D&D 5E Expertise Dice Alternative

[Chris_Nightwing]

There have been a number of threads about maneuvers, expertise dice and so on. I do not object to the Fighter and Rogue sharing a combat system, but I do object to their use of maneuvers being so very similar. I propose a slightly different approach, with a shared system, accessed and used differently by the two classes. It's a rough draft, but hopefully you get the idea:

• Each class has a weapon attack bonus and a weapon attack progression.
• Expertise dice become what I will nebulously call Combat Points or CP.
• CP are treated more like an encounter resource than a round-by-round resource in that they can accumulate and are reset during a short rest.
• CP are designed to be used in combat, but there is scope for their use during exploration, however I would expect the Rogue at least to get some skill-based abilities outside of this system.
• The maximum CP you can spend in a single action or reaction is limited by your weapon attack bonus, with some exceptions.
• I've tried to make your weapon choice remain relevant, so that damage from maneuvers doesn't dominate.

Fighter

• The Fighter's weapon attack bonus is +2.
• The Fighter gains +1 weapon attack bonus for every 4 Fighter levels.
• The Fighter knows Deadly Strike plus any other two Fighter maneuvers.
• The Fighter learns a new Fighter Maneuver for every 3 Fighter levels.

Combat Expertise
The Fighter knows combat like no-one else. Despite the chaos of the battlefield, the Fighter knows exactly where to position themselves, when to move, when to press an attack and when to withdraw. At the start of their turn, the Fighter gains a number of CP, dependent on level. When combat is over, the Fighter loses all unused CP except for the number they would normally gain at the start of their turn.

Level	W-Att	CP/round
Class	+2	--
-----	--	--
1	+0	1
2	+0	1
3	+0	1
4	+1	1
5	+1	2
6	+1	2
7	+1	2
8	+2	2
9	+2	2
10	+2	3

Rogue

• The Rogue's weapon attack bonus is +1.
• The Rogue gains +1 weapon attack bonus for every 5 Rogue levels.
• The Rogue knows Sneak Attack plus any other two Rogue maneuvers.
• The Rogue learns a new Rogue Maneuver for every 3 Rogue levels.

Danger Sense
The Rogue is extremely quick to react to danger. In such a situation, such as the start of a combat or upon triggering a trap, the Rogue gains a number of CP dependent on level, to help overcome the hazard. These CP may be used liberally during a combat, but if granted against a specific hazard, they can only be used against that hazard. After the combat or interaction has been resolved, all remaining CP are lost.

Dirty Fighting
Whilst the Rogue is not as sturdy or reliable in combat as the Fighter, they are always looking for opportunities to attack their opponent when they least expect it. Whenever a Rogue attacks an opponent with advantage, they gain a number of CP dependent on level that they may spend immediately to improve the outcome of that attack. CP spent in this way do not count towards the maximum CP limit that can be spent in a single action, and any CP unspent are lost immediately after the attack is resolved.

Level	W-Att	DS/DF CP
Class	+1	--
-----	--	--
1	+0	2
2	+0	2
3	+0	2
4	+0	3
5	+1	3
6	+1	3
7	+1	3
8	+1	4
9	+1	4
10	+2	4

Example Maneuvers

Maneuvers may be combined as desired, even with themselves, provided they can be used under the same conditions and you have enough available CP. I've only made a few based on those that already exist. Rogue maneuvers can only be used with finesse and ranged weapons, to preserve their style.

Deadly Strike (Ftr) 1 CP
After you have successfully hit a creature, you may roll a dice one step down from your weapon's normal damage dice and deal that much extra damage to the creature.

Cleave (Ftr) 1 CP
After you have successfully reduced a target to 0 hit points or fewer with a melee weapon attack, you may attack another creature within reach. If you hit this creature, deal only your weapon's normal damage, without any ability modifier.

Second Strike (Ftr) 3 CP
You may use this maneuver at any point during your turn in order to make an attack on the creature of your choice without using your action.

Combat Reflexes (Ftr, Rog) 1 CP
When you roll for initiative, you may add your weapon attack bonus to the result.

Sneak Attack (Rog) 1 CP
After you have successfully hit a creature, you may deal an extra 1d6 damage.

Hamstring (Rog) 1 CP
After you have successfully hit a creature, you may halve that creature's movement for 1 round. If the creature has multiple modes of movement, you affect all those that are non-magical.

Surprise! (Rog) 2 CP
If you attack a creature who is in melee with one of your allies, you may do so with advantage.

Multiclassing

Assuming 3E-style multiclassing, you may combine levels from different classes as you choose. If you have multiple classes, you may use the highest base weapon attack bonus available to those classes. Weapon attack bonuses gained from advancement are summed, for instance a Ftr4/Rog5 would have a weapon attack bonus of +4 (+2 base, +1 from Ftr levels, +1 from Rog levels). If you gain a Fighter level as an additional class, you learn Deadly Strike. If you gain a Rogue level as an additional class, you learn Sneak Attack. The maximum CP you can spend on an attack is still limited by your Weapon Attack bonus and available CP, but you otherwise may spend CP from one class on maneuvers from another.

Discussion
The principle idea, which I may have implemented in a clumsy manner, is that we already had a shared system between fighting classes - the attack bonus - which can be adapted to inform the maneuver system. I aimed for reliable Fighters and unexpected Rogues. I'm not sure I have the balance right for multiclassing, heck I'm sure the wording is bad on some of these abilities. I don't expect this to ever be used in play - I just want to demonstrate that you can have a combined system that plays differently for different classes.

 

[kerleth]

I like the overall concept. Definitely think that consistent fighters and unexpected rogues would give them each some more definition. I still think dice instead of points are the way to go. Having dice from the get go allows for further differentation via die type vs number of dice (though obviously the most recent playtest didn't use that). Not sure about rogues only getting their dice from a "hazard". Is the possibility of getting caught in a lie and imprisoned a "hazard"? How would this effect the rogue's ability to use this ability to manuever in combat (pun intended), or to proactively use skills without triggering a trap. As you pointed out it is just a rough draft, so I'm just giving generalized impressions and concerns.

As a side note, while fighters being a "by round" class is a great mechanical niche, I hope we get a few die doesn't recharge till you take a short rest effects for those who want them. As someone with extensive experience with physical labor and a little fighting experience, I can definitively say that there are some things that can only be done a few times before you need to take a breather. Regardless whether anyone believes that or not, the option would be nice for those who do want to play that way. Those who don't just don't take those abilities/ the DM says they are not available in their campaign. I wonder if there would be similar complaints about a rogue only getting their points/die on occasion, or could it be circumvented by the descriptions of the abilities relying on timing and luck?

 

[the Jester]

I don't really see how this is better than the expertise dice.

I don't like the idea of making them an encounter resource- we're right back to the problem so many people had with martial encounters/dailies in 4e, why can't I do this every round?

I am not even really sure what problem or issue you're trying to address here.... perhaps you could elaborate a bit?

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Thanks for the comments, I'll try to explain a bit more!

I don't really see how this is better than the expertise dice.

I don't like the idea of making them an encounter resource- we're right back to the problem so many people had with martial encounters/dailies in 4e, why can't I do this every round?

I am not even really sure what problem or issue you're trying to address here.... perhaps you could elaborate a bit?

The problem I'm trying to address is the unfortunate same-ness introduced by having the Rogue use the Fighter's expertise dice mechanic in exactly the same way as the Fighter, only with slightly different maneuvers - the mechanics don't evoke the archetypes of the classes. I also think there is a problem inherent in making maneuvers a round-based resource - balancing at-will abilities is very difficult. Further, the current maneuvers show no power progression - the use of multiple dice either increases damage or improves the odds of rolling better for another effect (whirlwind attack excepted - that shows a sort of progress).

I take your point on making the resource encounter-based, but bear in mind it isn't the same as the 4E system. The criticism there wasn't that you couldn't do something every round, it was that you could never do the same thing twice within the same encounter. Here you can throw out the same maneuver every round (if it's cheap) or save up and use something bigger every few rounds - I think that the resilience and tactical knowledge of the Fighter is represented quite well by having the resources build up until they want to unleash them, and the weapon attack bonus is a natural way to limit how much you can do at once by level.

I like the overall concept. Definitely think that consistent fighters and unexpected rogues would give them each some more definition. I still think dice instead of points are the way to go. Having dice from the get go allows for further differentation via die type vs number of dice (though obviously the most recent playtest didn't use that). Not sure about rogues only getting their dice from a "hazard". Is the possibility of getting caught in a lie and imprisoned a "hazard"? How would this effect the rogue's ability to use this ability to manuever in combat (pun intended), or to proactively use skills without triggering a trap. As you pointed out it is just a rough draft, so I'm just giving generalized impressions and concerns.

I forsee problems with using dice rather than points. Take Deadly Strike for instance, by the time you have 3d10 expertise dice, why would you want to be a two-handed weapon guy? Your damage dice has been overwhelmed by your ability to deal extra damage every round, and you'd rather have +1AC than +2 average damage at that point. I also think that they are very limiting when it comes to design: every maneuver you come up with will have to involve the dice size in some way, or bigger dice aren't better. Note how there is no knockdown in the current set of maneuvers - because it's cheap to do with a d4 but rubbish with a d10.

Hazards are sort of left nebulous - I couldn't decide if it was a good idea to list a set of conditions that would trigger Danger Sense. I intended maneuvers to be used primarily for combat, rather than for skill checks and such, but your idea of getting caught in a lie sounds like an excellent trigger for the ability! I wanted the Rogue to have some points they could use during combat without having advantage - for defences and the Surprise! maneuver - and thought that getting an adrenalin rush at the start of combat would be suitable, then figured that would also trigger if you triggered a trap or got knocked off of a cliff. That way you get an instant boost to do something cool against whatever just went wrong, which feels very Roguish to me.

As a side note, while fighters being a "by round" class is a great mechanical niche, I hope we get a few die doesn't recharge till you take a short rest effects for those who want them. As someone with extensive experience with physical labor and a little fighting experience, I can definitively say that there are some things that can only be done a few times before you need to take a breather. Regardless whether anyone believes that or not, the option would be nice for those who do want to play that way. Those who don't just don't take those abilities/ the DM says they are not available in their campaign. I wonder if there would be similar complaints about a rogue only getting their points/die on occasion, or could it be circumvented by the descriptions of the abilities relying on timing and luck?

When I first saw the expertise dice system I was surprised they hadn't gone with a stamina system - the Fighter has some maximum level of stamina, performing maneuvers uses this up, and a short rest is required to recharge back to full. I tried to implement that at first, but found it difficult to mesh with the Rogue's more immediate gaining of points, and I didn't want to stray too far from the round-by-round expertise dice philosophy. I think that what you suggest ought to be playtested though - my feeling with ED was that everyone was so excited by giving the Fighter options, they would have like anything, and now that we're seeing the Rogue pick up the same abilities there's a re-evaluation of whether the system was that good after all.

For a stamina-like system as you suggest, I would try one of two things. You could increase all the costs of maneuvers, so that the Fighter gaining a point a turn wasn't such a big deal and they would mostly rely on the points they start a combat with. The Rogue would then also start with fewer stamina points, and rather than regaining them slowly would have adrenalin rushes to give them temporary points to spend (like my current danger sense) and when they have advantage against an opponent. The tricky bit, as ever, is avoiding an overpowered Rog1/Ftr1 compared to either class 2.

I don't know how you prefer your magic system either.. but a system like this can totally be used for mana points/spell slots that renew on a daily basis too. The important feature is really that different classes feel different, whilst using the same underlying physics/mechanics.

 

[the Jester]

The problem I'm trying to address is the unfortunate same-ness introduced by having the Rogue use the Fighter's expertise dice mechanic in exactly the same way as the Fighter, only with slightly different maneuvers - the mechanics don't evoke the archetypes of the classes.

Ahh, gotcha- I guess you're just approaching it from a (to me) weird angle.

I also think there is a problem inherent in making maneuvers a round-based resource - balancing at-will abilities is very difficult. Further, the current maneuvers show no power progression - the use of multiple dice either increases damage or improves the odds of rolling better for another effect (whirlwind attack excepted - that shows a sort of progress).

I don't know that I agree with the difficulty here. I think the increase in accuracy/damage/whatever being based on the increasing expertise dice is actually really cool, and I like the way the dice offer pcs different options from round to round, especially once you have more than one die. I also appreciate the elegance of the "roll however many you like but only use the best one" mechanic- tweaking probability without 'unflattening' the math.

I take your point on making the resource encounter-based, but bear in mind it isn't the same as the 4E system. The criticism there wasn't that you couldn't do something every round, it was that you could never do the same thing twice within the same encounter. Here you can throw out the same maneuver every round (if it's cheap) or save up and use something bigger every few rounds - I think that the resilience and tactical knowledge of the Fighter is represented quite well by having the resources build up until they want to unleash them, and the weapon attack bonus is a natural way to limit how much you can do at once by level.

We'll have to disagree here; I heard the "all martial powers should be at will" chant quite a bit when the subject came up. And I don't care for the "you have to wait to use your cool attacks" rhythm you've got in your system, but that's a matter of taste.

I forsee problems with using dice rather than points. Take Deadly Strike for instance, by the time you have 3d10 expertise dice, why would you want to be a two-handed weapon guy?

This is a very good point. I am hoping that we'll see specializations, prestige classes and other options that give you good reason, but we'll see.

I also think that they are very limiting when it comes to design: every maneuver you come up with will have to involve the dice size in some way, or bigger dice aren't better. Note how there is no knockdown in the current set of maneuvers - because it's cheap to do with a d4 but rubbish with a d10.

Another good point, though I'm of the opinion that you can simply have some maneuvers cost one die, two dice, etc. without having them affect the results other than to enable the maneuver if those maneuvers are sufficiently cool.

Another way this could work, let's say for disarm: you spend two expertise dice to enable your autodisarm attack, but if your enemy has expertise dice they can spend some/all to make an opposed roll against your spent dice. I dunno, this one just struck me and I haven't given it any thought- my point is that this may not be a very big problem.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

I also appreciate the elegance of the "roll however many you like but only use the best one" mechanic- tweaking probability without 'unflattening' the math.

I'll just pick up on this, since you and I are the only ones talking , but whilst answering the survey that went out today I noticed that this mechanic, whilst it appears to keep things with the bounded accuracy framework, in fact completely breaks it.

Not until 4th level mind you: that's when you get two dice. Specifically Skill Mastery, though Iron Will/Great Fortitude/Lightning Reflexes also suffer, gives you a bonus that takes you far beyond the bonuses we've seen so far. It turns out that you have greater than a 50% chance of getting 5+ on the highest of 2d6 (anydice.com is your friend here). When you hit 10th level, 3d10, you have a greater than 50% chance of getting +8. Now, in combat, yes you're sacrificing your ability to do something else with those dice, but outside of combat? The Rogue is getting d20 + let's say +4 ability modifier, +6 from increased skill training and a +8 on average on top of that, so that he can, odds on, hit DC 27, aka 'only demigods can do this'. Min-max and you can get another +2 there, so your skill check is d20+20. Ridiculous, and completely antagonistic to the bounded accuracy framework. The saving throw maneuvers mostly come up during combat, but traps? May as well use all your dice against it. Tumbling Dodge as well, lets you SUM the dice for your AC, Opportunist lets you pick the best for your attack modifier. I know these are limited circumstances, but it still goes against the principle of the system.

 

[kerleth]

I forsee problems with using dice rather than points. Take Deadly Strike for instance, by the time you have 3d10 expertise dice, why would you want to be a two-handed weapon guy? Your damage dice has been overwhelmed by your ability to deal extra damage every round, and you'd rather have +1AC than +2 average damage at that point. I also think that they are very limiting when it comes to design: every maneuver you come up with will have to involve the dice size in some way, or bigger dice aren't better. Note how there is no knockdown in the current set of maneuvers - because it's cheap to do with a d4 but rubbish with a d10.

I think the reason they left out the push and knockdown manuevers was to get us to use the rules for doing it the generic way in the latest packet. That's just a theory though. I also remember reading an article where it was commented that the die size increasing was integral to keeping the damage options competitive with the manuevers. When you starting fighting things with 50-70hp +1d4 just seems a little lackluster. But knocking them prone so your ally gets advantage, heck yeah! From my experience that +1 AC is usually more valuable than an extra point or two of damage anyways. That is really a matter of two-handed weapon vs sword and board, since it could also be argued that who cares about +1 to AC when you can negate 3d10 damage. Also, sticking to a die system allows an at-a-glance difference between classes by varying die type and number. Of course they didn't do that with the rogue, but I suspect they are taking things a step at a time and seeing how they are received.

When I first saw the expertise dice system I was surprised they hadn't gone with a stamina system - the Fighter has some maximum level of stamina, performing maneuvers uses this up, and a short rest is required to recharge back to full. I tried to implement that at first, but found it difficult to mesh with the Rogue's more immediate gaining of points, and I didn't want to stray too far from the round-by-round expertise dice philosophy. I think that what you suggest ought to be playtested though - my feeling with ED was that everyone was so excited by giving the Fighter options, they would have like anything, and now that we're seeing the Rogue pick up the same abilities there's a re-evaluation of whether the system was that good after all.

I don't remember having seen anyone actually complaining about the general application of ED (erectile dysfunction?), rather in it's application to the rogue. I do agree with your general concept, about making the rogue work a little differently. I'm going to play Devil's Advocate for a moment though. The rogue isn't just a different set of manuevers. He is also different weapon proficiencies, armor proficiencies, attack bonus, and skills. When you start really pairing down the differences between classes and how many true "defining features" there are, that is actually a lot more than some people make it seem. Spell slots are old hat. Love 'em or hate 'em all of us long time players know the score. Expertise is a shiny new thing, and it is likely that they want to keep it simple and try all the permutations that way. There seems to be a real design push to minimize the number of unnecessary bells and whistles to keep the game simplified and more accessible. I think they started at the right point. Don't jump in and sell your house until you have tried rearranging the furniture first, if you catch my drift.

For a stamina-like system as you suggest, I would try one of two things. You could increase all the costs of maneuvers, so that the Fighter gaining a point a turn wasn't such a big deal and they would mostly rely on the points they start a combat with. The Rogue would then also start with fewer stamina points, and rather than regaining them slowly would have adrenalin rushes to give them temporary points to spend (like my current danger sense) and when they have advantage against an opponent. The tricky bit, as ever, is avoiding an overpowered Rog1/Ftr1 compared to either class 2.

Just to clarify, I'm not advocating a stamina based system as a whole. I am instead saying that a small amount of manuevers that worked that way would be fun. It would really serve to set them apart and highlight how unique they are. Also, it would then not redefine the general "at-will warrior" schtick the fighter has going on, which is a perfectly valid (and probably wise) way to develop the fighter. I honestly don't expect anything like that in the core books, but think it will be sprinkled here and there in splats. Maybe even a "Complete Wuxia" so that it is targeted more at those who won't rebel and cry for blood.