Forcing enemies to shift

[Li Shenron]

I do like the new tactical options from sliding enemies, and I do like the fact that movement becomes more important. That certainly meets my taste.

In case of abilities when you slide an enemy I do not actually have particular problems explaining it in game terms: I see them like in those western spaghetti movies (ever seen a Bud Spencer & Terence Hill flick? ) where two guys punch/slap the foe in turn and bounce him back and forth.

What I am concerned with is (a) consistency and (b) easy chance of abuse.

Example of (a) is being able to slide anything even if much bigger than you.

Concern of (b) is about pits, lava and similar deadly obstacles. At first sight it looks like the sliding powers will make these kind of hazards more interesting in the game, since they become a real threat and not just tapestry. However I wonder... as soon as players figure out that a sliding power is an insta-kill in presence of a pit deep enough, would a DM ever feature a deadly pit anymore in his adventures?

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Well it isn't necessarily a instant kill, since a monster would have to roll to see if they fell off or just went prone.

Also, with more powerful creatures like elites and solos or BBEG. I would be tempted to have them do a skill-challenge to for example climb back up the side of the cliff to rejoin the fight kind of deal.

 

[Dunamin]

It's not the rules that are poor, necessarily.

The problem is that if you are trying to have an internally-consistent world, the idea that "oh, the dragon moved because there was a hole" makes no sense if there was no hole there to begin with. Unless we're talking about casters, you can't just magic up a hole in the floor with being awesome with a weapon.

The explanations for powers like these should rely upon the character, and the character only, doing something. Not messing around with the terrain, unless the ability is dependent upon a particular feature of the terrain, and not dictating the behavior of your enemies, unless the ability is one that explicity does so (like charm or hold person).

The various explanations for forced movement would generally be derived from descriptions of individual powers.

Tide of Iron pictures the acts as physically pushing back your opponent and I imagine that the limitations to size that applies to this power would also be included in powers that similarly are flavored as physically pushing back.
On the other hand, Curse of the Dark Dream makes the opponent believe there are imaginary obstacles and threats that force him to move about, in which case a size limitation would not make sense.

I am thrilled about how dynamic and mobile combats have become. Not only does it add tactical depth, but it also allows more cinematic moments where people are hurled through windows, off bridges, and into traps! Good times!

 

[Hussar]

/snip

However I wonder... as soon as players figure out that a sliding power is an insta-kill in presence of a pit deep enough, would a DM ever feature a deadly pit anymore in his adventures?

Well, considering that save or die has been pretty much nerfed, I would say that featuring deadly pits is probably a bad idea. A pit that hurts lots if you fall into it is a good idea. One that is deep enough to instantly kill you is probably bad. The point of terrain is not to make combat that much more deadly, just more interesting.

 

[Revinor]

I hope there will be some official rule for that, if not, we can always house-rule it. Something like "You are allowed to ignore effects of forced pull/push/slide, but you fall prone and attacker gets immediate AoO against you with a bonus to hit equal to number of squares you were supposed to move (and possibly everybody gets combat advantage against you till next round if it is not effect of being prone already)".

Effect should be balanced in the way that you may want to use it not only when avoiding bottomless pits, but even in some cases of normal push. I think that AoO, wasted move action next round to stand up (is it another AoO?, in this case maybe the first one is not required) and giving combat advantage to everybody around for one round should be roughly ok.

 

[Ian O'Rourke]

The explanations for powers like these should rely upon the character, and the character only, doing something. Not messing around with the terrain, unless the ability is dependent upon a particular feature of the terrain, and not dictating the behavior of your enemies, unless the ability is one that explicity does so (like charm or hold person).

Where are the abilities that dictate the behaviour of enemies (without it being a charm or hold) as you say?

I've not got a massive knowledge of all abilities released so far so I'm intrigued what these ones are, since people are moaning about them I assume they exist?

I suspect Tide of Iron has a size restriction, and if so I don't seem the problem, the character attacks with such power, with a focus on using his shield as a bashing implement that he knocks his apponent back. Seems sensible to me.

Let's assume for a second an ability like Tide of Iron doesn't have a size restriction, so a fighter can battle back a Dragon or a Big Giant. Sounds stupid? Well, it does initially, but I tell you what sounds even more stupid? That the fighter and the Dragon or the Giant can fight and both stand in place and hit each other - in truth that fight would be highly mobile as the fighter was moved constantly by the big lumbering hulk that is the Dragon or Giant. Yet for ages players of D&D have accepted they can stand on adjacent squares and go toe-to-toe? If you accept that, and allow the the heroic fighter to hold the Dragon / Giant at bay (by virtue of not always having to step back away from it) it's not a big leap to assume he can cause it to step back the other way due to extremes of skill and heroism.

But it's a moot point, as I suspect Tide of Iron will be size restricted.

 

[DeusExMachina]

I hope there will be some official rule for that, if not, we can always house-rule it. Something like "You are allowed to ignore effects of forced pull/push/slide, but you fall prone and attacker gets immediate AoO against you with a bonus to hit equal to number of squares you were supposed to move (and possibly everybody gets combat advantage against you till next round if it is not effect of being prone already)".

Effect should be balanced in the way that you may want to use it not only when avoiding bottomless pits, but even in some cases of normal push. I think that AoO, wasted move action next round to stand up (is it another AoO?, in this case maybe the first one is not required) and giving combat advantage to everybody around for one round should be roughly ok.

What we've heard sofar indicates that a character or monster pushed into an unsafe square gets a saving throw and if he passes he falls prone on the last safe square before being pushed in. What with people having combat advantage against the character and needing to spend a move action to get up again is nasty enough, but probably preferable to being pushed into the pit/fire/etc...

 

[thundershot]

Wow. I looked at the thread title really fast and didn't see "shift". I saw something else... I shouldn't check the board so soon after waking up.. lol..



Chris

 

[Revinor]

What we've heard sofar indicates that a character or monster pushed into an unsafe square gets a saving throw and if he passes he falls prone on the last safe square before being pushed in.

Which means saving throw against death and even without counting opponent level into it. If the roll is required, I would rather use some kind of skill check (acrobatics?). Plus, it is not really acceptable for me to have a mechanic which works only in presence of deep pits - if there is a way to prevent push, it should work regardless if you are standing with your back to the deep pit or not. And for sure, it should not depend on fact if the pit is 5', 25' or 625' deep - you should just have the choice to save yourself or not.

 

[Dunamin]

Which means saving throw against death and even without counting opponent level into it. If the roll is required, I would rather use some kind of skill check (acrobatics?). Plus, it is not really acceptable for me to have a mechanic which works only in presence of deep pits - if there is a way to prevent push, it should work regardless if you are standing with your back to the deep pit or not. And for sure, it should not depend on fact if the pit is 5', 25' or 625' deep - you should just have the choice to save yourself or not.

I don't know. Level is taken into account in the challenge of landing attacks and resilience in taking the punishment - a low-level foe has low defenses and fewer hps, while a high-level foe has high defenses and more hps.

If you manage to land enough attacks that force movement to push a dangerous enemy into deadly environment, without the enemy succeeding in maneuvering to prevent this throughout the fight, there’s nothing wrong with him/her taken the punishment as a result. Same goes for foes using this against PCs.

However, I find that its usually more interesting to design encounters so that environment has a significant but not extreme effect – make that pit 5 ft and neither side will bother trying to force foes in it, but make it endless and your combat will be over much sooner than you intended, depending on which side succeeding in forcing opponents in first (though once in a while it’s fun to raise the stakes by putting a very deadly element on the playfield for all sides to take advantage of).