I would let him do so automatically whenever he scored a critical hit. I might let him attempt to do so whenever he rolled a 15+ on the d20.
Killing two birds with one tank
- Thread starter Kzach
- Start date
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
Yeah, it's a good idea to let fighters do special combat moves more often/better/more efficiently/more awesomely than anyone else. It's very good. I wouldn't be surprised if 5e does something quite similar.
I don't, however, think a fighter dealing buckets of damage instead of/in addition to that is a problem. Combat role niche protection shouldn't be that important, and everyone should be able to be a striker (or whatever) when they need to be.
But that's sort of a tangential thing. The core of your idea is solid, and I hope they implement something similar. I honestly wouldn't even have a problem with Trip, Disarm, etc. not being standard combat options, but instead being fighter-specific options. Your wizard cannot effectively Sunder, forex, unless he trains as a fighter.
I don't, however, think a fighter dealing buckets of damage instead of/in addition to that is a problem. Combat role niche protection shouldn't be that important, and everyone should be able to be a striker (or whatever) when they need to be.
But that's sort of a tangential thing. The core of your idea is solid, and I hope they implement something similar. I honestly wouldn't even have a problem with Trip, Disarm, etc. not being standard combat options, but instead being fighter-specific options. Your wizard cannot effectively Sunder, forex, unless he trains as a fighter.
Fanaelialae
Legend
It's an interesting idea, but I don't think it actually addresses the issue of "aggro".
If a fighter pulls an enemy off an ally, that enemy can just shift and charge right back on it's next turn.
The fighter could prevent that by tripping the enemy, but I find the idea of bodyguards and knights who spend their every turn tripping enemies to be a bit absurd. Tripping an enemy once is cool and stylish. Tripping an enemy every round ad nauseum is farcical. It just doesn't fit the archetype.
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of giving fighter's more battlefield control, but if DDN is to support the concept of the shielding warrior, then the game needs mechanical support for protecting someone. It could be a Mark, or a Defend action, or something else, but without it any attempt to make such a character is going to be unsatisfying more likely than not.
If a fighter pulls an enemy off an ally, that enemy can just shift and charge right back on it's next turn.
The fighter could prevent that by tripping the enemy, but I find the idea of bodyguards and knights who spend their every turn tripping enemies to be a bit absurd. Tripping an enemy once is cool and stylish. Tripping an enemy every round ad nauseum is farcical. It just doesn't fit the archetype.
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of giving fighter's more battlefield control, but if DDN is to support the concept of the shielding warrior, then the game needs mechanical support for protecting someone. It could be a Mark, or a Defend action, or something else, but without it any attempt to make such a character is going to be unsatisfying more likely than not.
Imagine you're the DM and a combat begins. You're running a bunch of bandits who, although they aren't the brightest sparks, have decent tactics and have ambushed more than a few travellers in their time.
A cleric in the PC's party immediately hails his god and calls forth divine powers to bolster the party. You think, "Ahah! Target priority number one!" And then this douchebag in heavy plate trips your bandit up and kicks him in the face whilst he's down. Another one of your bandits goes for the cleric only to have his shield sundered in half by this increasingly annoying plate-wearer, who then carves a big chunk out of the bandit to add injury to insult. And then the final straw, your BBEG goes to carve the cleric in two only to have his sword flung fifteen feet away by that darn plate wearer, and then be smashed in the face by a gauntleted fist.
Who is now the priority number one target on the battlefield?
Someone
Adventurer
What about this proposal, it's even simpler:
What does it mean?
All melee combatants are tanks. Since when you start next to melee you're slowed, this means your radious of hitting things is limited. If a squishy is 20 feet away from a melee monster who's next to the party's melee guy, he's safe. Also, since ranged characters and spellcasters take the equivalent of a Mark penalty if they start their turns in melee range.
- No opportunity attacks
- Charge must be the first action you take in a given round, or it takes both a move and a standard action (in 4e terminology)
- When you start a move action next to a combatant or you move next to an enemy combatant in a given move action you're Slowed, since you must take some care to disengage.
- If you start your turn in melee, you take a -2 penalty to hit with ranged attacks/enemies gain a +2 bonus to resist your spells (unless said spell is a melee attack)
What does it mean?
All melee combatants are tanks. Since when you start next to melee you're slowed, this means your radious of hitting things is limited. If a squishy is 20 feet away from a melee monster who's next to the party's melee guy, he's safe. Also, since ranged characters and spellcasters take the equivalent of a Mark penalty if they start their turns in melee range.
Stormonu
NeoGrognard
I kind of like some of the things thrown out, here's my tweaks:
- The fighter, as a minor action, can add a Combat Maneuver to an attack (perhaps from a preselected list, chosen at level-up?)
- You have to have a feat/class ability to get an OA
- Intimidate or other skill to create threat/influence an opponent to target you (perhaps a class ability that is used as a Minor Action?) Basic effect lasts one round, perhaps a feat/ability chain to make it last longer?
- Fighter class ability Soak, that allows you to ignore X amount of damage (maybe a die roll - starts d4, advances up to d12 eventually?). Takes a minor action to utilize, so you can either use Soak or add a Combat Manuever
- The fighter, as a minor action, can add a Combat Maneuver to an attack (perhaps from a preselected list, chosen at level-up?)
- You have to have a feat/class ability to get an OA
- Intimidate or other skill to create threat/influence an opponent to target you (perhaps a class ability that is used as a Minor Action?) Basic effect lasts one round, perhaps a feat/ability chain to make it last longer?
- Fighter class ability Soak, that allows you to ignore X amount of damage (maybe a die roll - starts d4, advances up to d12 eventually?). Takes a minor action to utilize, so you can either use Soak or add a Combat Manuever
Blackwarder
Adventurer
Interesting disscution, just remember that as it stands, in combat, every one can do an attack action and a move action, there are no minor actions.
Think about it 2e style.
Warder
Think about it 2e style.
Warder
Chris_Nightwing
First Post
As I sort of came up with on another thread..
If armor makes you *easier* to hit, but reduces the damage you take, then heavily armored characters would be the right targets for enemies - they definitely deal some damage rather than maybe dealing more damage.
If armor makes you *easier* to hit, but reduces the damage you take, then heavily armored characters would be the right targets for enemies - they definitely deal some damage rather than maybe dealing more damage.
Steely_Dan
First Post
Yes, and it sounds like Roles will not be part of 5th Ed (or Power Sources), Classes should be able to go in several directions.
The old all-Rogue party can be kick-ass.
I use something like this in my 3x game. X/day (con based) a fighter can make a maneuver (trip, disarm, push, pull, etc). It's a free action that doesn't provoke. Target cannot be more than 1 size caegory different. Makes things more dynamic without the need for crazy feats.
