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

[Klaus]

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.

I'll argue that every system has that. But I'll agree with you about DDN/5e, it's looking to be mighty versatile from the get-go.

 

[Li Shenron]

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.

Since I guess they want to support characters be able to attempt anything imaginable, those fundamental things will really be in the game.

A long time ago they talked about them as part of a "narrative combat module", but they are so obvious ideas that I'm not even sure they need a module, but anyway need to be part of the core in one form or another.

The easiest implementations I can think about:

(a) simple combat actions: make an attack roll, get the wanted effect (disarm, trip, etc.) if you succeed

(b) opposite ability checks: Str vs Str/Dex for example

The main difference being proficiency matters in the first case, doesn't in the second case.

 

[Balesir]

My friend way playing a 4e fighter (in the PHB only era of August 2008). His two at-wills were Tide of Iron and Cleave.

He was in town when a mugger (a level 1 brute) jumped him in an alleyway. A level 1 foe vs a level 1 PC mano-e-mano in a 20-by-20 area. Should be easy?

He missed with his encounter power, and since there was no other foes, used Tide of Iron to push the enemy back. Unfortunately, he didn't have his sword with him, so he was relying on a backup dagger.

Every round, he used Tide of Iron, hit, and did 1d4+3 damage. To a foe with 30 hp. He Tide-of-Ironed the guy seven times (not counting misses), pushing him clockwise around the room (did one and a half walls before the guy fell).

The absurdity of watching a guy get pushed along 1 and 1/2 walls of a room was enough to call it a night for that game.

Sigh.

1) You don't have to use the push. Forced movement is almost always optional. You use it when you can gain something from it - like push the guy into a flanked position, of into a brazier, or over a drop, or...

2) A brute monster (max HP) against a PC armed with nothing but a fruit knife (or dagger) is just asking for a long fight. Why do that if you aren't set up for a long fight?

3) What was the "mugger" doing in all this? MBA (repeat)? Didn't they have anything interesting to do?

4) Such a long fight and no one else (Watch, etc.) turned up?

Seem to me to be plenty of things wrong, there - but the system wasn't really one of them.

 

[Balesir]

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.

I agree with [MENTION=607]Klaus[/MENTION] that this applies to every system I have seen to date (and that's quite a few).

D&D has never, for example, been able to do a realistic swordfight. 4E arguably comes closest, but there is still a yawning gulf left over. I'm actually fine with this, these days - I just accept that "realistic fight" is not what D&D does. It does "cinematic action movie fight" pretty well in its current incarnation - and that's enough to get a good game out of.

 

[Obryn]

As a very big 4e fan, I'll concur that it's not made for 1-on-1 fights. It's a team game, and works best when 3+ PCs can support one another. It's intentional in the game's design, which for me is mostly a huge perk, but it can lead to bad situations like the thug thing.

 

[Nagol]

Sigh.

1) You don't have to use the push. Forced movement is almost always optional. You use it when you can gain something from it - like push the guy into a flanked position, of into a brazier, or over a drop, or...

2) A brute monster (max HP) against a PC armed with nothing but a fruit knife (or dagger) is just asking for a long fight. Why do that if you aren't set up for a long fight?

3) What was the "mugger" doing in all this? MBA (repeat)? Didn't they have anything interesting to do?

4) Such a long fight and no one else (Watch, etc.) turned up?

Seem to me to be plenty of things wrong, there - but the system wasn't really one of them.

Tide of Iron At-Will ✦ Keywords: martial, weapon
Standard Action
Range: Melee weapon

Requirement: using a shield
Target: one creature

Attack: Strength vs. AC

Hit: "1[W] + Strength modifier damage, and you push the target 1 square if it is your size, smaller than you, or one size category larger. You can shift into the space that the target occupied.

The movement doesn't look optional at first glance, but it might be buried in the general rules, I suppose.

The "long" fight is still over in a minute and in a rough part of town, getting help is likely more than a minute away if it comes at all.

I'd be more interested in why the fighter was still carrying his shield if he didn't have his primary weapon(s).

 

[ExploderWizard]

Sigh.

1) You don't have to use the push. Forced movement is almost always optional. You use it when you can gain something from it - like push the guy into a flanked position, of into a brazier, or over a drop, or...

2) A brute monster (max HP) against a PC armed with nothing but a fruit knife (or dagger) is just asking for a long fight. Why do that if you aren't set up for a long fight?

3) What was the "mugger" doing in all this? MBA (repeat)? Didn't they have anything interesting to do?

4) Such a long fight and no one else (Watch, etc.) turned up?

Seem to me to be plenty of things wrong, there - but the system wasn't really one of them.

Things are what they are in the gameworld. Changing the nature of something on the fly to suit narrative concerns IS a problem with the system. It means engaging in illusionism BS instead of running an honest game.

Either the mugger was a L1 brute or he wasn't. Assuming he was, then the system says 10 rounds of combat to take him down isn't uncommon. If you enjoy a long fight with a thug then the system is working as intended. If you don't, then once again there is a system problem.

 

[fjw70]

My thought on the fighter mugger fight is how long did it take in real time? If both were using the same power over and over again it should have been no more than 2-3 minutes tops. EAriler editions could have been shorter but you can come up with things that didn't work well in any edition.

One time in 1e my character got into a fight with another PC. We both had 1 hp and a high enough HP that we both needed a 20 to hit each other. I don't remember how many rounds that fight went but it was a lot. It probably took longer than the fighter/mugger fight (both in rounds and real time) but we finished it and moved on with needing to trash the system because of this one fight.

 

[Bluenose]

Things are what they are in the gameworld. Changing the nature of something on the fly to suit narrative concerns IS a problem with the system. It means engaging in illusionism BS instead of running an honest game.

Every single time you describe hit point loss you're taking into account the amount of hit points the target has remaining, the amount they started with, etc; and you're taking that into account on the fly to suit narrative concerns. Illusionist BS, part of D&D since the 1970s.

 

[Obryn]

The movement doesn't look optional at first glance, but it might be buried in the general rules, I suppose.

It's a general rule that any movement stated in a distance - including forced movement - includes everything up to that distance, including 0. It wasn't in the PHB 1, which was an oversight and led to dumb arguments. It was answered in a faq somewhere, and then clearly spelled out in PHB 2.