Blog (A5E) Keeping it Classy: Updated Core Classes in Level Up

Timespike

A5E Designer and third-party publisher
I do not, sadly. I wasn't one of the folks that worked on maneuvers.
@timespike Do you have any insight into that particular maneuver? Because I've got to agree with @Sword of Spirit that it's wording is so unclear that it manages to call into question both how Instinctive Counterattack itself works, and how maneuvers work in general.

I mean, I think it works like @Faolyn says, but I can't be sure.
I do not, sadly. I wasn't one of the people who worked on maneuvers, and I haven't heard a lot of chatter from those folks about their design process either, so I can't help with this one.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

FitzTheRuke

Legend
I do not, sadly. I wasn't one of the people who worked on maneuvers, and I haven't heard a lot of chatter from those folks about their design process either, so I can't help with this one.

So you're in the same boat as us, then. Thanks. Got any idea who we can call in? Might be a good idea to get that clarified before the book goes to print.
 

Mike Myler

Have you been to LevelUp5E.com yet?
witnessed.gif



Using a combat maneuver requires spending one or more exertion points and either a bonus action, reaction, action, or they are performed as part of the Attack action.

Your exertion pool has 2 or more points in it. You spend 2 exertion and use your reaction. The maneuver activates. You make a melee weapon attack. Play resumes.

The change was made because someone doing data entry on the website pointed out that every other combat maneuver that requires a reaction has a when or if clause for that reaction to trigger off of. It's specifically "When your exertion pool is not empty" to provide design space for other mechanics that might alter that combat maneuver's exertion cost (not that I'm terribly keen to such a thing, but under the right circumstances that could be very cool and appropriate).

Edit: Errant 0!
 
Last edited:

Faolyn

(she/her)
I think I understand what you‘re saying (correct me if I’m wrong). You are interpreting it as saying that you spend your 2 exertion points, and as long as you have 1 point remaining you can now use your reaction to make the melee attack. In other words, you have to have actually have 3 points to initiate it.
Yes, and again, I think that's a dumb requirement, especially since it means someone can't use this as a last-gasp measure (i.e., when they only have two points of exertion left), and I'd likely not include that requirement unless the book gives a really good explanation as to why. But yes, you spend your exertion and then use your reaction to make an attack. (Hey, @Morrus, can you tell us the reasoning?) Never mind, Mike Myler explained it.

The problem I’m seeing here is that in order to read it that way, you have to separate the exertion expenditure from the action used to activate the maneuver.
I don't know if you have to. I mean, you don't have to separate spending a spell slot from the action used to cast a spell. It's just kind of a thing you do when you cast a spell. Yes, it's two steps, but it's so ingrained that it's just an automatic thing.

Using a maneuver is therefore:
1) Choose maneuver
2) Spend points
(Maneuver is now active)
3) Meet requirements in text
4) Take specified action or otherwise derive benefit

That seems a really weird process, because it has to artificially split the exertion expenditure (step 2) from the action used (step 4) so that you can see if requirements (step 3) are met in between them. That may be the process maneuvers use (I don‘t know how the maneuver rules read), but I definitely would not assume it.

What makes more sense is for the order to be more like 1,3,(2+4 simultaneous).
I'm not so sure those are actually as separate as you think.

For instance, the Exploit Footing maneuver. The requirement is that you're attacked by someone who has either advantage or disadvantage on the roll and both rolls miss. So, the Narrator here has to tell the player that the foe has (dis)ad, and that the foe missed. At which point, the player says "Did both rolls miss? If so, I spend my two points and activate Exploit Footing (that's steps 1, 2, and 3 in one sentence). The foe now has to make a Dex save or fall prone (that's step 4)." (Personally, I think that because of the excessive requirements, it should be 1 point but oh well).

Or Twist the Blade. The requirement is that you roll an 18 or 19 when using a melee weapon. You make that roll (step 3), then you spend 2 points to use your reaction to turn it into a crit (steps 1, 2, and 4).

So the way I see it, each of these maneuvers is done in basically two steps. Or three, if you include step 0 (remember that you have the maneuver in the first place).
 



FitzTheRuke

Legend
Okay, so you pay 2 exertion to attack once using a reaction.

And It has a sort-of place-holder trigger that muddies it up a bit, but makes it so you can't use it if you have some kind of ability to use a maneuver for free, if you're out of exertion.

Seeing as it's called "Instinctive Counterattack" I don't know why the trigger wouldn't just be "You're attacked by a foe within reach" but I guess they want you to be able to use it even if you're not attacked (plus for some reason don't want you to use it in the presumably rare circumstance described above).
 

"In-world" it seems like the condition for using Instinctive Counterattack is actually "do you have enough gas left in the tank to use special combat abilities", rather than anything to do with counter attacks.

While I might quibble about the wording of the maneuver's effect proper, the maneuver itself is fine as far as it goes. But maybe then "Instinctive Counterattack" is a misnomer, yes?
 

FitzTheRuke

Legend
"In-world" it seems like the condition for using Instinctive Counterattack is actually "do you have enough gas left in the tank to use special combat abilities", rather than anything to do with counter attacks.

While I might quibble about the wording of the maneuver's effect proper, the maneuver itself is fine as far as it goes. But maybe then "Instinctive Counterattack" is a misnomer, yes?

Yeah, I like the ability - spend 2 exertion, attack off-turn. Nice!

... but it doesn't feel like much of an Instinctive Counterattack.

At least, not without trying it. It's true that in practice, it'll probably mostly be used off-turn in response to something a monster does. You might not being counter-attacking an attack against YOU, but you might often use it to help out an ally. I guess I'll have to see!
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Yeah, I like the ability - spend 2 exertion, attack off-turn. Nice!

... but it doesn't feel like much of an Instinctive Counterattack.

At least, not without trying it. It's true that in practice, it'll probably mostly be used off-turn in response to something a monster does. You might not being counter-attacking an attack against YOU, but you might often use it to help out an ally. I guess I'll have to see!

The name in fencing actually ... includes basically countering the enemies attack by interrupting their attacks timing. Throw in some defensive benefit for more IRL authenticity.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top