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

[CapnZapp]

Eh, in general a bonus to hit is going to net you more overall damage than a similar bonus to damage.

Yep.

 

[Corwin]

So you will have to get used to me sticking around, Corwin, discussing ways to tweak 5th edition to make it more robust for "advanced" play (or at least my kind of play), I'm afraid.

I see what you did there. "Advanced", huh? Please. I'm at least as "advanced" a player as you and I'm not having all your problems with 5e.

If you're so "advanced", why did you throw a 70 gnoll mob at the group a single time, to be chewed up by a spell you *knew* they had, then give up? Sounds terrible shortsighted to me. Even pedestrian. Certainly not on any level that could be considered "advanced" play. I mean, gnolls have freakin' longbows, for cryin' out loud! I thought you saw the superiority of ranged combat? Yet you had all of them run up, like lemmings, into a 15-foot radius meat-grinder spell centered on the PC caster, anyway? Yikes.

 

[Caliban]

I see what you did there. "Advanced", huh? Please. I'm at least as "advanced" a player as you and I'm not having all your problems with 5e.

Dude, chill out. He put "advanced" in quotes, and even added a parenthetical comment to make it less absolute. You are being way oversensitive about this.

 

[Corwin]

Dude, chill out. He put "advanced" in quotes, and even added a parenthetical comment to make it less absolute. You are being way oversensitive about this.

I was being sarcastic, just as he was, not oversensitive. I saw what he did. I even said so in the first sentence. But whatevs.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

No.

I want the game with feats and MC to be as balanced and varied as the game without.

I consider this expectation a completely reasonable and natural thing; you trying to twist it into something unreasonable nowithstanding.

I don't disagree with you on the issue. They should have done a better job of balancing the options which they introduced for the game.

But the fact of the matter is that the default state of the game, unless the DM actively intervenes, has no feats and no multi-classing. Kind of like the default healing rate for the game is one-hour short rest and overnight full heal, unless someone actively does something to fix it. It sucks, and I wish they would have chosen otherwise, but it's a simple fact of the game. You can change it, but those are the defaults.

And to this end, I was not responding to your assertions. I was simply correcting someone else, who said that feats weren't really optional. They are entirely optional. People can and do play the game without using the feats option, and to state otherwise is simply false.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

No.

It's fine for you to conclude your preferences are different from mine.

But please try to abstain from claiming you have done a complete job of justifying your stance while I haven't, insinuating I'm presenting an ever-shifting target.

I don't think you are presenting an ever-shifting target. I don't mean to be disrespectful.

I don't think you're arguing in bad faith.

I do think that when you present a question, you often have hidden requirements about the form of the answer which makes it frustrating to answer those questions, because I'm not a mind reader. "How would you A?" "I'd do B." "But I don't like B, because C." Well, you didn't say "How would you A if C is required?" You just said, "How would you A?" If you would do D because B isn't an option due to C, then fine--do D. But you'll have to answer your own questions next time.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Overkill would have been a worry if I hadn't tried lots of weak mobs only to see them absolutely shredded by a single Spirit Guardians spell. (I think it was 70 Gnolls vs level 8-ish characters)

I ran that encounter with the express purpose of giving the DMG mob attacks (if that's what they're called) a test whirl.

Not even once did I get to make a group melee attack against the players. Not even once.

I am honestly shocked that 70 Gnolls shredded themselves on a Spirit Guardians spell instead of firing 70 longbows. 70d8+70 (385) * hit rate DPR. If your whole goal was to try out mob attacks, then you try out mob attacks: if there's an AC 20 Fighter, well then he takes 14d8+14 (77) damage that round from 70 arrows (group ranged attack at +3).

Gnolls can survive a Spirit Guardians spell from a level 8 spellcaster, but it still slows them down, which is exactly the sort of situation that causes soldiers to pull out longbows if they weren't already using them. "Oh, something is slowing gnolls who try to reach the cleric! Guess we better shoot him instead!"

I can only assume you took away their longbows for some reason. But I can't imagine why.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

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.

I agree with #5 and #6, and a variation of #2. But not for your reasons.

Archers were deadly. Ranged attacks (preferably from behind cover) should be a go-to tactic for just about anybody. The #1 reason why? Because you can't get killed if they can't hit you.

But, you need ammo, and I don't see any reasonable explanation as to why charging requires a feat. Hold your spear down and run at the other guy.

For #2, I think it's trying to target somebody else when there is somebody next to you with a sword is stupid. Opportunity attack, absolutely. And if that hits, it ruins your shot. In fact, I might go so far as AoO with advantage.

No to #1. If anything I'd do the opposite. Bowhunters are looking for a 1 shot kill, whether it's a deer, a bear, lion, whatever. Humans are much easier (although armor was effective, past short range anyway).

No to #3. The economy of actions works really well in this edition. I wouldn't change that.

No to #4, either. For the same reason, you're taking time to not do something. But a ready action would negate any bonus the archer had for being hidden.

No to #7. At least in part. Advantage + max damage is too much.

As for #8, I'm certainly not opposed to additional move amounts. However, in my campaign we use AD&D-style 1 minute rounds. A normal person can move 120 feet in a round without running, and much more if they sprint. To put it another way, I usually don't worry about how far somebody can move in a round, it's almost always irrelevant.

Running across a field towards some archers. That's a different story. The longer you're in range and not within melee closing range is a dangerous proposition.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

Ever walked through a forest? Or a jungle? Or looked at a map and seen contour lines?

Or watched Revenant where the bear is... right there.

Just start your encounter descriptions with: 'As you enter the clearing you spot a pack of wolves emerging from the treeline about 30' away...' or 'Rounding the bend on the road around a small hillock, you come across a band of Ogres crossing the road at a distance of 40'.. or 'As you come up the ridge line, you peer over it and into the dead ground on the other side. You notice a manticore taking a drink in the creekline on the other side, about 50' from your position' or 'As you wander through the barren bad-lands (checks passive perception of the PCs, notes two have a good enough bonus) you notice movement in the rocks around you. You two are not surprised, but the rest of you are as bandits open fire on your position...'

I mean dont do it all the time. Some encounters you want to start at longer range (to give your casters and ranged guys a chance to shine). 'As you cross the plains, you see a group of humanoids emerge from behind some trees around 300' away...'

But you dont need complex rules to do it. Just... DM it.

I haven't seen Revenant, but I was hanging out in the woods, and heard a helicopter nearby. I then heard a snap to the side and behind me and there was a black bear not 30 feet from me that pushed off of a tree trunk and turned and ran the other direction. In plain sight. I had no idea it was there. And this was an evergreen wood, no low branches with leaves or anything, just tree trunks.

And in terms to the prior post that you already responded to, 150 ft is 3 rounds with a dash before melee. But anybody who is going to run across a field towards archers is probably going to get shot anyway. At least 3 shots in that time, and that's assuming they don't have extra attacks, and that there is only one archer. Most likely they'd be dead.

On the other hand, at longer ranges archery really isn't that accurate. Most hunters won't shoot something more than 40 yards out, and 30 yards is more common. I wouldn't want to be the target at that distance. Longbows were mass weapons for long range, with volleys of hundreds of arrows up to 300 to 400 yards out.

Also, I don't typically describe things in terms of feet or yards. It's more along the lines of "you come across a band of ogres, they are at the extent of your short range" or "they are within range to close for melee," something like that. In the first example, they might actually be just beyond your short range, imposing disadvantage.

Nor do I worry about "giving casters and ranged guys a chance to shine." That's up to them. Encounter distance is a function of action (usually movement), Perception and terrain. If they are traveling stealthily and slowly, then there's a good chance that they can control the encounter distance (or avoid it altogether). Otherwise the encounter distance will happen to them.

 

[smbakeresq]

Nod. At best, additional quivers would likely be tucked away in a backpack for storage. So once the archer burns through his active quiver, if the combat isn't over yet, will need at least a round of ineffectualness gaining access to a fresh loadout.

A quiver wouldn't fit in a backpack. Try it or just look at a picture of both.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app