Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6705814" data-attributes="member: 1465">It's probably going to work, and has no real balance issues, but IMHO that +1 modifier is quite boring and fiddly.Previously in some 3e campaigns we have used a skill which we called Knowledge(Battle), that wasn't specifically referring to wars (i.e. large-scales battles, which are typically rare in normal RPGs) and as such was applicable also to PC-scale combat. It was quite similar to what you have in mind, but instead of a flat bonus, it was instead used to get one tactical clue, such as:- what could be the most advantageous position for fighting in this locale- what tactic are the enemies using or about to use- is there something in the environment that we could use to our advantage- what is the safest route for withdrawing- who is leader/commander of the enemies army- what could be the weak spot of the enemies armyThe player can come up with more questions freely. Sometimes the players can just figure out these kind of things without a check (in fact, having this skill in the game shouldn't make it mandatory!) but often they are just guessing... so a PC with the Knowledge(Battle) skill is entitled to make a check and -if successful- receive an answer to these sort of question from the DM. The DC is as usual up to the DM, depending on the question and the circumstances.I don't remember for sure, but I think we actually required the use of a standard action to make each check, as if the PC is giving up her attacks in order to focus and assess the situation, which is the same as you plan to use. If it turns out to be too costly, you can consider allowing this as a move-equivalent-action, but in general I think it's better not to make it free.</blockquote>

Verification