Move - Attack - Move

[fjw70]

I like the threatened squares equals difficult terrain option. Maybe modify it a little to that is costs one extra square of movement for every enemy that threatens the square.

I may couple this with needing to use an action to disengage from melee if you start your turn engaged.

 

[howandwhy99]

TotM* Testing every core game rule makes developing the core game more difficult. I also like the threatened area = difficult terrain option, which can slow an opponent (or stop, if a reaction is set for anyone moving through this area).

The tough part is, how do we define this area in TotM? It's the same issue we're going to have once we start including all kinds of other terrain effects and location, so better to figure it out now. Really, the first step is probably going to be to drop spatial positioning. I *think* everything would need to be based upon defined conditionals.


*theatre of the mind

 

[Lalato]

The only suggestion I've seen thus far that works for me is the difficult terrain one. I honestly believe that free attacks are too powerful as the default, and do, in fact, bog down the game considerably.

In order to make it easier to adjudicate in TotM... I would change it to, if you move into or out of a threatened square, your speed is halved. If you have already moved half your speed or more when you enter a threatened square, you stop.

That would make combat sticky without overly complicating things. You could dart in, and depending on where you started and what your normal speed is, you might still be able to dart out, but you couldn't move up 3 and move back 3 if your speed is 6.

 

[mlund]

There real problem is there's no such thing as a bottleneck under the rules unless you have Stand Your Ground.

Have 4 players in a 10' square? Grog the Orc doesn't care. He walks right through your square and beats your Wizard to a pulp and the players cry "foul!"

Have 6 Orcs and 4 front-line fighters in a 10' deep x 20' wide area all making melee attacks? Dave's Wizard doesn't care. He steps right into the melee, hits someone with shocking grasp, and retreats. When the Orcs decide to pay him back for his electric mayhem next turn they completely ignore the front-line fighters and saunter over to Dave's character for a pounding and the PCs cry "foul!"

My PCs in general don't mind that they have Spring attack and never provoke OAs wherever they go. They get irked if I have the monsters use the same tactics on them, though.

Sticking your head into touch or weapon range of a combatant should be dangerous.

I think I agree that the double-penalty was a bad idea. It is actually self-defeating. Anyone leaving the melee to hit the spring-attacking Wizard would get Disadvantage and cancel out the Advantage to hit him anyway.

So I think this is a better idea:

1.) Anyone who is within melee reach of an enemy or touches someone within melee reach of an enemy is "in melee."

2.) Anyone who moves out of a melee without spending an action grants Advantage to attack him to all enemies until the start of his next turn.

3.) Anyone who was in melee at any point during their turn has Disadvantage to Ranged Attacks. (replaces rule about making a ranged attack in melee)

This also leaves plenty of room for a "Skirmisher" theme with feats that eliminate such penalties.

- Marty Lund

 

[Crazy Jerome]

My choice right now would be: If you move past someone with a readied melee weapon, the area within reach of the opponent is difficult terrain. Alternately, you may move at full speed by being disadvantaged until your next turn.

Disadvantage provides a much cleaner mechanic for the set of penalities that I had proposed earlier this year, for a similar mechanic, especially in the way it does not stack and has other repercussions. Moreover, unless you are already disadvantaged (admittedly an edge case that would seem odd when it does come up), it has bite. That means if you run past the fighter to whack the wizard, you have less chance of connecting. (Presumably, it would also apply to a saving throw if the wizard responds with a spell, too. Don't have the rules handy.) Finally, it is something that applies right now, to the creature taking the action. It's thus easier to remember without interrupting the flow.

Then for double movement through threat, to avoid it, would be most creatures' first choice, but hard to achieve in many cases. A creature will almost always need to spend one round working around the fighter, taking a shot at him, then peel off to go after the rear rank. That one extra turn makes all the difference. Given room to do a fighting withdrawal, the fighter can slowly retreat before the pack of goblins, keeping them slowed down. That's something interesting for the fighter to do with his movement, especially if he wants to finish off one foe before moving back a bit. Then for creatures with lots of movement, it's an abstract way of handling "tumbling" through the melee.

I think this is actually almost as easy in TotM as it is on the grid. If the fighter has room and says he is going to keep the foes bottled up in the corridor, then any foe trying to get to the soft squishy parts several feet behind him can try to maneuver the fighter into a corner or take their chances with disadvantage. If a kobold monk with super speed is on the scene, he can burn through and kick the wizard despite the fighter.

How much move does it take? On or off the grid, most of the time that fighter is going to control at least three squares that must be taken. At a corner or such, it might be only two. Make a judgement as to which, creature can take the movement penalty--or not and suffer.

 

[Abraxas]

There real problem is there's no such thing as a bottleneck under the rules unless you have Stand Your Ground.

Have 4 players in a 10' square? Grog the Orc doesn't care. He walks right through your square and beats your Wizard to a pulp and the players cry "foul!"

Only if the character lets Grog through their square - see page 5 of the DM guidelines.

 

[Zaukrie]

I love the difficult terrain answer for the simple rules.

Sent using Tapatalk 2

 

[mlund]

Only if the character lets Grog through their square - see page 5 of the DM guidelines.

Ah, I see now. Grog's got to go around the PCs or hack her we through. That's cool! On the down side, it also puts you back on the 5' square grid to use precisely.

It does set a good precedent for using it imprecisely, though. Two PCs or Enemies fighting side-by-side can secure a 10' battle line that's basically impassible to anyone they don't want to let through. That's sufficient for bottle-necks and battle-lines (maybe even a little too good in some cases).

It doesn't solve the "spring-attack" and "kiting" problems, though. The Kobold Karousel is still ridiculous. There needs to be a core penalty for walking out of melee reach with your movement.

- Marty Lund

 

[IronWolf]

Ah, I see now. Grog's got to go around the PCs or hack her we through. That's cool! On the down side, it also puts you back on the 5' square grid to use precisely.

To be precise yes, but TotM isn't about being precise as you note below.

It does set a good precedent for using it imprecisely, though. Two PCs or Enemies fighting side-by-side can secure a 10' battle line that's basically impassible to anyone they don't want to let through. That's sufficient for bottle-necks and battle-lines (maybe even a little too good in some cases).

Yeah, or doorways, a gap between boulders, a narrow pathway, etc, etc.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

On a grid, a character threatens all the squares surrounding them. Which basically means 15 feet of difficult terrain to either side of them.

So, moving up to an opponent requires no added movement. Moving past an opponent is equal to moving 30 feet.

So, TotM is covered. It takes 30 feet of movement to get past an opponent.