Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Combat is fictionless
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 8407065" data-attributes="member: 6795602"><p>*P1 has information - they know the basic distances of the goblins, the terrain, etc.</p><p></p><p>I would add that once P1 has declared that it's a noticeable part of the fiction. He's zeroed in on that 1 goblin, his allies and the goblins can both see it. That should turn the rest into fictional decisions rather than mechanical ones. In short, the declaration phase changes the fiction. Also, I think it's worth noting here that if another creature meets you in the middle - so to speak that you always have the option of attacking that creature instead.</p><p></p><p>For P2 their move is going to need a general direction. The idea isn't that they get to move wherever they want when their initiative comes up. The DM abjucates positioning based on your declaration. That detail is required. (For melee characters it's kind of built in if they are wanting to attack N1).</p><p></p><p>I like how the dodge action functions under this system better. It feels more dynamic and response. You see multiple enemies about to gang up on you and so you attempt to defend. Other interesting actions N1 could have attempted would be to fall back and shoot with his bow. P1 might not be able to reach him then.</p><p></p><p>N2 moving and attacking P2 is going to create is going to create an interesting situation regarding if he gets there before he shoots.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So far this feels good to me. </p><p></p><p>I'd just add that N2 is eligible to dash toward his intended target if he can't reach them to attack. If he did so, he likely closes the distance but doesn't find a good opportunity to attack after doing so.</p><p></p><p></p><p>*Initiative is going to be rerolled. So P1 cannot assume he will go first again. I probably could have made this more clear</p><p></p><p></p><p>Sounds reasonable assuming that was the new initiative order.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I think so?</p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't share these principles. I don't want something overly complex or overly long. But adding a little bit of complexity or combat time to reach the goals is acceptable. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I've no idea what you mean.</p><p></p><p>The DM adbjucates everyone's precise positions when it's the players turn in the initiative. That's how movement works in this system. So you always describe fictionally in your declaration where you want to move (or if on a grid you could point precisely) and that provides the DM the information to be able to abducate this.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I actually had the opposite take away on dodge. It made dodge better because enemies couldn't just ignore you after you dodged as they can in current 5e. Yea, sometimes it will be ineffective, but you at least have more info on if enemies are going to focus fire you.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The whole basis is that movement has to be fairly specific for abjucation. Actions on the other hand may could be more generic so that they aren't wasted. I'm not opposed to that change. I mean, the specific action may not even need to be specified for this to function. I'll have to think about that.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I assumed applicable bonus actions could be used at your initiative.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="FrogReaver, post: 8407065, member: 6795602"] *P1 has information - they know the basic distances of the goblins, the terrain, etc. I would add that once P1 has declared that it's a noticeable part of the fiction. He's zeroed in on that 1 goblin, his allies and the goblins can both see it. That should turn the rest into fictional decisions rather than mechanical ones. In short, the declaration phase changes the fiction. Also, I think it's worth noting here that if another creature meets you in the middle - so to speak that you always have the option of attacking that creature instead. For P2 their move is going to need a general direction. The idea isn't that they get to move wherever they want when their initiative comes up. The DM abjucates positioning based on your declaration. That detail is required. (For melee characters it's kind of built in if they are wanting to attack N1). I like how the dodge action functions under this system better. It feels more dynamic and response. You see multiple enemies about to gang up on you and so you attempt to defend. Other interesting actions N1 could have attempted would be to fall back and shoot with his bow. P1 might not be able to reach him then. N2 moving and attacking P2 is going to create is going to create an interesting situation regarding if he gets there before he shoots. So far this feels good to me. I'd just add that N2 is eligible to dash toward his intended target if he can't reach them to attack. If he did so, he likely closes the distance but doesn't find a good opportunity to attack after doing so. *Initiative is going to be rerolled. So P1 cannot assume he will go first again. I probably could have made this more clear Sounds reasonable assuming that was the new initiative order. I think so? I don't share these principles. I don't want something overly complex or overly long. But adding a little bit of complexity or combat time to reach the goals is acceptable. I've no idea what you mean. The DM adbjucates everyone's precise positions when it's the players turn in the initiative. That's how movement works in this system. So you always describe fictionally in your declaration where you want to move (or if on a grid you could point precisely) and that provides the DM the information to be able to abducate this. I actually had the opposite take away on dodge. It made dodge better because enemies couldn't just ignore you after you dodged as they can in current 5e. Yea, sometimes it will be ineffective, but you at least have more info on if enemies are going to focus fire you. The whole basis is that movement has to be fairly specific for abjucation. Actions on the other hand may could be more generic so that they aren't wasted. I'm not opposed to that change. I mean, the specific action may not even need to be specified for this to function. I'll have to think about that. I assumed applicable bonus actions could be used at your initiative. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Combat is fictionless
Top