Level Up (A5E) Actions in Combat

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 :D
1635813923017.png
 

log in or register to remove this ad




lichmaster

Adventurer
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

Explorer
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

Legend
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!
 



lichmaster

Adventurer
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 :)
 

Xaielao

Explorer
Speaking of Opportunity Attacks, looking at the section under "Grapple", specifically "Freeing a Grappled Creature": would moving a friendly 5 feet away from the enemy that grappled it allow it an OA that could simply re-grapple it?
I'd say no Scrumpet, based solely on this line... "Additionally, you may move the freed creature 5 ft. in any direction."

That makes it Forced Movement, which is not subject to Opportunity Attacks. It's nice to see allied forced movement. It's got quite a lot of potential, so it's unfortunate we haven't really seen it in O5E.

I really like how the Combat Actions have been reworked. Press the Attack and Fall Back will make for some interesting back and forth maneuvering. I like that you can avoid it with a reaction but you still get a benefit from using an action to Press the Attack thanks to an Opportunity Attack. The new Shove is quite potent, and thematic. No save when pushing an enemy over a ledge is nasty and my players will love it.. until I use it against them muahaha. ;)
 

Stalker0

Legend
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 :)
So just out of curiosity I looked at what the Marilith would do with advantage vs giving it the OA and losing advantage (I also used the double damage crit rule of LU)

The marilith generally does about ~20 more DPR against your usual AC ranges if allowed to have advantage.

Aka yes against a marilith, you will take less damage if you choose to take the OA. Below is a chart with the numbers for those who care.

ACDmg (OA + Advantage)Dmg (advantage)
21​
56​
73.935​
20​
59.8​
78.8175​
19​
63.6​
83.235​
18​
67.4​
87.1875​
17​
71.2​
90.675​
16​
75​
93.6975​
 

So just out of curiosity I looked at what the Marilith would do with advantage vs giving it the OA and losing advantage (I also used the double damage crit rule of LU)

The marilith generally does about ~20 more DPR against your usual AC ranges if allowed to have advantage.

Aka yes against a marilith, you will take less damage if you choose to take the OA. Below is a chart with the numbers for those who care.

ACDmg (OA + Advantage)Dmg (advantage)
21​
56​
73.935​
20​
59.8​
78.8175​
19​
63.6​
83.235​
18​
67.4​
87.1875​
17​
71.2​
90.675​
16​
75​
93.6975​
That's a great example . Press the attack takes the marilith from scary to horrifying lol :D
 


See? This is why I like fall back. It’s one of those that’s not great at low levels but gets better as the monsters get more attacks!
Even better... I pity the fool who does press the attack against the marilith & gives it all those advantage attacks or makes an OA against an adjacent marilith ally using the reaction they can no longer use to scream "fallback! in terror.
 

GMMichael

Guide of Modos
I'm so glad they took out the fourth Off Your Turn item:

4. Pull out your smart phone and start scrolling. Because hey, the game really does revolve around just you.

I guess you can always declare the damage to be non lethal. . .
All damage is non-lethal if your opponent gets three death saves after hitting zero. Does O5E extend this courtesy to monsters, by any chance?
 

Stalker0

Legend
See? This is why I like fall back. It’s one of those that’s not great at low levels but gets better as the monsters get more attacks!
So we can normalize this to a more general scenario.

Scenario: Assume that a creature has X number of attacks, where all attacks at the same to hit (which is +9 for this example) and damage. We will also assume crits are double damage and only occur on a 20. In that case, when does falling back result in more or less damage?

Attacks
AC
1​
2​
3​
4​
21​
21%​
-6%​
-19%​
-27%​
20​
23%​
-3%​
-16%​
-23%​
19​
25%​
1%​
-12%​
-19%​
18​
28%​
4%​
-8%​
-15%​
17​
30%​
7%​
-4%​
-11%​
16​
33%​
10%​
-1%​
-7%​

In this chart, a positive % indicates that a character using fall-back will take more damage on average than if they had accepted the advantage. A negative % means that fall-back actually reduced the damage.

So in general:

1) With 1 attack monsters, you shouldn't not use fall back unless there are other circumstances going on.
2) With 2-3 attack monsters, its debatable. It depends on your AC and their attack bonus. Considering you also get disadvantage on your attacks and it costs your reaction, probably not worth it in many cases but could be in some others.
3) At 4+, fall back becomes more favorable and generally will save you a good bit of damage.
 


Honestly, it looks to me like the intent of Fall Back is to not provoke OAs from your attacker. Maybe think of it as "give ground" instead. The opponent is making you choose to either take some nasty attacks, or move where they want you to and have your own attacks penalized. Those are both pretty undesirable conditions. You could also imagine it in reverse. Your opponent is inflicting forced movement on you, Didsadvantage to your attacks and using up your Reaction, but you can instead choose to "Stand Your Ground" as a free action and not take those effects at the cost of granting them Advantage on attacks against you.

It really seems like that's the intended balance. Having you also take an OA from that opponent when you fall back seems too much.
 


Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top