Level Up (A5E) Should AD&D5E remove simple/martial weapon category as exotic weapons were removed from 5E?

[CubicsRube]

They would need to give standing up a meaningful cost. using half the movement you weren't going to use after getting knocked down in a melee combat has no impact on the game. standing up provoking an AoO was removed in the name of streamlining/simplifying just to simplify so the cost/benefit of things that trigger prone or allow standing up at a different cost are messed up since few if any of them were improved in other ways to offset the loss/gain.

I'm of two minds about this.

I do think that a few items like picking up a disarmed weapon on the ground and getting up should provoke attacks of opportunity, but I'm leery of having 3e levels of AoO triggers to remember. There's a level when it gets too much. However for a few things like that it should be ok.

I do worry however that an AoO on prone could be a real death spiral for PCs. If they get knocked prone and swarmed by a group of enemies then their choices are that all attacks next round have advantage on them, or they eat a ton of AoOs. I'm sure it's realistic, but I'm not sure it would be fun at the table.

 

[Micah Sweet]

that is not in question. Just don't say that you like rolling for abilities and you like a balanced game.

and magic items are 100% up to the DM.

Designing a sub system that makes the default ability generation method more unbalancing doesn't seem like a good idea to me. A DM can like a balanced game and still be in a rolling group. There are degrees of imbalance, and to me this crosses a line.

And not allowing magic items in a group that likes them (which in my experience is most groups, and certainly myself as a DM) will not result in a happy game.

 

[CapnZapp]

I'm just saying I am seeing suggestions for (1) removing restrictions and (2) adding more levels of complexity

Doing 1 and 2 too much can be disastrous. What is added or taken away has to justify itself for inclusion in base rules.

When you're responding to my posts, I'm assuming you're... responding to my posts.

You said "Removing simple/martial means you have to add something to warriors that don't make them extremely tasty in multi/dual/sub/split classing."

I'm responding, "no, simple/martial doesn't hold that kind of power."

 

[Minigiant]

When you're responding to my posts, I'm assuming you're... responding to my posts.

You said "Removing simple/martial means you have to add something to warriors that don't make them extremely tasty in multi/dual/sub/split classing."

I'm responding, "no, simple/martial doesn't hold that kind of power."

I am sayig that I agree alone it doesn'tbut it can if it is combined with some of the other suggestions for the game.

 

[Horwath]

Sorry, the entire premise of the OP negates itself. The whole idea of an Advanced D&D 5E assumes that the game will be more complex and less generic. If you want D&D simplified any mire than 5e already is, just find some rules-lite system that works for you. Apparently, there are plenty.

(Can't be bothered to read the comments, nor to read/comment further. Sorry, it's just the simple truth. D&D has already been dumbed down way too much, thanks. I'm off to PF2 some more now.)

removing simple/martial split does not dumb the game down.

As I stated, difference in "martial" ability of characters should be in fighting styles, maneuvers, various class features and feat choices. Even HD size determines if you are more or less capable of handling more or less weapon combat.

If AD&D5E adds more weapon properties as many here suggested(higher crit damage, higher crit chance, damage re-roll, various bonuses to certain combat stunts), having only one "power level" of weapons makes designers job in balancing them easier.

 

[CubicsRube]

And the simple truth is that in it's most basic form, Extra attack features are the primary source of adding power to martial characters in 5e. Then you add on elements like hunter's mark, rage damage, battle master maneuvers, colossus slay, sneak attack etc, and there's no way the sorcerer with a glaive is going to do anything like what a martial character can do RAW. In fact, once their level is high enough, using a weapon will be a suboptimal choice for most spellcasters even against their cantrips.

 

[tetrasodium]

I'm of two minds about this.

I do think that a few items like picking up a disarmed weapon on the ground and getting up should provoke attacks of opportunity, but I'm leery of having 3e levels of AoO triggers to remember. There's a level when it gets too much. However for a few things like that it should be ok.

I do worry however that an AoO on prone could be a real death spiral for PCs. If they get knocked prone and swarmed by a group of enemies then their choices are that all attacks next round have advantage on them, or they eat a ton of AoOs. I'm sure it's realistic, but I'm not sure it would be fun at the table.

There's probably some happy middle ground. Over in the later pages of this thread there is talk of a "change state" type action to cover some of that that lond of do stuff with your hand that provokes an AoO that could work for covering a lot of 8-2's actions but 5e's near complete removal of the tactical grid combat component & the AoOs it needs to matter was a few bridges too far from "some people think there were too many ways to provoke an AoO*".

* even though in practice there were usually only a couple that provoked regularly & "bob does your $ability provoke" and a bookmark between page 140/141 tended to cover the rest. Look at the table & it's pretty simple

• Common Actions: Make a ranged attack, Cast a spell w/cast time of 1 action including touch spells on up to 6 allies or use an Spell Like Ability,reload a light hand heavy or repeating xbow(you remember this by level 2 if anyone uses either!),"run" or move normally rather than a 5 ft step,
• Uncommon but regular actions: Aid another provoked (unless you were doing something that didn't provoke to do it), drink a potion/apply an oil/read a scroll, stabilize an ally, use a skill (probably use judgement y0!), Control a frightened mount (why did you need to wonder?), Sheath a weapon so it can't be kicked away or stolen when you switch them, stand up, dig through your pack to grab an item(Lets face it, your probably going for a potion scroll or oil so will eat two over two actions so be careful instead of doing a wolverine impression),coup de grace(oh you wanted to instakill a baddie with a full round action & not be at risk from his friends, throw out a wight & see how fast your PCs remember this), prepare to throw a splash weapon (aka holy water/flask of acid), Move a heavy object (again why did you need to wonder when "is it heavy to bob" is the real question).
• rarely ever seen actions: Make an unarmed attack (monks were special & ignored this), light a freaking candle or torch in the middle of melee combat(wtf?!f?!f?!),escape from a net, lock/unlock a locking gauntlet bob needed to specially add to his armor
• Special rarely used actions with unique mechanics that can provoke bob can look at the action to say yes it provokes he just looked up if he doesn't remember: Sunder a weapon or object being worn, disarm, grapple, trip

There's almost more sarcasm than cases that actually provoke an AoO & the vast majority of tings that provoke are kind of in the "duh" range like controlling a frightened mount, lighting a candle/torch, moving a heavy object, spend a full round action stabbing someone in the heart/eye or slicing their throat open, pretend you are the quarterback with a vial of holy water/acid you hope to throw with no linebacker between you & a baddie, etc.

In many cases 8-2 needlessly defines things separate like individual entries for load light/hand xbow & load heavy/repeating xbow , move & run, light a candle/tinderwick & light a torch, etc edit:because they use a different action type.

 

[CubicsRube]

The psychologist George Miller came up with a "magic" number of 7 for how many chunks of information we can fit in short term memory. From my experience, having everything within a range of 3-7 items of information, choices, options, etc has worked well and I use it in a lot of my presentations, business cases and other kinds of communication.

I think it applies well here also. In 3.5 e we went from 20+ (although most minor) to 1. I think a few groups like an "object interaction" meaning to pick up something from the ground, getting something from a backpack, opening a door, etc works well as a chunk (I would probably have removing a weapon from a sheath exempt from this, as sheathes are designed for the purpose of quick and easy retreival).

So at the moment on the suggestions above, it looks like:

1. Moving within an opponent's range
2. Standing up from prone
3. Object Interaction
4. Using a ranged spell/attack

 

[tetrasodium]

The psychologist George Miller came up with a "magic" number of 7 for how many chunks of information we can fit in short term memory. From my experience, having everything within a range of 3-7 items of information, choices, options, etc has worked well and I use it in a lot of my presentations, business cases and other kinds of communication.

I think it applies well here also. In 3.5 e we went from 20+ (although most minor) to 1. I think a few groups like an "object interaction" meaning to pick up something from the ground, getting something from a backpack, opening a door, etc works well as a chunk (I would probably have removing a weapon from a sheath exempt from this, as sheathes are designed for the purpose of quick and easy retreival).

So at the moment on the suggestions above, it looks like:

1. Moving within an opponent's range
2. Standing up from prone
3. Object Interaction
4. Using a ranged spell/attack

1 was Moving in some form other than a 5 foot step within an opponent's range. it was mentioned in many places like the move action & such but described on

Spoiler: 144/145

5 cast a spell with the exception of "swift action" or if any existed "free action" spells & there were very few if any of those that didn't involve quicken spell.

Spoiler: quicken spell

class abilities were Ex/Su/Sp (extraordinary supernatural & spell like ability). If you had a Sp ability it probably casts a spell & would provoke an AoO if done in melee

Spoiler: for example

The special melee attack options (trip/sunder/grapple/etc) were effectively martial spells & they almost always would or could provoke an AoO unless the character doing it invested in one or more feats specifically to avoid that (ie improved trip).


The AoOs themselves rarely came anywhere near that 7 bits of info because Alice didn't usually need to remember which of Bob's abilities provoked an AoO unless they were playing the same class & both had the same ability. Monster abilities pretty much came down to "did it move more than 5 feet, drink a potion/scroll, or cast a spell?... still not sure, ask the gm who will say yes or no if it has a (Sp) tag or not on the ability"

 

[Undrave]

Having too many things provoke opportunity attacks, to me, would lead to paralysis. People would waste their turn to disengage and run away all the time because they'd be too affraid of AoO to 'do cool naughty word' and it would slow down fights too much.

In an AL game where none of the caster character showed up (apart from a Paladin) we ended up fighting animated trees and we were doing SO LITTLE damage once the Paladin had run out of smites that we improvised the use of lantern oil to set those guys on fire. That's like... three different AoO triggers in there and we would have been too scared to even try. You could argue 'run away from that fight' but, while I don't recall the details, I remember we were not in a position to run away.

(Also, the Curse of Stradh season of AL was BS with its caster supremacy skewing design and I'm stil mad at it)