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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Problems with marks?
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="keterys" data-source="post: 4245972" data-attributes="member: 43019"><p>So, it appears that marks are a particular turnoff for a number of people. Particularly when monsters do it. To be clear, I'm talking actual marks and the marked condition - hunter's quarry and warlock's curse can have its own discussion <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>So I'm kinda hoping ya'll would brainstorm a bit with me on the pros and cons of marks and ways to replace them. I don't necessarily plan to do so myself, but I'd like to have a reasonable offering for a replacement - for PCs and monsters.</p><p></p><p>I believe most objections to marks fall into two camps:</p><p>1) These are a pain to track</p><p>2) This penalty is unrealistic / stupid / annoying</p><p></p><p>The primary benefit to marking is that it allows a 'tanking' aspect, where a target is penalized for ignoring a particular soldier or defender. The secondary benefit is that it stops multiple soldiers / defenders from creating a "screwed if you do, screwed if you don't" situation.</p><p></p><p>While it seems pretty viable to remove the 'marked' condition by replacing it with some other benefit (for example, what if paladins had an immediate interrupt to block X damage to an ally within 5 squares instead of dealing X damage, and perhaps added Y damage to attacks against an enemy that hit one of its allies since the paladin's last turn) - still lets it do its job of defending. The problem is that secondary issue of what happens if you have two paladins...</p><p></p><p>For monsters, it's possible to just change marks into a brief penalty to attacks, free attacks (like a fighter), and a host of slow/immobilize/knockdown type effects... but removing the choice of movement is bad as it makes combat more stagnant and you hit the 'What if there's 3 soldiers' problem again. I'd definitely like a good option for 'There's a penalty for not attacking this guy, but it may be worth it'.</p><p></p><p>Anyhow, this is probably already in TLDR territory... but I would ask that you refrain from bringing up inherent objections to the defending concept that marking is trying to enable from a "Don't make D&D into an MMO" angle or similar thread. I just want to discuss alternate systems to obtain a similar result or other methods to make it easier <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="keterys, post: 4245972, member: 43019"] So, it appears that marks are a particular turnoff for a number of people. Particularly when monsters do it. To be clear, I'm talking actual marks and the marked condition - hunter's quarry and warlock's curse can have its own discussion :) So I'm kinda hoping ya'll would brainstorm a bit with me on the pros and cons of marks and ways to replace them. I don't necessarily plan to do so myself, but I'd like to have a reasonable offering for a replacement - for PCs and monsters. I believe most objections to marks fall into two camps: 1) These are a pain to track 2) This penalty is unrealistic / stupid / annoying The primary benefit to marking is that it allows a 'tanking' aspect, where a target is penalized for ignoring a particular soldier or defender. The secondary benefit is that it stops multiple soldiers / defenders from creating a "screwed if you do, screwed if you don't" situation. While it seems pretty viable to remove the 'marked' condition by replacing it with some other benefit (for example, what if paladins had an immediate interrupt to block X damage to an ally within 5 squares instead of dealing X damage, and perhaps added Y damage to attacks against an enemy that hit one of its allies since the paladin's last turn) - still lets it do its job of defending. The problem is that secondary issue of what happens if you have two paladins... For monsters, it's possible to just change marks into a brief penalty to attacks, free attacks (like a fighter), and a host of slow/immobilize/knockdown type effects... but removing the choice of movement is bad as it makes combat more stagnant and you hit the 'What if there's 3 soldiers' problem again. I'd definitely like a good option for 'There's a penalty for not attacking this guy, but it may be worth it'. Anyhow, this is probably already in TLDR territory... but I would ask that you refrain from bringing up inherent objections to the defending concept that marking is trying to enable from a "Don't make D&D into an MMO" angle or similar thread. I just want to discuss alternate systems to obtain a similar result or other methods to make it easier :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Problems with marks?
Top