D&D 5E Legends & Lore Article 4/1/14 (Fighter Maneuvers)

[Remathilis]

Any other edition and it would have just been the fighter and the mugger standing there trading blows. You could use the scenery or try another action like in 3e or previous editions. 4E gave out more options - it didn't take any away - and a boring fight is going to be a boring fight.

A boring but a quick fight. The problem was the pc exhausted his bag of tricks early (I don't recall if he used his daily or not) and the fight broke to pushing the foe around.

You never see two people fighting across a room in fiction.

Wait...

Usually because the one moves to get into position rather than keep getting bashed with a shield.

First of all, it sounds like this fight took about 10 rounds if not more - in other words, roughly a minute. If you can't imagine people moving 30' or so in a minute then I invite you to watch any action movie or maybe a boxing match or two.

Second, the player explicitly chose to use Tide of Iron. He could've used a normal basic attack with the exact same chance to hit and damage. In other words, he shoved the enemy around on purpose. Don't blame the game for what the player chose to do with it. People have many options available to them besides just using the abilities on their sheet.

Third, the stats of monsters (including level 1 brute muggers) are made with a certain function in mind: to provide a fun challenge for a party of PCs. A single fighter with just his dagger is no such thing. It's a (minor) failing of 4e but it simply doesn't do duels like this well, it's an action-adventure game built around a party. The DM never should've done an encounter like this.

Fourth, what kind of alleyway is shaped like a 20 by 20 foot room?

Fifth, even if our hypothetical cube-alley is shaped like that, a 4-square by 4-square battlefield is far too tiny by 4e standards. And too boring as well, as it sounds like there was no special terrain, no features to make use of, nothing to stunt or improvise with.

All in all it sounds like an encounter custom-tailored to make the least possible use of 4e's strengths and focus on hitting the weak spots as much as humanly possible. A skill challenge to notice a pick-pocket in time, chase him down, and intimidate him into giving you some of his stash would've been easier to do, more in keeping with the game's intended use, and loads more fun.

1. See above. The mugger really didn't move much on his own account.

2. It was in 2008, the game really lacked for good clarity and options. Yeah, he could have used a basic or even cleave, but why would he? ToI did the same damage and had the same to hit. There was 0 reason for him not to!

3. No. This is a Major Failing. The original MM numbers made far too many assumptions about how combat works: even teams of five with a leader to bump numbers in huge deathtrap arenas. A spur of the moment encounter (the pc was in the bad side of town and the dm wanted to show how dangerous it was) turned into a weird slog/dance routine. If 4e can't handle a quick combat without a bakanced team and a dozen terrain features, there is a problem. It limits the dm to only one kind of combat and takes away options.

4. It was a "court" between some buildings at the end of an alley. The was done trash and stuff but it was never designed for a full encounter; just a quick scrap.

5. See above.

All in All, it showed there should be some trade-off for these moves, be it a check or a resource.

 

[D'karr]

If you don't bring your world to life, combats will be boring, whether you're playing Tunnels & Trolls or Rolemaster, beacuse you're only playing the numbers.

Well said. I've seen many combats like that with many different game systems.

 

[Ahnehnois]

The base problem going on is that the combat, at its roots, is abstract hp ablation that should be resolved simply and quickly. Drawing it out with bloated numbers, fancy moves, and exotic battlefields is just putting lipstick on a pig.

Indeed. People wanting more sophistication should not be asking for ways of obfuscating hp ablation; they should be asking for a more sophisticated combat system to begin with. And frankly, most people probably don't want that. Combat is quick and abstract. Get it over with.

 

[Sadrik]

He's the only one allowed to use the superiority dice mechanic to do those things.

Everybody else will probably just do some opposed ability checks, or use the grapple rules, or adapt some basic combat rule, something in general significantly less effective by design.

This would be acceptable then. I don't want basic concepts that anyone could try and do to get thrown into one class and then it is not possible to shove, trip, grapple, snatch etc. These are fundamental things. I don't mind at all if the fighter is better at them, the important part is that they are in basic game rules and the fighter's maneuvers modify those already standing abilities that all characters can attempt.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Nice hyperbole there.

Using the environment in a fight only brings the roleplaying into combat. Knocking over a table, slamming your foe against the wall and keeping him there, kicking a waste bucked over, all these details bring the environment to life, and by thinking about them, the player gets to experience the fight as his character would. These details bring the environment to life, they contribute to the sense that the dungeon is inhabited, that these creatures exist beyond the numbers that must be reduced to 0. This is by no means "setting up an arena event", but rather providing tools for the roleplaying to occur, and for the damage to be exciting. If you don't bring your world to life, combats will be boring, whether you're playing Tunnels & Trolls or Rolemaster, beacuse you're only playing the numbers.

The point is, that environmental factors DO add extra fun to the game. This is applicable in ANY system.

If the system in question REQUIRES this in order to not be boring, then there are other factors in play. Damage can only get but so exciting when its a straight grind to 0. This isn't picking on any edition of D&D in particular. It is true of ALL of them, which is why brevity is the secret sauce.

If combats are the main focus of the game then they shouldn't be so abstract or become boring quite so easily. This requires design from the ground up, not merely sprinkling in a few maneuvers, and environmental factors. All they do is add to resolution time that remains a steady grind down to 0.

 

[Dausuul]

Tide of Iron just highlighted the problems of the above scenario, it didn't create them. What created them was 4E's extraordinarily low damage-to-hit-point ratio, which came from 4E's decision to focus on big set-piece battles to the exclusion of all other combat scenarios.

Let's imagine a comparable fight in 5E; a 1st-level fighter against a 1st-level rogue, say, both armed with daggers and neither armored (assuming that if the fighter didn't have his weapon, he wasn't armored either, and the rogue is just a common cutpurse). Give the fighter Str 16, Dex 12, Con 16, and give the rogue Dex 16, Con 12. Then you're looking at a fighter with 13 hit points, AC 11, and an attack at +4 to hit for 1d4+3 damage; versus a rogue with 9 hit points, AC 13, and +4 to hit for 1d4+3 damage (and maybe 1d6 sneak attack on the first round).

The rogue is almost certain to go down in two hits. The fighter is likewise almost certain to go down in three--two if the rogue got off a sneak attack. One way or another, the fight will end quickly.

 

[Klaus]

The point is, that environmental factors DO add extra fun to the game. This is applicable in ANY system.

If the system in question REQUIRES this in order to not be boring, then there are other factors in play. Damage can only get but so exciting when its a straight grind to 0. This isn't picking on any edition of D&D in particular. It is true of ALL of them, which is why brevity is the secret sauce.

If combats are the main focus of the game then they shouldn't be so abstract or become boring quite so easily. This requires design from the ground up, not merely sprinkling in a few maneuvers, and environmental factors. All they do is add to resolution time that remains a steady grind down to 0.

And that's where 4e excelled: every character had a way to rebound from damage (Second Wind) and redouble their efforts for a short burst (Action Point). Imposing conditions was also a great way to avoid the "grind to 0" (and the #1 feedback I got from my playtesters).

And finally: if the "duel" was just a distraction from the main plot, with a pretty certain outcome, I'd just switch the mugger's stats from Brute to Minion secretly (+2 to defenses, 1 hp, no damage from a miss). 4e gave the DM the story tools to keep things interesting on the fly.

 

[ExploderWizard]

And that's where 4e excelled: every character had a way to rebound from damage (Second Wind) and redouble their efforts for a short burst (Action Point). Imposing conditions was also a great way to avoid the "grind to 0" (and the #1 feedback I got from my playtesters).

And finally: if the "duel" was just a distraction from the main plot, with a pretty certain outcome, I'd just switch the mugger's stats from Brute to Minion secretly (+2 to defenses, 1 hp, no damage from a miss). 4e gave the DM the story tools to keep things interesting on the fly.

Perhaps, but for those of us who aren't concerned in the least with story/narrative concerns and don't want that baggage in our game those tools are not as helpful.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The original MM numbers made far too many assumptions about how combat works: even teams of five with a leader to bump numbers in huge deathtrap arenas. A spur of the moment encounter (the pc was in the bad side of town and the dm wanted to show how dangerous it was) turned into a weird slog/dance routine. If 4e can't handle a quick combat without a bakanced team and a dozen terrain features, there is a problem. It limits the dm to only one kind of combat and takes away options

And that's where 4e excelled: every character had a way to rebound from damage (Second Wind) and redouble their efforts for a short burst (Action Point). Imposing conditions was also a great way to avoid the "grind to 0" (and the #1 feedback I got from my playtesters).

And finally: if the "duel" was just a distraction from the main plot, with a pretty certain outcome, I'd just switch the mugger's stats from Brute to Minion secretly (+2 to defenses, 1 hp, no damage from a miss). 4e gave the DM the story tools to keep things interesting on the fly.

I think this points out how 4e made assumptions that weren't born out in practice, though: It assumed that every combat was something you wanted to spend a significant amount of time doing. If you didn't want to spend a lot of time on a fight, you needed to use some very specific tools to make that come about (such as minions), and those tools might have had their own problems (such as making you buy into the minion concept in order to run a short combat).

4e wants you to play it in a particular way. It's needy in that way -- you can run a quick fight with a thug in an ally, but there's a right way to do it, and if you don't do it that way (because it's spontaneous, because you didn't plan for it, because you don't like some other mechanic, because you just can't keep all the rules in your head at once), 4e won't give you a great experience. And if you DO run it like 4e wants, you might have to face some mechanics you might not be a fan of for other reasons.

5e seems to be able to run the thug-in-the-alley combat pretty well, though. It's fast. Even a Battle Master fighter with a shield-shove won't have enough turns to do more than knock the thug around a few times (and, presumably, there'd be no reason for them to knock the thug around when they can just spend the die on MORE DAMAGE!). One guy in an ally shouldn't last more than a few turns.

That's as it should be, IMO. No special rules or modifications needed. If you plunk down a level 1 human thief in an alley with a level 1 human fighter, that combat will not take 5+ rounds.

 

[Thaumaturge]

5e seems to be able to run the thug-in-the-alley combat pretty well, though. It's fast. Even a Battle Master fighter with a shield-shove won't have enough turns to do more than knock the thug around a few times (and, presumably, there'd be no reason for them to knock the thug around when they can just spend the die on MORE DAMAGE!). One guy in an ally shouldn't last more than a few turns.

And 5e appears to able to handle the big set-piece battles just as well. The Battle Master will get more time and reason to do his tricks, interacting with various objects seems easy to adjudicate, and large numbers of various enemy types can be thrown at a party with reasonable confidence of tension and drama.

Thaumaturge.