Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 7932871" data-attributes="member: 87792">First, slides and pushes are meaningfully different. But your +3s are hyperbole - the weakest modifiers I recall seeing in play started at Advantage (which was +2 and triggering things like Sneak Attack), +3 (which is closer to 5e Advantage than it is to +1; Advantage is somewhere round 4 or 4.5) was normal, and I remember +5s and above until the start of the round.So I call strawman here even if yes, it did get too fiddly. And yes, slides and pushes are interesting if you fight in varied environments.Only rarely if you fight in boring environments.Sure - at the cost of (a) passing a saving throw and (b) making the target go prone - which was a reasonably powerful action denial effect in 4e. At this point you're basically telling me Hold Person is a useless spell because the target gets a saving throw against that.Then you normally used your other At Will. Tide of Iron and Cleave were normally paired together in basic fighter builds - and Tide of Iron did a few damage to a target next to yours.The part you're missing is opportunity cost. The push you get in 5e (and the unupgraded Bull Rush in both 3e and 4e) were almost never used because they took up the place of an entire attack and there are very few situations where it is better for someone to inflict a five foot push than it is to hit them with their sword. Meanwhile if you're only giving up a couple of points of damage or a minor modifier to a single attack it's just not that important. In 5e to use a push you are literally asking the raging barbarian to give up hitting people with their axe. That's almost never a good alternative. Meanwhile if push only cost giving up the two points of rage damage it would be used a whole lot more.Or to quote Saelorn:Which is why pushing only normally took the place of a couple of points of damage - or at the outside an extra target in melee which is no use at all when you're only next to one enemy.You do not need a huge set piece fight even if many DMs enjoy them and enjoy that 4e makes them shine. But a fight round a camp fire is not a huge setpiece so much as an improvised wandering monster check. And someone's going to end up in the campfire. Bad guys fighting near a pit trap isn't a huge set piece; it's a consequence of one school of dungeon design and again comes out of improvised terrain drawing. Likewise in a manor a fight on the landing at the top of the stairs isn't a huge set piece. The fight in a room with a chandelier on a rope might be - but in 4e you're going to try and position the monsters under that chandelier. And sending someone down a coal chute or into a latrine is always fun, again without being a huge set piece involving overlapping walkways or things exploding.Yes, 4e works well with huge set pieces if that's your thing. But it just requires a non-boring environment.Likewise, if you remember back to the 5E playtest, an early version of the Battle Master could sacrifice damage in order to apply maneuver effects. The version which made it to print instead gives you bonus damage, in addition to maneuver effects; and the maneuver considered to be the most valuable is the one which increases accuracy.Other attacks are situational. It's not true to say the only time other things make a difference is when the math is suspiciously balanced (for one thing 4e's balance isn't that close - and for another attrition matters in some schools of play). It is true to say that accuracy and damage are always important - but pushing someone into the campfire is damage. Also that one of the reasons you get two at will attacks in 4e is so that one can be raw damage and the other can be for the fun stuff.</blockquote>

Verification