Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6607559" data-attributes="member: 1465">Uhm... I am still trying to understand how OA/Disengage/Dodge work in 5e so forgive my mistakes...I am not really sure how Disengage is useful in the game at all, except for Rogues.IIUC, Opportunity Attacks are meant to make the following tactical options risky (in order from most to least important IMO):a) running away from combatb) moving past the enemies front line to do something more convenient (e.g. attack the enemy wizard or take the McGuffin)c) stop fighting to do something else on the battlefieldd) change your current target to anotherI am not sure how option d) is common in reality, it is practically always more convenient to stick to your target (unless you are being ineffective against it). Either way, I want to point out that IMHO there is no reason why c) and d) should be penalized with an OA, in fact I think that suffering the OA is rather the consequence of the OA rules, but these scenarios were not what the designers had in mind when designing OAs.Anyway the scenario a) is probably the original reason for "suffering a free attack against" in older editions of D&D. But what does Disengage really accomplish in the game, if you want to run away from a fight?Without disengage:- you take a double move ("Dash + Move") and suffer an OA- enemy takes a double move and you're back to melee rangeWith disengage:- you take a single move but no OA- enemy takes a single move and attacks youThe problem is that unless your speed is higher than the enemy's, you'll never run away in either case, and you'll die since the enemy keeps making attacks while you don't (actually, you'll die even faster by disengaging if the enemy has multiple attacks). If instead you are faster, with disengage the enemy needs to take 2 moves and can't attack but can still "stick to you" if they want, so it's probably better for you to just eat one OA and put enough range so that this will be the only attack you'll ever get against you, and then flee.This is just a very basic case, ground features and other stuff can make things more interesting of course. But overall it makes me think that disengage doesn't add much to the game, and it would be simpler to have an even more "meta" rule saying that if you want to quit a combat, you all get an attack against and be done with it.I think since Dodge also takes an action, again you are never going to flee combat unless the enemy lets you so or you find something more creative than just dodging or disengaging.I don't fully understand why you would prefer the risk of Dodge rather than Disengage. They both cost you an action, Dodge gives all the enemies a penalty while Disengage gives them no OA (which is a bigger penalty). I thought in fact Dodge wasn't meant for running away or past the enemies but instead it was meant for:a) standing in the front line defensively, giving up offensive in exchange for better protection (e.g. if the foe is stronger than you are, and you are waiting for a spell or another event that will flip the tide in your favor)b) when you are cornered or outnumbered, and again waiting for helpc) when you are clueless about what to do this roundIndeed the Rogue's Cunning Action is the only* thing that makes IMO Disengage an interesting addition to the game, since it allows a Rogue to disengage without using up the regular combat action. But if remove Disengage from the game, you can then achieve the same by saying that 2nd levels Rogues are immune to OA, as long as they don't use Cunning Action (for Dash of Hide).* I forgot there is also Fighter's Action Surge, and I guess there might be some spells also granting extra actions</blockquote>

Verification