D&D 5E Battlemaster Maneuvers - only 3-4 good ones?

[Michael Goguen]

I thought evasive footwork might be useful if my fighter was going to intentionally provoke a bunch of attacks of opportunity to use them up so other characters could retreat or something... use that manoeuver, then walk in and out of enemies reach (could be using the dodge action too) and then hopefully you trigger a bunch of reactions and nullify some attacks before your allies zip through...

 

[jayoungr]

Disarming strike: The real issue here is that the disarmed weapon is dropped at the opponent's feat... which they are then free to pick up on their turn with no penalty whatsoever, almost as if the disarming never happened! Boo. It is marginally useful if you do it then withdraw (your foe doesn't have his/her weapon to hit you with as a reaction) but appart from that... The maneuver would be *greatly* improved if the weapon was tossed 10 feet away... but it might be too powerful then?

As an alternate proposal, maybe it could require the target's reaction to pick up the weapon. Then you could disarm and run without provoking an opportunity attack. It would make sense within the game fiction too--the target would be distracted for just that crucial second while picking up the weapon.

Lunging attack: You give yourself a bit more reach. Is this good? Seems a bit narrow in use... I can't tell.

What jumps out at me is that you could use it to avoid opportunity attacks, if the target's reach is equal to yours to begin with (which will usually be the case when fighting humanoids). Lunge to hit someone two squares away and then back off scot-free without ever officially entering their threatened zone.

Parry: I don't know what to think about this. It's dex dependent (so are battemasters dex fighters?). At first I was thinking "sweet, it's like casting shield!"... but then I realized I read it wrong - it's not AC, it's damage reduction. And it's only one attack. So now I don't know what to think of it.

I DM for a dex-based battle master who uses parry all the time. It's saved her from a lot of injuries or softened the blows, even though she's hard to hit. Also, she can use it after she knows what the damage would have been. I'd say it's solidly useful for a dex-based fighter, possibly less so for a strength-based one; haven't seen a strength-based battle master in play yet.

If you're curious, her first three maneuvers were menacing attack, parry, and riposte.

 

[jodyjohnson]

Regarding Disarm - if the target can just pick it up as a non-action, I'd allow kicking it away as a non-action for the attacker.

But it really depends, I prefer to not turn an epic fight into a bullying beatdown of the villain because he's now unarmed.

If being disarmed is basically equal to being defeated I prefer to not let that happen until he's reduced to 0 hp. At that point you can pull his shirt over his head and knock him down after giving him a wedgie. He's defeated.

 

[ehren37]

"Gack! Right in the messoscapulocoracoid process, again!?!"Uh... Dragon. If hill giants and ogres and Champion fighters can survive being dumb for decades, surely a 'dumb' (by draconic standards) dragon can go centuries.

Fair enough. Hell, our recent game had them meet an adult white dragon dock worker and a 2nd dwarf commoner who was 300 years old. Just decade after decade of punching in and out, drinking at the local pub, and low motivation.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Regarding Disarm - if the target can just pick it up as a non-action, I'd allow kicking it away as a non-action for the attacker.

But it really depends, I prefer to not turn an epic fight into a bullying beatdown of the villain because he's now unarmed.

If being disarmed is basically equal to being defeated I prefer to not let that happen until he's reduced to 0 hp. At that point you can pull his shirt over his head and knock him down after giving him a wedgie. He's defeated.

Most weapon users will carry a backup. Even if its just a dagger or two. And/or have other options like use the disarm option in the DMG to try to take a weapon from one of the PCs. Disarm puts the opponent at a disadvantage, not makes them helpless.

 

[Bayonet]

I played a Battlemaster Fighter through the entirety of the HotDQ/RoT campaign, and I definitely used Riposte and Rally the most. The ability to smash a guy, yell at the Rogue to stop bleeding like an idiot, and smash a guy again was pretty fun. Riposte is just sensible, more attacks.

I believe I used Menacing and Goading attack a fair bit as well. I took Maneuvering Attack as one of my first maneuvers, and I don't think I ever used it.

Remember, your BM build, and the makeup of your party will have a lot to do with deciding what maneuvers are best. I think more people would take Commanders Strike if it took a bonus action, rather than giving up one of your attacks.

 

[CapnZapp]

I think more people would take Commander's Strike if you didn't have to pay 3 to get 1.

A bonus action, attack and reaction is (very roughly) equal, for a fightery guy anyway.

The 3:1 ratio makes the ability very circumstantial indeed. Which isn't the same as worthless. Only "less worth" than most other maneuvers which you can control much more reliably.

Lower the cost to 2:1 and things start to look up.

Lower the cost to 1:1 and you're looking at the new Warlord...!

 

[ChrisCarlson]

I agree with your assessment. And by that I mean, that I agree people like win-buttons. The bigger the win-button, the more attractive and desirable it is.

 

[hejtmane]

I assume that Lunging Attack was probably invented for the sake of casual players who aren't good at pre-planning movement. It's sort of a free "Oopsie!" so that you're never just five feet out of range of an enemy. I can see that being a frustrating moment for certain kinds of players.

Since you get to add damage on the hit I always thought it be must useful for adding reach to a whip or a polearm instead of 10' it is now 15'

Example guy with pole arm lunges hits guy at 15' feet then moves on battle field 30' he stayed out of Opportunity attacks then ran over and hit a different monster and is out of most monsters movement range for melee

 

[Al2O3]

Lower the cost to 1:1 and you're looking at the new Warlord...!

And then maybe I would not have bad first impressions of everything using superiority dice (although I've come to realise that I like how it was implemented in the latest UA).

Skickat från min Nexus 6 via Tapatalk

 

[Ancalagon]

I think more people would take Commander's Strike if you didn't have to pay 3 to get 1.

A bonus action, attack and reaction is (very roughly) equal, for a fightery guy anyway.

The 3:1 ratio makes the ability very circumstantial indeed. Which isn't the same as worthless. Only "less worth" than most other maneuvers which you can control much more reliably.

Lower the cost to 2:1 and things start to look up.

Lower the cost to 1:1 and you're looking at the new Warlord...!

You (as the battle master) should be sacrificing an attack or a bonus action. I can't fathom why it's both, it makes no sense to me.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

You (as the battle master) should be sacrificing an attack or a bonus action. I can't fathom why it's both, it makes no sense to me.

Probably as a balance, because it is assumed that you will be granting an extra attack to an ally whose attack is more powerful than your own. Such as a Rogue.

 

[Ancalagon]

Probably as a balance, because it is assumed that you will be granting an extra attack to an ally whose attack is more powerful than your own. Such as a Rogue.

Well then, if you grant a powerful ally an attack... huzza no? It is supposed to be a power

 

[Tony Vargas]

... huzza no? It is supposed to be a power

It's supposed to be a maneuver. No 'huzza.'

 

[Xeviat]

Well then, if you grant a powerful ally an attack... huzza no? It is supposed to be a power

When a fighter uses a maneuver, they're getting [W]+Ability+1d[superiority] in damage, plus an effect. When you grant that attack to a Barbarian, Cleric, Paladin, or Rogue, who have stronger singular attacks, due to their class abilities, it's more than what the fighter would have gotten using it on themselves. So giving up the attack and the bonus action is really fine. It's not for most. Using it on a Rogue is a huge bonus. They go from 2d6*+5+1d12 at the high end to 1d6+5+10d6+1d12 ... kind of a big jump.

Granted, it has a miss chance, while the raw maneuvers don't (since they're used on a hit).

 

[Azzy]

Commander's strike:
I like the principle of this, but the problem is the action economy angle. So you are giving up one of our attacks *and* your bonus action (which you could have used for something else) to let someone use a reaction - which they might have been to use for an opportunity attack, or shield spell or whatever. If the action economy could be improved the maneuver would be better.

I'd rather it didn't also use up your bonus attack, but it is pretty useful.

Disarming strike:
The real issue here is that the disarmed weapon is dropped at the opponent's feat... which they are then free to pick up on their turn with no penalty whatsoever, almost as if the disarming never happened! Boo. It is marginally useful if you do it then withdraw (your foe doesn't have his/her weapon to hit you with as a reaction) but appart from that... The maneuver would be *greatly* improved if the weapon was tossed 10 feet away... but it might be too powerful then?

Or even 1d10 or 2d6 feet away. Hell, as a DM, I'd say say give me a DC 15 Athletics check to catch it yourself if you have a free hand (like an expert disarm in 2e's CPHB).

Evasive footwork:
The use scenario of this is a bit narrow - increase your AC when moving - ie vs attacks of opportunities. When you need it it's great, but it won't be in every fight. Still not bad.

Personally, I think it'd be better if it lasted until the start of your next turn.

Lunging attack:
You give yourself a bit more reach. Is this good? Seems a bit narrow in use... I can't tell.

Situational, but a good option to have.

Maneuvering attack:
The use case scenario is narrow, but in some specific situation this is *hugely* useful - cut off an escape route for example.

It can also be used to get an ally out of melee range, get a rogue set up for sneak attack, position a spellcaster for an area of effect spell.

Parry:
I don't know what to think about this. It's dex dependent (so are battemasters dex fighters?). At first I was thinking "sweet, it's like casting shield!"... but then I realized I read it wrong - it's not AC, it's damage reduction. And it's only one attack. So now I don't know what to think of it.

Yeah, it can be handy in the right situation, but it's no shield spell.

Sweeping attack:
Meh... maybe for dealing with mobs?

With low-level opponents staying relevant longer, mobs tend to be fairly common. It's an okay maneuver.

 

[FrogReaver]

Parry is amazing

 

[Ancalagon]

Personally, I think it'd be better if it lasted until the start of your next turn.

Then it would be *amazing* - the equivalent of a shield spell, or even better!

With low-level opponents staying relevant longer, mobs tend to be fairly common. It's an okay maneuver.

Yes but inflicting your superiority dice in damage to a second mook instead of the guy you are hitting is only useful if you know that your blow *will* will the first guy and you are trying to "spread" the excess damage around. It's a pretty narrow case scenario IMO.

 

[Z. H. Darkstar]

Tripping Attack + Booming Blade = proc the secondary BB damage on a failed save. Since standing from prone eats up half of your speed, it would qualify as movement for the purposes of BB.

 

[FrogReaver]

Tripping Attack + Booming Blade = proc the secondary BB damage on a failed save. Since standing from prone eats up half of your speed, it would qualify as movement for the purposes of BB.

I would disagree. Standing up from prone is not movement.