Level Up (A5E) Actions in Combat

[tetrasodium]

Same thoughts. I assume the "everyone can reckless attack" means that berserkers do not have reckless equivalent anymore. I really like that the new option adds an element of movement to the battlefield and that anyone can do it but if that movement option comes with a myriad of negative impacts, it's never going to get used and that battlefield will remain a static slug fest. (Obviously this is a lot of assumption having never used the system, the other combat options might also add movent possibilities.)

It doesn't look like berserkers had it before. Here's the first couple levels of berserker from the playtest for it

 

[Scrumpet]

It doesn't look like berserkers had it before. Here's the first couple levels of berserker from the playtest for it
View attachment 145982

I believe @Adam Koester was talking about the Berserker enemy from O5E, which had this ability natively.

 

[Anselm]

I believe @Adam Koester was talking about the Berserker enemy from O5E, which had this ability natively.
View attachment 145986

I was actually talking about the barbarian equivalent. I didn't do the play test so making guesses about classes that haven't been previewed yet

 

[tetrasodium]

I was actually talking about the barbarian equivalent. I didn't do the play test so making guesses about classes that haven't been previewed yet

berserker(10 levels) got previewed & it's pretty cool, the lack of that class feature isn't a big deal among all the cool stuff

 

[lichmaster]

So if we assume normal O5e rules, only the attacker would get an OA here.

Attacker Presses the Attack
Defender falls back. Assuming this was at the edge of the attacker's reach, this would move you outside of that reach, triggering an OA.
Attacker than moves in to complete the attack. As this is a movement within reach, it should not provoke an OA (this is a specific O5e change to OAs, different than 4e and 3e, which worked when you moved through reach). Even if it did, the defender has already used their reaction to fall back, so they wouldn't get an OA regardless.

I wasn't meaning that they would trigger OAs to each other as I'm seeing their movement pretty much lockstep.
I was meaning OAs wrt other combatants in melee. Imagine there's a 2 vs 2, both the pressing character and the falling back one would trigger AO from the enemy combatant not in front of themselves.

Considering the OA AND the penalties the defender gets, I think its going to be a very rare for a defender to want to fall back. I think it would have to be used with some kind of team combat tactic (such as another ally getting an OA on the attacker should they close in on the defender), or if the attacker was immobilized, etc. But 1 on 1 especially, I would struggle to think of many scenarios where I would want to fall back.

If the falling back character would trigger an OA from the pressing one, I agree with you: it would still be attacked (without advantage), and also receive an OA from the pressing enemy.
If the falling back character wouldn't trigger the OA from the pressing enemy than I see the falling back option becoming more useful.

But very likely there are many tactical aspects we're not considering right now, and that could change our conclusions quite a bit.
For example: fall back specifically says that the pressing character does not have advantage. If you also have some combat maneuver (stance) that allows you to impose disadvantage on attacks, and also maybe make counterattacks or gain some other form of edge when the enemy misses you, then that could become an interesting semi-passive fighting style.

 

[m0dredus]

I'd love to see an explainer article regarding the design philosophy behind the PtA/FB actions and range/reach/melee weapons, since they are all very finnicky and I can forsee them leading to a lot of confusion at the table. Specifically clarification regarding ranged attacks benefitting from Press the Attack would be appreciated.

 

[Stalker0]

I wasn't meaning that they would trigger OAs to each other as I'm seeing their movement pretty much lockstep.

I think that's the outstanding question. Obviously there could be more general rule changes about OAs or reach that we don't know about yet. But assuming the rules have not changed, the way this reads is that you absolutely would trigger an OA with this movement.

If that is not the designer's intent (assuming they are listening in), then its a chance to clean up the language before release. If there is a side rule we don't know about....then we will find out soon!

 

[This Effin’ GM]

I like fall back. I would happily provoke the OA from the Marilith rather than suffer all them attacks with advantage.

 

[WinnableBadger]

Is the damage still 1/2 proficiency bonus? I was under the impression that it had changed?

 

[lichmaster]

I like fall back. I would happily provoke the OA from the Marilith rather than suffer all them attacks with advantage.

You're trading several attacks with advantage with being pushed 5 ft and taking one extra attack (OA).
It can be a good choice, but it's probably very circumstantial. Maybe we can call it depth