No 5 foot step

[TheAuldGrump]

Hmmm, the first time not being able to take a five foot step out of combat got my character killed I would take the fifteen foot step out of the game.

I have never had a problem with the rule, and as a DM I am much happier with the spellcaster being able to step out of combat rather than needing to generate a new character for the next game.

Then again, I like AoOs, so I would not remove them either.

The Auld Grump

 

[SteveC]

Here's a version that makes it a bit tougher to use five-foot steps to avoid attacks of opportunity (it still helps spellcasters a bit).

Five-Foot Step
A five-foot step is a special type of combat action. As a move action, you can move one square (or five feet); unlike other movement, a five-foot step does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

You can also take a five-foot step as part of a full attack action with a melee weapon; doing so is not an action apart from the full attack action. If you take this option, you can take your step at any point in your sequence of attacks.

For what it's worth, I think this is a great idea if you don't like the 5' step and full ranged attack, and it's what I'd do...

--Steve

 

[Justin Bacon]

A heavily armored 1st level fighter with DEX 16 and Combat Reflexes moves 60 feet (a triple move) toward his foes. At the end of his move he is 5 feet from 3 opponents. Having performed a double move, our fighter has exhausted his actions for the round. The fighters 3 opponents start casting spells. All of a sudden, our fighter can attack 3 TIMES.

Sure. But the guy specifically took a feat and dropped a high stat into Dex to specifically model a character adept at taking advantage of other people's mistakes on the combat field. It's an exceptional ability.

You seem annoyed at the difference between these two scenariors:

(1) A fighter runs up to three combatants who are actively concerned with avoiding his swinging sword -- they're backing away from him, ducking and weaving, etc. It's going to take him a couple of seconds (i.e., until his next turn) before he'll have a chance to position himself and have a chance to deal 'em some meaningful damage.

(2) A fighter runs up to three combatants who, instead of paying attention to him, are busy trying to get some spells cast. He doesn't have to try to close with one or them or set-up an attack on someone ducking and weaving (i.e., he doesn't have to wait until his next turn -- he can take an AoO), he can just go in swinging and have a chance of connecting for some meaningful damage. If this guy has really quick combat reflexes (i.e., the feat and a high Dex), he might even be able to take advantage of the inattention of all three of them.

Conceptually, I just don't see the problem with this.

 

[Elf Witch]

I played in two long running campaigns from the start of 3.0 to just last October we never used the five foot step.

In the one game I played a sorcerer and in the second an archer and yes it does make it a little more diffcult to play. But I personally did not mind it. It made my feats important for example as a sorcerer I took the feat combat casting and maxed out my concentration skills.

So I had to remember to combat cast my spells.

When I played the archer I learned to use smart tactics like staying out of melee range using cover to my advantage and knowing when to put away the bow and use a melee weapon. As I went up in levels and took feats and picked the right prestige class I was able to use my bow in melee without worring about AOOs.

I am starting my own campaign as DM and I have house ruled the five foot step away. I just don't think it makes sense that all you have to do is take a step back and use a bow or cast a spell when confronted with a great axe weilding fighter who wants your head.

When I play in games that use it it just seems so silly and I have noticed that mage types don't use the feat combat casting because they don't need it.

 

[Elf Witch]

Ranged-weapon combatants will go the way of the dodo as they can no longer use a 5-foot step back to avoid an attack of opportunity when firing their ranged weapon.

Olaf the Stout

I totally disagree with this sure at lower levels the ranged weapon fighter needs to learn to stay out of melee range and to use tactics other than I stand and fire arrows.

But as they go up in levels and get feats and the right prestige classes then they become able to use the bow in melee combat.

 

[Storm Raven]

It makes getting a full attack a little tougher since no little movement to help that. also, can make cleaving and great cleave a little weaker since one can't move to get the extra cleave attacks.

Move to get the extra cleave attacks?

 

[wedgeski]

I am starting my own campaign as DM and I have house ruled the five foot step away. I just don't think it makes sense that all you have to do is take a step back and use a bow or cast a spell when confronted with a great axe weilding fighter who wants your head.

You're thinking far too literally. The 5' step represents the character's ability to stay nimble on his feet, be tactically aware of the battlefield, and try to find a safe little corner of the mayhem to do something which requires concentration and/or leaves him vulnerable. He's not literally backing 5 feet away from the axe-wielding fighter who has rushed exactly 30 feet that round and is now standing like a statue unable to move before his next turn comes up.

 

[Kormydigar]

(1) A fighter runs up to three combatants who are actively concerned with avoiding his swinging sword -- they're backing away from him, ducking and weaving, etc. It's going to take him a couple of seconds (i.e., until his next turn) before he'll have a chance to position himself and have a chance to deal 'em some meaningful damage.

(2) A fighter runs up to three combatants who, instead of paying attention to him, are busy trying to get some spells cast. He doesn't have to try to close with one or them or set-up an attack on someone ducking and weaving (i.e., he doesn't have to wait until his next turn -- he can take an AoO), he can just go in swinging and have a chance of connecting for some meaningful damage. If this guy has really quick combat reflexes (i.e., the feat and a high Dex), he might even be able to take advantage of the inattention of all three of them.

Conceptually, I just don't see the problem with this.

I don't have a problem with the concept of AOO's, just the current rules for them. Lets just look at example 1 for a minute. If the fighter wins initiative in this scenario then the three combatants are not ducking and weaving, they are standing there flat footed, denied thier dex bonuses and ripe for sneak attack. In this situation our fighter cannot take advantage of this because despite not being ready or able to dodge, his opponents did not provoke an attack. Why do the actions of the opponents matter so much. If they were preparing spells at least they wouldn't be flat footed and inactive.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

It surely is worth a try.

DDM is like that. There is no five-foot step, so that archer has to move away before he can shoot (you can't use ranged attacks or non-touch spells in melee).

A handful of figures do have the sidestep ability, which is the old five-foot step.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Move to get the extra cleave attacks?

Well, normally the 5 ft. step does not work directly in conjunction with Cleave, although there are improved variants like Superior Cleave that do. But I suspect you know that.

However using the 5 ft. step to make minor tactical adjustments is extremely useful for setting up potential Cleaves while still gaining the full benefit of the Full Attack. Otherwise the character may need to perform a Move + Attack in order to get the potential Cleave at all.

Cleave changes from a feat that has little or no cost to exploit, to one that usually does have a cost.