Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
PF2e House Rules:
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="zztong" data-source="post: 7646907" data-attributes="member: 6943414"><p>I'm not entirely sure why static combat is bad. Certain kinds of combat are realistically static. But on the assumption that it is bad and that more movement is desired, I'll play along...</p><p></p><p>I think the heart of the issue is that character (PC, NPC) actions are not more interleaved. Movement is largely adjustment in position to gain an advantage or alleviate a disadvantage. So, wouldn't it make sense for characters to _do less_ per action so that there was more of an opportunity to adjust your position compared to the number of attacks they face? (I'm spit-balling here. Shoot this full of wholes.)</p><p></p><p>If you only had two actions, there would be more opportunity to make positional adjustments in relation to the number of attacks being conducted. There would be more opportunities to move out of a disadvantage compared to the number of attacks received and then you might see melee better represent a duel or small action where mobility is more prominent.</p><p></p><p>My observation of the three-action system has been that Rogues become more mobile in pursuit of a flank without having to resort to immersion-breaking acrobatics because there are few AoO's. But once the rogue is in position, they fall into static patterns like everyone else. None of the other classes appear to be played any different than before with the possible exception of Fighters/Rangers no longer needing to have Spring Attack to quickly close with a very large creature, again because there are few AoO's.</p><p></p><p>Basically I'm positing that if you want more mobility in your game, you want fewer attacks per action, allowing those on the defense to adjust more frequently, which in-turn will lead to more adjustments by those on the offense.</p><p></p><p>But recognize that terrain makes for better places to defend. Expect defenders to use terrain and that will also make combat more static. You're going to defend a doorway, for instance to limit the number of attackers that will reach you.</p><p></p><p>Anyways, that's a theory, half-baked as it may be. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="zztong, post: 7646907, member: 6943414"] I'm not entirely sure why static combat is bad. Certain kinds of combat are realistically static. But on the assumption that it is bad and that more movement is desired, I'll play along... I think the heart of the issue is that character (PC, NPC) actions are not more interleaved. Movement is largely adjustment in position to gain an advantage or alleviate a disadvantage. So, wouldn't it make sense for characters to _do less_ per action so that there was more of an opportunity to adjust your position compared to the number of attacks they face? (I'm spit-balling here. Shoot this full of wholes.) If you only had two actions, there would be more opportunity to make positional adjustments in relation to the number of attacks being conducted. There would be more opportunities to move out of a disadvantage compared to the number of attacks received and then you might see melee better represent a duel or small action where mobility is more prominent. My observation of the three-action system has been that Rogues become more mobile in pursuit of a flank without having to resort to immersion-breaking acrobatics because there are few AoO's. But once the rogue is in position, they fall into static patterns like everyone else. None of the other classes appear to be played any different than before with the possible exception of Fighters/Rangers no longer needing to have Spring Attack to quickly close with a very large creature, again because there are few AoO's. Basically I'm positing that if you want more mobility in your game, you want fewer attacks per action, allowing those on the defense to adjust more frequently, which in-turn will lead to more adjustments by those on the offense. But recognize that terrain makes for better places to defend. Expect defenders to use terrain and that will also make combat more static. You're going to defend a doorway, for instance to limit the number of attackers that will reach you. Anyways, that's a theory, half-baked as it may be. :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
PF2e House Rules:
Top