Increasing combat mobility

[Thondor]

Increasing Combat Mobility

These thoughts oringinally occured to me in the Eliminating Iterative attacks thread http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=196052

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baby Samurai
I would actually like a system where characters and monsters get their full array of attacks as a standard action, thus giving combat more movement and moving away from standing in one place and hacking, which becomes even more apparent at higher levels (for melee types). At levels 1 to 5 a fighter can move and still get his full attack, but suddenly when he reaches 6th (1st iterative) he's encouraged to not move more than 5 ft. a round and stand there like a schmoe – we must fix this.

As was said above, this makes combat very static and lacking in cinematics. Furthermore the combat variants I propose below would make high BAB classes much more verrsatile.

Keeping Warriors mobile Variant
I see three possibilities,
1) Warriors Classes (and most monsters- unless they are clearly spellcasters) can full attack throughout their move action (throughout a single move action at their base speed -edit). They can attack any number of enemies equal to their # of iterative attacks that they move ajacent to in their move action.
this allows the warrior classes to excell in combat like no other classes
2) All classes besides spellcasters (and all monsters - unless they are clearly spellcasters) can full attack throughout their move action (throughout a single move action at their base speed -edit). They can attack any number of enemies equal to their # of iterative attacks that they move ajacent to in their move action.
After all rogues and bards are often seen as the ones ducking and weaving through a battlefield.
3) All classes and all monsters can full attack throughout their move action (throughout a single move action at their base speed -edit). They can attack any number of enemies equal to their # of iterative attacks that they move ajacent to in their move action.
After all with much lower BAB the spellcasters will benefit much less from this ability, besides which mostly they'll want to be casting spells not making melee/ranged attacks.

All variants would allow for some serious tactical movement on the part of the warriors. I believe it would help to remedy some of the classic feeling that spellcasters outstrip warriors at higher levels.This would make some feats redundant for warriors under 1 and for the other classes under 2) and 3) mobility, whirlwind attack (any warrior can now attack whomever he please with his 1st 2nd third and fourth attack), ride-by attack. This would also increase the abilities of TWF. (Although I suppose it would also really helps those with Cleave because of your ability to move between attacks. You'd probably have to limit Great Cleave, say to a number of attacks equal to the characters Str Bonus.)
OF course much of this movement will still be impeded by Attacks of Oppurtunity a good thing IMHO.
All magics and objects (caltrops, tanglefoot bags, terrain) that impede or improve movement become much better. It makes wearing light armor a better choice (higher movement).
It does make monks much stronger because of their many attacks and because of their increasing base land speed. Helps Barbarians as well for the later reason and hinders races with 20ft movement (dwarves, gnome, halfling). Could be good could be bad.
Of course if you don't feel that Warrior types need a boost then you could let all classes gain this mobility variant 3). Perhaps the better solution is to let Bards and Rogues gain the mobility (after all Iconicly they are the ones ducking and weaving through combat) and restrict only the spellcasters to only being able to move 5ft and full attack.

So what are your thoughts on how this will alter combat. Is it unbalancing, what else changes and are these good or bab things?

 

[Thondor]

Other things affected,

Mounted individuals benefit a lot from increased movement. Also terrain altering spells and natural terrain can become more important. Both in the sense that they can be easier to circumvent and that they are more important in shaping the battle.

Spellcasters and Movement/ Standard actions
Regardless of the variant adapted anything that was previously considered a standard action should probably be able to be done anywhere within the move action. (essentially giving everyone mobility)

Thoughts?

 

[SuedodeuS]

I really like this idea. It would definately lead to a more cinematic battle. One of the reasons, however, why you normally can't attack more than once after you've moved 5 feet has to do with time - frankly, it takes too long to reach your enemy for you to be able to get off more than one attack. As it stands, this system would allow a character to move his full speed, then unleash hell on an enemy. I might have a bit of a remedy for this, however.

Have a "use it or lose it" system based around the character's movement. Take their actual speed (so it would be speed x2 if they were running) and divide it by number of attacks. This value is basically how far a character can move and still get off their full number of attacks. For each time they pass it without getting off an attack in the intervening time, the number of attacks they get that round drops by . If a character is running, he can only get off one attack on each target.

Let's use a human fighter in light armor as an example. At 10th level, he has two attacks, one at +10 and one at +5. His speed is 30 ft. If he's just hustling, this means he can move up to 15 ft before his first attack. Provided he makes an attack during this first 15 ft, he also gets another attack (at +5) at one additional target within his movement range (or against the first target if he wants). If he moved 20+ ft before his first attack, however, he'd only get one attack at +10. If running, he could move up to 30 ft before his first attack and still be able to get off a second, although not against the same target.
Now let's level this guy up to 15 so that he has +15/+10/+5. Now his "use it or lose it" distance is only 10 ft. So he could move up to 10 ft away from his starting position and make a +15 attack, then move up to 20 ft away from his initial starting position and make a +10 attack, then move up to 30 ft away from his initial starting position and make a +5 attack. If he had to move 15 ft before making his first attack, he'd make one at +15 and still have one left (to be used at any point within his range) at +10. If he had to move more than 20 ft, though, he would only be able to get off one attack. If running, he could move up to 20 ft before his first attack and still be able to get off two more, although not against the same target as the first.


Sorry for taking up so much space, but you gave me an idea so I ran with it. For mounted characters, they would use their mount's speed for their "use it or lose it" distance. For dual wielding characters, have each hand be done seperately - so a 3-attack character w/ only TWF (thus 4 attacks) would still use 1/3 speed for the "use it or lose it" distance and could make an offhand attack at any point during their movement. The same character w/ Imp.TWF would use 1/3 speed for their normal weapon and 1/2 for their offhand weapon. To prevent things from getting bogged down, you should probably have players write down their "use it or lose it" distance next to their speed for a quick reference.

As for feats, mobility would actually be more useful (since it adds to your AC against AoO for moving out of threatened squares - something you'll likely do a lot of). Whirlwind would still be a good thing to have, since it lets you attack every foe within range at your highest BAB (so the 15th level fighter from above could get off 8 +15 attacks if completely surrounded by other medium sized enemies). Ride-by attack and spring attack could be revamped so that, instead of just letting you do what this variant allows naturally, they let you do it without provoking attacks of opportunity.
[edit: I just took a look at the PHB, and it turns out ride-by attack and spring attack already work w/o provoking attacks of opportunity. I think they would still be worthwhile feats, particularly because you can now make multiple such attacks.]

Finally, I think this would work perfectly well implemented for all classes equally. Warriors still get the biggest advantage (since they have a high BAB), rogues and bards are able to use it, clerics generally won't get a huge advantage out of it (they have a middling BAB and rely on heavy armor), and it's nearly useless for arcane spellcasters (since they really shouldn't be using melee attacks anyway). Personally, I wouldn't give spellcasters the option to move, cast, then move again without a feat. If I did, I'd probably require them to make a concentration check, but that's your call.

 

[Thondor]

1) I agree that giving it to all classes is probably the best and simplest solution. Who else agrees with this?


2)Use it or lose it system
Hmmm while your use it or lose is certainly a workable system, (and logical) I do forsee some problems.
Individuals with 20ft movement, or even worse 15ft. If through extrapolation I take a 16th level Halfling fighter in Full-plate, (very rare but bare with me) If he doesn't move at all he keeps all four attacks +16/+11/+6/+1, if he takes a mere 5ft step he loses his lowest attacks if not two of his lowest attacks (1/3 movement is 5 ft, under your proposal if I understand correctly, based on the number of attacks individual has is the percentage of his move he can make while keeping those attacks. So with 4 attacks can take up to 1/4 move before losing an attack, 2/4 before losing next attack etc.) Based on wether or not we round up or down . . .
Even a 16th level Human fighter loses an attack if he wears full plate and takes a five-foot step.
While keeping track of these movement rates isn't really challenging, it is one more thing. One more complication to explain to the players and one more thing to keep track, especially in large fights were the incresed mobility comes in handy. I as DM don't really want to have to and one more thing to keep track of my monsters.

It's much easier to explain to the players - Full attacks yeah now you can do those as long as you move your speed, anywhere along your movement. Other full-round actions still exist (like loading a heavy crossbow). Oh and all standard actions can be taken anywhere along your move action. It has a certain simplicity to it.

The point should be to keep things mobile throughout higher levels not make things gradually less mobile. Whish is what your Use it or Lose it method achievies. (Although it is certainly better then the current arrangement)

 

[Thondor]

Feats

As for feats, mobility would actually be more useful (since it adds to your AC against AoO for moving out of threatened squares - something you'll likely do a lot of). Whirlwind would still be a good thing to have, since it lets you attack every foe within range at your highest BAB (so the 15th level fighter from above could get off 8 +15 attacks if completely surrounded by other medium sized enemies). Ride-by attack and spring attack could be revamped so that, instead of just letting you do what this variant allows naturally, they let you do it without provoking attacks of opportunity.
[edit: I just took a look at the PHB, and it turns out ride-by attack and spring attack already work w/o provoking attacks of opportunity. I think they would still be worthwhile feats, particularly because you can now make multiple such attacks.]

I stand corrected, about mobility, it is much better. I was thinking of spring attack, not sure if the remaining benefits are worth a whole feat.
Whirlwind attack is less powerful relatively speaking, seeing as a 16th level character could make four different attacks on four different creatures at his different attack bonuses something he couldn't do before. - Perhaps altering whirlwind attack to a Standard action is the solution. With it as a Full-attack action, using standard rules it does not provoke attacks of oppurtunity. so your propose solution wouldn't work.
Ride-by Attack - (already provides not attack of oppurtunity from one defender) - this is much like spring attack now. Should both spring attack and Ride-By-Attack let you provoke no attacks of Oppurtunity from any of the defenders you attack? or is that too much?

PS. thanks for your thoughts SuedodeuS, keep them coming. And feel free to try and convince me that your right about your Use it or Lose it Idea

edit- you were editing while I was writing

 

[SuedodeuS]

Those are some good points. Of course, although it does look like the system causes you to lose mobility as you gain levels, compare a 2 attack and 3 attack character. One can get off up to two attacks if he moves up to half his speed before making his first one - the other move up to 2/3 his speed before making his first attack and still get off two strikes in the same round.

People with low movement do certainly take a hit compared to everyone else, but I think that's alright. It doesn't make a lot of sense for characters in heavy armor to be jumping about spry on the battlefield - their going to hold their ground and dish out some pain. Gnomes and halflings do take something of an unfair hit, so maybe adjusting the system so that they can move a bit further than spd/attacks for their first movement could work (say, have a halfling get +5 ft on the first one but still have the others work as normal).
As for the unforunate fellows that end up losing attacks with a single 5-foot step, I'd say implement a caveat - the "use it or lose it" distance must be at least 5 feet.

I certainly agree that this system makes things more complicated, particularly when you have monsters involved (a gargantuan or colossal dragon has 8 attacks per round of 6 different types - how the hell do you determine what attacks they can get off?). I'd have to play test it to see if it makes things enough more complicated that it gets to be tedious. Your system would certainly simplify things, although it would also mean rolling a lot more dice. It would also make instances in which the monster attacked first much more dangerous - normally keeping your distance from a dragon will mean you'll only get a bite every so often, but now as long as the dragon can reach you he can tear you 8 different ways.

 

[SuedodeuS]

Whirlwind attack is less powerful relatively speaking, seeing as a 16th level character could make four different attacks on four different creatures at his different attack bonuses something he couldn't do before.

Actually, the way I understood it, the Full Attack Action allowed you to strike whomever you wanted, so long as they were within range. If you were being attacked by two orcs, you could attack the first until he dropped (say, 3 attacks), then turn around and use the rest of your attacks on the other.

Ride-by Attack - this is much like spring attack now. Should both spring attack and Ride-By-Attack let you provoke no attacks of Oppurtunity from any of the defenders you attack? or is that too much?

Actually, I think that would work quite well.

 

[Thondor]

Feats
I forgot to mention Shot on the Run is now useless. I don't thing ranged attacks have a really good reason to be treated differently. (though I could understand a case being made for one) The largest restriction I could see imposing would be, Move, Full-attack, finish Movement.

 

[Thondor]

Those are some good points. Of course, although it does look like the system causes you to lose mobility as you gain levels, compare a 2 attack and 3 attack character. One can get off up to two attacks if he moves up to half his speed before making his first one - the other move up to 2/3 his speed before making his first attack and still get off two strikes in the same round.

Wait what, you lost me explain how your system is working again please. Are you saying it's just if you move more then Half-speed lose one attack (assuming you have two), when do you lose your secound attack? your third attack?

Umm I realize now that it may not have been clear but my original intention was that as long as the character made took only a single move-action then he could scatter his full-attack throughout the move. Does that change things?

People with low movement do certainly take a hit compared to everyone else, but I think that's alright. It doesn't make a lot of sense for characters in heavy armor to be jumping about spry on the battlefield - their going to hold their ground and dish out some pain. Gnomes and halflings do take something of an unfair hit, so maybe adjusting the system so that they can move a bit further than spd/attacks for their first movement could work (say, have a halfling get +5 ft on the first one but still have the others work as normal).
As for the unforunate fellows that end up losing attacks with a single 5-foot step, I'd say implement a caveat - the "use it or lose it" distance must be at least 5 feet.

I'm certainly agreed with the need for the five-foot step caveat if using your use-or-lose it system.

Your system would certainly simplify things, although it would also mean rolling a lot more dice. It would also make instances in which the monster attacked first much more dangerous - normally keeping your distance from a dragon will mean you'll only get a bite every so often, but now as long as the dragon can reach you he can tear you 8 different ways.

Rolling more dice- only because the combatants get to use all their attacks whenever they get to attack.
True- monsters with multiple attacks would be considerably more dangerous. Some should even see a rise in CR. As long as the DM is aware of this, and the players adjust their tactics (it does make defending the wizard more difficult) then their shouldn't be much of a problem.

 

[SuedodeuS]

Feats
I forgot to mention Shot on the Run is now useless. I don't thing ranged attacks have a really good reason to be treated differently. (though I could understand a case being made for one) The largest restriction I could see imposing would be, Move, Full-attack, finish Movement.

I forgot about that one, too. You're right - shot on the run becomes completely and utterly useless in this system. The only way I can think of to make it not be would be to impose a penalty for shooting on the run without it - but the penalty would have to be rather large to warrant the feat, and then we'd just be unfairly punishing players who want to make archers. Of course, on the opposite side of the coin this system could reward such players unfairly - their archers would have no trouble keeping their distance from enemies while still getting off full attacks, all without the investment of a single feat. This could require some thought.