean closing your eyes for disadvantage, but trying to engineer excuses to 'attack' just before combat.

 

[Ahrimon]

Rough sketch here

Fighter: Tactician

You are skilled at maneuvering your opponents through steady practiced moves and counter moves. Before your opponents know what hit them you are striking the final blow.

Lvl 3: Whenever you hit an opponent you gain one tactical point. If that attack is a critical hit you gain two points. You may only use those tactical points vs your current opponent(s). If your opponent or you moves away your points reset to 0.

When you attack you may spend tactical points when you attack. Any attack in which you spend tactical points you do not gain any points.

{List of abilities and point costs.}
Stuff like 2 pts: +1dx damage, 4 pts: advantage on your attack, 1 pt: str sv vs knocked prone.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Rough sketch here

Fighter: Tactician

You are skilled at maneuvering your opponents through steady practiced moves and counter moves. Before your opponents know what hit them you are striking the final blow.

Lvl 3: Whenever you hit an opponent you gain one tactical point. If that attack is a critical hit you gain two points. You may only use those tactical points vs your current opponent(s). If your opponent or you moves away your points reset to 0.

When you attack you may spend tactical points when you attack. Any attack in which you spend tactical points you do not gain any points.

{List of abilities and point costs.}
Stuff like 2 pts: +1dx damage, 4 pts: advantage on your attack, 1 pt: str sv vs knocked prone.

That seems to be very cumbersome, especially if you're fighting against multiple opponents and have different point totals for each to keep track of. The OP has probably the easiest solution in just tweaking the BM's maneuvers to starting with 0, but gaining them each round, up to a maximum.

 

[dave2008]

Don't believe he said that.


As far as the general topic, the last time D&D tried to implement video game mechanics into TTRPG? Didn't work out so great, for the success of the game at any rate. It's much better for something like that be a houserule for your gaming table.

I don't know about that, 3e (and by extension Pathfinder) had and are having a good run.

 

[Satyrn]

Mike Mearls actually wrote a 3e variant Player's Handbook called Iron Heroes full of classes and feats with such a mechanic. It's certainly possible, and I would like to see some 5e subclasses built with something like it.

(It even had a sort of warlord class!)

 

[Satyrn]

Iron Heroes was a d20 "variant PHB" designed by Mike Mearls, for use in Conan-style lower-magic settings. It featured ~10 new martial classes, and they pretty much all worked this way. It might be worth checking out, if you can find a copy.

. . . I should have read a little farther being making my above post. Oh well, it was worth saying twice, at least.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

I really like WarpedAcorn's idea - I can see it leading to a lot of new and interesting mechanics for D&D. From my POV, adding additional depth of strategy is almost always a good thing. I'm imagining a maneuver "tree" for fighters. You execute tactic A, and as a result B, C, and D are available next round, in addition to your normal options. You do C, and options E, F, and D(again) are possible next turn.

Horwath has an excellent point, too. I like my D&D as realistic as possible. I don't like mechanics that are purely game rules and have no connection to either reality or the game fiction, called "disassociate mechanics" by some. So in doing this, I'd want it to be done in a reasonable way, and not every type of resource would be good to handle this way. Frex, a mechanic where you gain hp each round with no explanation wouldn't work for me. Mechanics with both building resources and exhausting different resources could be very interesting.

 

[Leatherhead]

Having considered this for a bit, the major problem lies in Alpha striking.

Most characters (and that does include NPC/Monsters) have a tendency hit hard and fast in combat. Mostly because their lives depend on it, and having one less member on the opposite side living is a huge benefit for your side. Therefore, you would need to make sure that the class (and by extension their party) has a way to survive long enough to make this happen in big fights. The easiest way of doing this would be going against the design principle and including some rest-recharge powers that allow for survival.

Additionally, you are going to need different "tiers" of powers for them to charge up to. Some really cheap stuff for the 3(or less) round knock outs, or options and engagement while charging up; something to mop up "normal" encounters that last longer than that; and the boss-busters that only come into play after the long haul. In the meantime, they would be using the same cantrips or basic full attacks that the other classes use while they are tapped out.