Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Removing feats as a universal class mechanic
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="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 6116228" data-attributes="member: 7006"><p>In terms of the "Combat Stunts" concept... this is precisely the way I had thought they probably should be handled, and I'm glad to see I'm not alone.</p><p></p><p>Bull Rush</p><p>Charge</p><p>Disarm</p><p>Grapple</p><p>Knock Down</p><p></p><p>All of these are stunts that many people believe everyone should be able to attempt, because they are theoretically not so difficult that they require precise combat training to do (whether or not that is actually true is a different story.) However, the issue always came up that if anyone could do these kinds of things, then what did the Fighter have to call their own, since they WERE the class that had that precise combat training?</p><p></p><p>But like UngeheuerLich suggests... I think we can get the best of both worlds once again via the fabulous Disadvantage mechanic.</p><p></p><p>Everyone can attempt these stunts. Most people, however, aren't very good at it... thus, they suffer Disadvantage when they try. BUT... what is good about using Disadvantage instead of just a penalty... is that this Disadvantage can be <em>offset</em>. If a person is able to find a way to gain Advantage during the fight, they can then use one of these stunts with no issue. It becomes just a regular action to accomplish, and thus even those without really strong combat training might still be able to find that one time when things open up for them and they can pull off that Trip attack at no penalty.</p><p></p><p>This is a marked difference to 3E... where most of these actions were so heinous in their penalties to the untrained that no one ever bothered to try them unless they had acquired the improved feat, because they were almost assured to fail. But using Disadvantage (which could be offset by gaining Advantage) means that while most PCs probably won't bother to try these actions normally... in those times when they can get Advantage, they might actually give it a go *and* be successful at it.</p><p></p><p>Now we move onto the Fighter. He *is* combat trained. He can learn how to do these actions all the time. To my mind... this is where having Maneuvers works well-- options a Fighter can take that removes the Disadvantage on the action automatically. A Fighter who has been trained to Disarm people can use the Disarm action without penalty all day long. And in those rare occasions when the Fighter can gain Advantage (like when he attacks from hiding)... he gets to be really good at it, because he actually does now have Advantage on this attack. This, to me, makes the most sense, and also truly gives the Fighter something to call his own.</p><p></p><p>Now yes... I know people who love the idea of "feats for everyone!" are going to say that these maneuvers should be feats that everyone can take-- so that for instance, a Cleric could take the feat that allows him to Bull Rush without Disadvantage. But to me... I really have to ask "Why?" If a Cleric is already putting all of his efforts into getting a full suite of Spellcasting... why should he also get to take combat abilities that should be the hallmark of the Fighter? After all... we don't have feats out there that allow a Fighter to grab a random 3rd level spell... so why should we let the Cleric intrude on the Fighter's schtick? If the Cleric WANTS to intrude in that way... then I think either he should multiclass into a level of Fighter (and thus get the combat training necessary to learn that feat/maneuver), or else there should be some more combat-centric SPELLS that the Cleric can prepare and then cast and use to accomplish the deed.</p><p></p><p>The Cleric is a Spellcaster. If we want him to have the opportunity to Grapple, Trip, or Disarm people without Disadvantage (like the Fighter)... let there be spells for him to choose from that might help him do that! Isn't that the point of being a Cleric? You use Magic to accomplish what you want to do. And giving him feats on top of that is overkill and intrudes on what the Fighter should be, in my opinion.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 6116228, member: 7006"] In terms of the "Combat Stunts" concept... this is precisely the way I had thought they probably should be handled, and I'm glad to see I'm not alone. Bull Rush Charge Disarm Grapple Knock Down All of these are stunts that many people believe everyone should be able to attempt, because they are theoretically not so difficult that they require precise combat training to do (whether or not that is actually true is a different story.) However, the issue always came up that if anyone could do these kinds of things, then what did the Fighter have to call their own, since they WERE the class that had that precise combat training? But like UngeheuerLich suggests... I think we can get the best of both worlds once again via the fabulous Disadvantage mechanic. Everyone can attempt these stunts. Most people, however, aren't very good at it... thus, they suffer Disadvantage when they try. BUT... what is good about using Disadvantage instead of just a penalty... is that this Disadvantage can be [I]offset[/I]. If a person is able to find a way to gain Advantage during the fight, they can then use one of these stunts with no issue. It becomes just a regular action to accomplish, and thus even those without really strong combat training might still be able to find that one time when things open up for them and they can pull off that Trip attack at no penalty. This is a marked difference to 3E... where most of these actions were so heinous in their penalties to the untrained that no one ever bothered to try them unless they had acquired the improved feat, because they were almost assured to fail. But using Disadvantage (which could be offset by gaining Advantage) means that while most PCs probably won't bother to try these actions normally... in those times when they can get Advantage, they might actually give it a go *and* be successful at it. Now we move onto the Fighter. He *is* combat trained. He can learn how to do these actions all the time. To my mind... this is where having Maneuvers works well-- options a Fighter can take that removes the Disadvantage on the action automatically. A Fighter who has been trained to Disarm people can use the Disarm action without penalty all day long. And in those rare occasions when the Fighter can gain Advantage (like when he attacks from hiding)... he gets to be really good at it, because he actually does now have Advantage on this attack. This, to me, makes the most sense, and also truly gives the Fighter something to call his own. Now yes... I know people who love the idea of "feats for everyone!" are going to say that these maneuvers should be feats that everyone can take-- so that for instance, a Cleric could take the feat that allows him to Bull Rush without Disadvantage. But to me... I really have to ask "Why?" If a Cleric is already putting all of his efforts into getting a full suite of Spellcasting... why should he also get to take combat abilities that should be the hallmark of the Fighter? After all... we don't have feats out there that allow a Fighter to grab a random 3rd level spell... so why should we let the Cleric intrude on the Fighter's schtick? If the Cleric WANTS to intrude in that way... then I think either he should multiclass into a level of Fighter (and thus get the combat training necessary to learn that feat/maneuver), or else there should be some more combat-centric SPELLS that the Cleric can prepare and then cast and use to accomplish the deed. The Cleric is a Spellcaster. If we want him to have the opportunity to Grapple, Trip, or Disarm people without Disadvantage (like the Fighter)... let there be spells for him to choose from that might help him do that! Isn't that the point of being a Cleric? You use Magic to accomplish what you want to do. And giving him feats on top of that is overkill and intrudes on what the Fighter should be, in my opinion. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Removing feats as a universal class mechanic
Top