D&D General Active Defenses: Increasing Player Engagement

[Xeviat]

Hi everyone! I've been thinking about how to make an Active Defense system. The big change to the system would be that AC and Save DCs would be rolled, but the main element would be that an aware defender gets to choose how they react to an attack.

For instance, if an enemy attacks with a melee weapon, the basic defenses could be Dodge, Parry, or Block. Each could use a different stat, but they could also have different results for success or failure. Parry could be more offensive, giving you advantage on your next attack against the target, and a failed parry could impose disadvantage or grant advantage to the enemy's next attack. Likewise, defending against spells could have choices too, like leaping out of the way or behind cover for a fireball vs covering your face and eyes.

My hope for such a system would be encouraging players to pay more attention when it's not their turn. It also allows players to feel like they have control of the action, not just waiting for things to happen to them.

But, to make it work, I think it would also need different basic attacks. If block used Strength, Dodge used Dexterity, and parry used your attacking stat, people would just use what's best. But maybe power attacks are harder to block, or attempting to parry a feint can be problematic.

This would definitely slow down combat, but I think the added tactics could make combat more dynamic and exciting. What do you think?

 

[FrogReaver]

Hi everyone! I've been thinking about how to make an Active Defense system. The big change to the system would be that AC and Save DCs would be rolled, but the main element would be that an aware defender gets to choose how they react to an attack.

For instance, if an enemy attacks with a melee weapon, the basic defenses could be Dodge, Parry, or Block. Each could use a different stat, but they could also have different results for success or failure. Parry could be more offensive, giving you advantage on your next attack against the target, and a failed parry could impose disadvantage or grant advantage to the enemy's next attack. Likewise, defending against spells could have choices too, like leaping out of the way or behind cover for a fireball vs covering your face and eyes.

My hope for such a system would be encouraging players to pay more attention when it's not their turn. It also allows players to feel like they have control of the action, not just waiting for things to happen to them.

But, to make it work, I think it would also need different basic attacks. If block used Strength, Dodge used Dexterity, and parry used your attacking stat, people would just use what's best. But maybe power attacks are harder to block, or attempting to parry a feint can be problematic.

This would definitely slow down combat, but I think the added tactics could make combat more dynamic and exciting. What do you think?

Like the basic premise, not sold on any of your potential implementations.

Trying to think of other ideas.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Hi everyone! I've been thinking about how to make an Active Defense system. The big change to the system would be that AC and Save DCs would be rolled, but the main element would be that an aware defender gets to choose how they react to an attack.

For instance, if an enemy attacks with a melee weapon, the basic defenses could be Dodge, Parry, or Block. Each could use a different stat, but they could also have different results for success or failure. Parry could be more offensive, giving you advantage on your next attack against the target, and a failed parry could impose disadvantage or grant advantage to the enemy's next attack. Likewise, defending against spells could have choices too, like leaping out of the way or behind cover for a fireball vs covering your face and eyes.

My hope for such a system would be encouraging players to pay more attention when it's not their turn. It also allows players to feel like they have control of the action, not just waiting for things to happen to them.

But, to make it work, I think it would also need different basic attacks. If block used Strength, Dodge used Dexterity, and parry used your attacking stat, people would just use what's best. But maybe power attacks are harder to block, or attempting to parry a feint can be problematic.

This would definitely slow down combat, but I think the added tactics could make combat more dynamic and exciting. What do you think?

I think that if you really have an issue with players not paying attention during your game, there are probably easier ways to work that out than trying to jerry-rig the D&D combat system in the manner you suggest.

1) Reduce the number of players at the table. Fewer players, less time between each person's turn, easier to stay engaged.

2) Do not have PCs level past like Level 6. Higher-level play means more and varied abilities that each player has to sift through on their turns to use, slowing their turns down.

3) Use Theater of the Mind rather than a grid and miniatures. Will cut down on the amount of time a player spends trying to move their figure around the board counting squares and trying to lay out AoE zones to capture just the right amount of enemies but not allies.

 

[Oryzarius]

Have you heard of Douglas Cole's Dragon Heresy 5e-derivative?

Review: Dragon Heresy Introductory Set

Copyright 2018 Gaming Ballistic LLC (image source)

bira.github.io

 

[mellored]

Just have players roll AC "saves" and spell attacks.

Simply minus 10 from the player AC, and plus 10 to the monster attacks.

I.e.
15 attack vs 1d20+8 AC.
1d20 +5 dex attack vs 12 Dex defense.

 

[Clint_L]

I've been thinking about this a lot since the monk got changed so much in the 2024 update - in particular, they almost never have a wasted reaction or bonus action, so it feels much more involved. On the other hand, it also slows the game down.

 

[billd91]

I think something like that might be better suited, or at least less of a drag on time, in a system where combat is a lot less common and more consequential. For example, in Call of Cthulhu 7, if you're involved in melee combat, you can either fight back or dodge - your choice. Each option has different consequences. But then CoC combat is a lot less common than D&D in general, so it doesn't feel like too much of a time sink. I'm not so sure I'd want that in D&D when fending off far more attacks than in CoC.

 

[Oryzarius]

I think something like that might be better suited, or at least less of a drag on time, in a system where combat is a lot less common and more consequential... CoC combat is a lot less common than D&D in general, so it doesn't feel like too much of a time sink. I'm not so sure I'd want that in D&D when fending off far more attacks than in CoC.

But it doesn't have to be an all-or-nothing approach. Currently, D&D 5e characters have almost NO active defenses. That doesn't mean the only other position is one in which PCs ALWAYS have an active defense.

In GURPS, for example, characters generally have a limited number of Active Defenses (or, at least, a steadily increasing penalty to their re-use). Moreover, many defenses are penalized or negated by attacks from certain angles (such as attacks from behind). That can add a lot more engagement and excitement against single, powerful foes as PCs try to acquire tactical advantage. Against hordes of foes, though, players have to choose which attacks to defend against, and take care for their own tactical position, since even low-powered foes can score a lucky hit or bear a hero down with the force of numbers.

Players can also give up their Active Defenses either involuntarily (such as when surprised) or voluntarily (such as to make an All-Out Attack for more accuracy or damage). That's another form of dramatic swing in the action which makes for exciting stories.

 

[Xenophon223]

I experimented with a parry system in our D&D game. Players liked it in theory, but it mostly served to slow down combat. No one wanted slower combat. We don't really use it anymore.

 

[GMMichael]

Just have players roll AC "saves" and spell attacks.

Simply minus 10 from the player AC, and plus 10 to the monster attacks.

This is how you do it if you don't want to break the game (although I'm not sure which D&D the OP is talking about). Mess with D&D too much and it will crash and burn. If you're lucky, a GURPS will rise from the ashes, or a Modos 2, in which active defenses are incorporated into the game's DNA.