Garthanos
Arcadian Knight
Color me flabberghasted ...
D&D General Compelling and Differentiated Gameplay For Spellcasters and Martial Classes
- Thread starter Campbell
- Start date
Manbearcat
Legend
@Campbell
So I'm looking at this and two things spring to mind (one a question and one an observation/question hybrid):
Question:
I'm not seeing the Fail Forward nature of Burning Wheel, Mouse Guard/Torchbearer/Strike (Twists), or 4e. So I'm assuming that action resolution failure is basically in the SOP mode of 3.x and PF1; process sim causal logic?
Observation/Question:
So I'm not seeing noncombat conflict resolution like 4e, etc. It appears that all noncombat resolution is task resolution, yes? Also, you mentioned Blades in the Dark. I'm assuming Free Play/Exploration, Encounter, Downtime are strictly called out as discrete units of play? Finally, are there any conflict resolution frameworks like Clocks? If so, what is there format and usage (my guess is there isn't any)?
So I'm looking at this and two things spring to mind (one a question and one an observation/question hybrid):
Question:
I'm not seeing the Fail Forward nature of Burning Wheel, Mouse Guard/Torchbearer/Strike (Twists), or 4e. So I'm assuming that action resolution failure is basically in the SOP mode of 3.x and PF1; process sim causal logic?
Observation/Question:
So I'm not seeing noncombat conflict resolution like 4e, etc. It appears that all noncombat resolution is task resolution, yes? Also, you mentioned Blades in the Dark. I'm assuming Free Play/Exploration, Encounter, Downtime are strictly called out as discrete units of play? Finally, are there any conflict resolution frameworks like Clocks? If so, what is there format and usage (my guess is there isn't any)?
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Hey, what about explicitly allowing anyone (but it’d mostly be worth it for Fighters and rogues) do all the things covered in the Battlemaster Fighter subclass, but without the Battlemaster benefits?
That is, in place of an attack, you can try to disarm someone.
In place of an attack (or as an action on this one), you can let someone make an attack as a reaction. This one maybe could stay unique to BM, but...why?
So, you can do those things at will, but what the Battlemaster does with SD is special for two reasons.
First, they get a bonus to damage, speed, defense, whatever, based on the SD roll.
Second, you do it in addition to making the attack, not in place of the attack.
I’d also consider other maneuvers that anyone could do, but would have the lowest relative cost for the fighter (from 11 onward).
For instance:
Distract- In place of an attack when you take the attack action, you can attempt to break the focus of a creature that is concentrating on a spell or other effect. Make an Ability Check at the DM’s discretion, against the save corresponding to the target’s spellcasting modifier. If you succeed, they must make a Concentration save. DC determined by your check total? Too complicated? Maybe just force a save as if they’d taken damage equal to your check result?
Maybe also one where you give up an attack in order to gain the ability to make a quick jab as a reaction if someone casts a spell while within Xft. You deal less (maybe no?) damage, but the caster has to make a concentration save in order to get the spell off.
That is, in place of an attack, you can try to disarm someone.
In place of an attack (or as an action on this one), you can let someone make an attack as a reaction. This one maybe could stay unique to BM, but...why?
So, you can do those things at will, but what the Battlemaster does with SD is special for two reasons.
First, they get a bonus to damage, speed, defense, whatever, based on the SD roll.
Second, you do it in addition to making the attack, not in place of the attack.
I’d also consider other maneuvers that anyone could do, but would have the lowest relative cost for the fighter (from 11 onward).
For instance:
Distract- In place of an attack when you take the attack action, you can attempt to break the focus of a creature that is concentrating on a spell or other effect. Make an Ability Check at the DM’s discretion, against the save corresponding to the target’s spellcasting modifier. If you succeed, they must make a Concentration save. DC determined by your check total? Too complicated? Maybe just force a save as if they’d taken damage equal to your check result?
Maybe also one where you give up an attack in order to gain the ability to make a quick jab as a reaction if someone casts a spell while within Xft. You deal less (maybe no?) damage, but the caster has to make a concentration save in order to get the spell off.
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Wanted to add to this real quick.
I might accompany these changes with a small feature for Fighters at a relatively low level. That is, the ability to do these things as part of your Action or as a Bonus Action or something 1/round.
The reason being, the fighter doesn’t have a lower cost on their attacks than anyone else until at least level 5, and not compared to other warriors until level 11.
Another thing I’d consider is some more interesting Fighting Styles, like a more balanced version of Close Quarters Combat from the Underdark UA, and a Spell and Blade Fighting Style that lets you change a damage type to an elemental one, or something.
Maybe even a fighting style that lets you do Special Actions more conveniently?
My question then is, what can we do in this vein to improve the fighter’s gameplay engagement for people who like explicit Things To Do outside combat?
Don Durito
Hero
Martial Practices can be done.
Son of the Serpent
Pupil
Are you trying to say this can be added or that it is already present? If you are saying its already present are you saying you would like the benefits thereof expanded upon?
Garthanos
Arcadian Knight
They certainly were not "done" - really they were unfinished and un-elaborated and un-meshed with guidelines in the DMG2 hence why I have been furthering the development for 4e. Making sure they are compelling and differentiated (and balanced) means leg worth that they didnt do when they were first released
Last edited:
Tony Vargas
Legend
Since 5e moved to free rituals, Martial Practices would be easier to design/balance. They could be integrated into Exploration and Downtime rules pretty easily, I'd think.
Garthanos
Arcadian Knight
No garantee the results would be as satisfying... Though I have considered it.
Don Durito
Hero
Well no. Hence the future tense.
I was being pithy. But it's the basic approach that's necessary. A lot of good ideas in 4E came too late and then were orphaned. (Skill powers being another example).
There's some key problems to be solved going forward.
- Martial practices cost healing surges in 4E - that made sense for some of them - for others it made no sense.
- sometimes, by overly defining things you end up taking things away from skills - now you can't do something unless you havethe appropriate pracice.
But I think the basic approach of giving martial characters some direct influence on the narrative is the right one. In 5E you can just climb a sheer wall if you spider climb - whereas with athletics even a 20th level character can fail a moderate DC.
So for example instead of Remarkable Athlete giving the Champion a fairly small boost to Athletics you say that once per day they can "Take 20"on an Athletics check to perform a feat of incredible Strength. Therefore you can rely on it. When PCs know they can just do something then they can make plans more easily because they don't need to be concerned with contingencies should they fail at the first step at something they should on average be able to do.
Similar Threads
