D&D 5E Helping melee combat to be more competitive to ranged.

Uchawi

First Post
5E could use some more variance on range categories and reduced them at the same time. That would create a sweet spot where you would have to be fairly close to remove any penalties and still not be next to them and have disadvantage. That makes is easier for melee to close in on ranged combatants.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lost Soul

First Post
Personaly, I think that melee combat is lagging a bit behind ranged combat. But not by much.

Here is few suggestions to help it along.


1. Raise the damage die of non-finesse melee weapons by one die. 1d4->1d6,1d6->1d8,1d8->1d10,1d10->2d6,1d12/2d6->2d8.

2. Making ranged attack provokes Attack of Opportunity(AoO) in addition of suffering disadvantage ot attack roll.

3. AoO does not use reaction. Reaction should be used of special class abilities not a simple swing. You have a number of AoOs per round equal to your proficiency bonus.

4. Ready action can be used to make every attack as normal Attack action. That way when archer peek around corner to shoot you can make your "full attack" on him.

5. Count the damn ammunition and check for load. Archers cannot pass whole campaign with starting 30 arrows and they sure can't carry 500 arrows around without magic quivers/bags of holding.

6. Add charge action: Action, add half your speed to your movement this round, but all movement must be in a straight line. If you move atleast 20ft make one melee attack as bonus action.

7. Add new feat: combat reflexes: +1 to str, dex or con. You have advantage on AoO attack roll, and deal max damage with AoO.

8. Add Run action: After you use your action to Dash, you can use bonus action to Run. Add your base move speed to your total speed for this round(with Dash, total of 3× speed). You can only move in a straight line.

1. I could kind of get behind that

2. No, let people live out their Legolas or Hank the Ranger fantasies

3. agreed, let all combatants get unlimited attacks of opportunity as long as the condition presents itself for one, only exception may be polearm master as that could need some tweaking

4 NO

5 Yes

6 Possible for mounted combat, especially with lances. D&D really does not do a mounted charge with a lance justice

7 NO, under no circumstances should a feat grant max damage in any circumstance especially with the liberal multi classing rules in place and certain feats (looking at you polearm master)

8 Totally unnecessary and completely unrealistic. Also, a run feat would just allow archers to run off the board. Won't solve anything
 

Lost Soul

First Post
Not all settings are 20×20 rooms in dungeons with 10ft corridors in between.

In somewhat open terrain minimum range for encounter is 60ft(normal darkvision range) or 150ft(longbow range). If there is open terrain al around, that is 5 rounds to close down to melee.

Just have the monsters take dodge actions as they run up if they do not have ranged offensive capabilities. Disadvantage on attack rolls will even up odds against PC's even if it takes a monster 5 rounds to make it through a kill zone
 

Lhynn

First Post
We took a poll. Not only did melee beat out ranged for preferences of the users here, but it kicked the butt of ranged by a massive 30 point margin. Make melee more competitive? It not only competes, but it trounces ranged in terms of popularity.

Once that has been established, why is this thread still going like this? Shouldn't it rather be, "how can we make ranged more attractive to people instead of melee?"
Why would I care about what's popular?
Especially with a sample so insignificant.
 

Lhynn

First Post
Melee oriented characters taking more damage than ranged characters is a feature and not a bug of the game. Its the reason that in the 20th century no one gets into hand to hand combat unless they CANNOT avoid it by any means. Ranged weapons should in fact do MORE damage than they currently do in a D&D game as piercing attacks are much more effective at armor penetration than slashing or bludgeoning attacks. You sign up for being a melee class EXPECTING to take more damage than a ranged character. Its the reason you are in heavier armor and tend to use a shield because you are protecting friends and its YOUR JOB to absorb, deflect or sustain the damage that your weaker companions cannot. If you don't like that then sit in the back and cast spells or use a ranged weapon.

Ranged weapons should be hell a inaccurate against moving targets. Especially if you aren't taking your time to aim. I'm talking below 10% of the shots made finding their target at mid distances even if trained.
Also I'm sure you can make more stabs in a 6 second round that you can fire arrows.
In fact melee disparity with ranged should be so big that while safe. Playing ranged should be downright unfun in terms of effectiveness.
Melee attacks should be much more brutal when they land. And should have many more effects than mere HP.
 

Irda Ranger

First Post
Man, I don't have the time to read 99 pages, so I don't know if this has been said before...

But my suggestion should be "Make shields better".

If you have a shield, there could be a "Take Cover" maneuver that grants 3/4 cover. +5 AC/Dex Saves, but Disadvantage on melee attacks. Good for use while Dashing to close the distance.

If you're in a group of people with shields, maybe there's a "Form Shield Wall" that has the same effect as "Take Cover" and further imposes Disadvantage on ranged attacks against you.
 

Ovinomancer

No flips for you!
We took a poll. Not only did melee beat out ranged for preferences of the users here, but it kicked the butt of ranged by a massive 30 point margin. Make melee more competitive? It not only competes, but it trounces ranged in terms of popularity.

Once that has been established, why is this thread still going like this? Shouldn't it rather be, "how can we make ranged more attractive to people instead of melee?"

CapnZapp, is that you? Oh, no, it's a different self appointed thread cop. My bad.
 

Caliban

Rules Monkey
Man, I don't have the time to read 99 pages, so I don't know if this has been said before...

But my suggestion should be "Make shields better".

If you have a shield, there could be a "Take Cover" maneuver that grants 3/4 cover. +5 AC/Dex Saves, but Disadvantage on melee attacks. Good for use while Dashing to close the distance.

If you're in a group of people with shields, maybe there's a "Form Shield Wall" that has the same effect as "Take Cover" and further imposes Disadvantage on ranged attacks against you.

I could see making those usable as a bonus action, and the effect lasts until the beginning of your next turn. You just have to take the bonus action every round to maintain the effect. Make it only available to people proficient with a shield.

Or for something simpler, just have shields give +2 AC vs ranged weapon attacks (or all ranged attacks if you want to include spells).

On an unrelated note - I've also considered making shields give a greater AC bonus to lightly armored individuals. Using the premise that if you are wearing heavy armor, a lot of the protection a shield grants is rendered redundant because you are covered in heavy armor. If you are lightly armored you have more unprotected areas that the shield can protect.
 


Ovinomancer

No flips for you!
Surely you see the irony in your comment?

Oh, totally. As ironic as spoons when I need a knife, or rain on my wedding day. Just chock full.

If you're going to stretch thread copping from saying that the thread isn't necessary to anyone poking a bit of fun at anyone else, well, officer, guilty as charged. Thread jail is over there, yeah?
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top