D&D 5E Support oriented Fighting Styles

[Tony Vargas]

Yeah it annoys me for some reason. Anti-heroic? For a fighter almost incongruous it seems this character can attack 4 bloody times moving in the middle between each even do an action surge to double down on the attacks, but he can react ummmm once...

It's ultimately an artifact of cyclical initiative - which is not to knock turn-based play, it's fair and functional, but it does need enough between-turn modeling to keep it reasonable. Without AoOs, for instance, you can just walk right past someone trying to 'protect' an ally. 5e's single reaction is not up to the task, does not scale with level, and the more we pile on it, the worse it gets.

 

[Garthanos]

It's ultimately an artifact of cyclical initiative - which is not to knock turn-based play, it's fair and functional, but it does need enough between-turn modeling to keep it reasonable. Without AoOs, for instance, you can just walk right past someone trying to 'protect' an ally. 5e's single reaction is not up to the task, does not scale with level, and the more we pile on it, the worse it gets.

1 opportunity attack per round vs 1 per turn is a big difference.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Part of the problem is that there's too much use for reactions, already, they're a very limited resource compared to OAs in 4e or AoOs in 5e. I actually considered making one style grant you extra reactions for specific purposes, corresponding to Extra Attack, but I figured I'd leave that a separate issue...

I'd rather see an unrestricted short rest ability, simply so that it could be called "Reaction Surge".

 

[Garthanos]

It's ultimately an artifact of cyclical initiative - which is not to knock turn-based play, it's fair and functional, but it does need enough between-turn modeling to keep it reasonable.

All the things are supposedly happening all at once not lurky jerky, so you are directly adjacent to everyone on their turn And everyone you are adjacent to on your turn.... well vice verci LOL not easy to picture we are all just ummm suspending disbelief

Without AoOs, for instance, you can just walk right past someone trying to 'protect' an ally. 5e's single reaction is not up to the task, does not scale with level, and the more we pile on it, the worse it gets.

Yeh like the Sentinel feat and Protection Style. I went wait a minute how many things use that? Defenders this edition are a non-existent thing.

 

[Garthanos]

@Tony Vargas this thought and language reminds me of the well lets call it formalization of escape as an option we have been discussing.

Skrimisher: Why fight a battle you can't win? And why win a battle you don't need to fight? The Skirmisher knows that victory goes not to the strongest, nor the smartest, nor even the most determined, but to the one who fights only when he can win. Discretion is the better part of valor, and he who fights another day, may yet live on until that day when can win. The Skirmisher delights in tactics that harry and drain the enemy, that draw them out of position, tempt them to over-extend themselves to finish the seeming-cowards who strike and melt away, only to find themselves surrounded, outnumbered, and doomed. Ah, yes, the valiant last stand, death with honor - a fitting end, to the Skirmisher's enemies.

 

[Tony Vargas]

this thought and language reminds me of the well lets call it formalization of escape as an option we have been discussing.

I compiled and summarized those concepts, so it could contain thoughts/wording from anyone from one of those Warlord threads...

 

[Garthanos]

I compiled and summarized those concepts, so it could contain thoughts/wording from anyone from one of those Warlord threads...

Not specifically about the Warlord (or 5e really). There are already some abilities which allow one to gain advantages at the start of conflict in 4e at least ... escape/disengage then re-engage with benefits wash rinse and repeat. A skirmishing Warlord could have benefits at the start of fight. And abilities to help the party escape the fight. Big picture tactical model.

 

[NotAYakk]

Scaling for a class with Extra Attack comes primarily from Extra Attack.

So a reaction that gives you a single attack is simply not scaling for them. Reactions thus become less potent, relatively speaking, as they level.

Sure.

For a low-level character who gets one attack, that's doubling his DPR, for a high-level one getting 4 attacks, it's +25%. I see a potential issue with that, but it's that it's dropping off in impact as you level.

Yes, it is a feature. It adds X DPR. It shouldn't multiply DPR by X.

As you gain levels, you gain more features. Each adds X DPR every ~Y levels.

Then, you end up doing K + Level * X/Y damage. Damage scales roughly linearly with level. (K is your damage without these features)

If you have a feature that multiplies DPR by X, you have to make it really weak at low levels to make up for its large impact at high levels.

If you have a feature that multiplies your damage by X every Y levels, you deal (K * X)^(Level/Y) damage. Damage scales exponentially with level.

Now, if K + Level * X_+/Y = (K X_)^(Y/Level), where X_+ is additive damage and X_ is multiplicative damage, and Level=20, we get:

Plugging in K = 8 (base damage), Y = 2 (feature every 2 levels), and level is 20, and X_+ is 8 we get:

8 + 20 * 8/2 = (8 X_*)^(10)
11 = X_*^10
X_* =~ 127%

So getting +8 damage every feature is the same as a feature that grants +27% damage per feature, at level 20. But back at level 1 or 2? +27% damage was about 2 points.

Now you can have those multiplicative features. But because 5e wants hero damage to be roughly linear (well, affine), and scaling damage is polynomial or exponential, you cannot have too many of those multiplicative features.

My attempt is to ensure that these "warlord-ish" combat styles are strong (even stronger than the base ones) when you get them, and don't scale ridiculously. Sadly, even after these heavy restrictions, they look like they could still be too strong; an extra tap (which many of these reliably are) at the cost of a reaction is too strong for a combat style - it leaves duelist in the dust, even at level 20.

 

[Garthanos]

The fighting style just doesn't have a huge amount of oomph is what I am hearing.

Leading Strike
allies gain +1 on attack vs the enemy a warlord targets till his next turn.
Opening Strike
( 1 or maybe even 2? following attacks against the target by ally gain Int/Wis bonus damage) .

Not sure what this might be valued at.
Battle Leader
Adds int to allies nearby initiative and allows the character to swap his initiative if it was higher with an allies once per fight

 

[Garthanos]

Not specifically about the Warlord (or 5e really). There are already some abilities which allow one to gain advantages at the start of conflict in 4e at least ... escape/disengage then re-engage with benefits wash rinse and repeat. A skirmishing Warlord could have benefits at the start of fight. And abilities to help the party escape the fight. Big picture tactical model.

If a Skirmishing Warlord could allow those beginning of the fight things to escalate they might be seen as doing the Beowulf trick of learning from previous encounters with the same enemies