D&D 5E Tactical Combat Module, hasn't it always been there?

[jmucchiello]

They will never put the word "Advanced" on a D&D book again. It "confuses" potential customers. And remember we, people who post on messages boards about the game, are not potential customers. "Potential customers" refers to people who have never played. Or have played once or twice but not bought the rulebooks.

 

[tetrasodium]

Build AD&D concurrent with D&D but release D&D with all the handles in place to use with Advanced Rules.

or just put like a page near the start of the phb saying new players may want to consider the following list of rules simplifications. There's also the fact that people are being massively disingenuous claiming that having things like meaningful AoOs that affected combat & so on was confusing for reasons other than layout if you didn't know you needed to look up the type of action you were doing to see if it triggered them ratherthan just looking up AoOs & then factor in class abilities/feats to see if they modify it for AoOs

 

[Henry]

Sometimes I think many people might have in mind the mythic idea of a "tactical combat module" when they claim that WotC didn't deliver. So while thinking about it, I decided to cherrypick a bunch of smaller modules from the DMG and see if altogether they form a decent tactical combat (assembled) module. Here is what I came up with:

• either combat grid or gridless combat, but definitely avoid TotM
• ALL optional combat Actions (Disarm, Mark, Overrun, Shove Aside, Tumble, Climb Onto)
• Flanking
• Facing
• Speed Factor
• Mobs
• Hitting Cover
• Cleaving Through Creatures
• Massive Damage
• Morale
• Mounted Combat, Underwater Combat and Weather rules when appropriate*

*these are not explicitly optional rules

You can also feature the Injuries and the Chases modules, but I decided not to include them in the list because they are more about what happens after combat rather than during.

So what do you think about it? I can imagine how each one of those modules can be disliked, but all together it's hard for me to believe that this isn't already quite tactical and complex!

my group has been using some of these for a few months now (including also a “roll init every round” rule that has been working surprisingly well for us.) it has definitely led to a grittier feel, and at one point a TPK.

 

[Garthanos]

or just put like a page near the start of the phb saying new players may want to consider the following list of rules simplifications. There's also the fact that people are being massively disingenuous claiming that having things like meaningful AoOs that affected combat & so on was confusing for reasons other than layout if you didn't know you needed to look up the type of action you were doing to see if it triggered them ratherthan just looking up AoOs & then factor in class abilities/feats to see if they modify it for AoOs

I have to say I prefer the option of a well thought out more intersting AoOs

I looked at the Mobs rule and find it boring math building swarm or mob monsters is much more satisfying in other words even the variants seem simplistic and under developed.

 

[Don Durito]

I think part of problem with tactical 5E is that so many of the tactical possibilties are built around character class abilities and spells, like 4E, but that the action economy is so often a straitjacket. (By the rules you can't even delay actions to better take advantage of allies' positioning.)

The core seems to have been built extremely simplistically and with hard coded rigid limits so that they can keep things reasonably balanced without resorting to the kinds of errata that 4E saw.

 

[Eric V]

I think they delivered in what they were talking about but people's expectations weren't met.

They technically delivered.

The way Transformers movies technically have a plot.

 

[Garthanos]

I think part of problem with tactical 5E is that so many of the tactical possibilties are built around character class abilities and spells, like 4E, but that the action economy is so often a straitjacket. (By the rules you can't even delay actions to better take advantage of allies' positioning.)

The singular reaction rules really inhibit a character design who like a defender generally needs to react a lot or like an enabler warlord is often granting actions out of turn. ( The cavalier seems clumsy work around to me instead of elegant so while it may work it seems to be fighting the system more than a bit). I think I am convinced this particular design feature made some very cool things harder to do.

 

[Don Durito]

The singular reaction rules really inhibit a character design who like a defender generally needs to react a lot or like an enabler warlord is often granting actions out of turn. ( The cavalier seems clumsy work around to me instead of elegant so while it may work it seems to be fighting the system more than a bit). I think I am convinced this particular design feature made some very cool things harder to do.

The inability to spend move actions to use bonus actions (Like in 4E and 13Age*) is also an issue. I tried playing the Rune Knight subclasses from Unearthed Arcana and found it mostly unworkable because everything it could do involved using a bonus action to activate. The Vengeance Paladin was similiarly afflicted, I could, in theory, use Misty Step to move into position for Thundering Smite, but I couldn't take advantage of it, because Thundering Smite has been (extremely clumsily) designed as a bonus action spell (It obviously has its roots in 4E encounter power design - which would combine with a teleport utility just fine.). And of course there's the whole two-weapon fighting debacle.

*13th Age keeps delays and the ability to downgrade actions and is much simpler in its core than 5e - so these restrictions are not necessary to avoid too much complexity.

 

[Garthanos]

I like/use the Cleaving Through Creatures(I allow it to affect damaged enemies as well),

I really want to thank you for that idea!

 

[Garthanos]

The inability to spend move actions to use bonus actions (Like in 4E and 13Age*) is also an issue. I tried playing the Rune Knight subclasses from Unearthed Arcana and found it mostly unworkable because everything it could do involved using a bonus action to activate. The Vengeance Paladin was similiarly afflicted, I could, in theory, use Misty Step to move into position for Thundering Smite, but I couldn't take advantage of it, because Thundering Smite has been (extremely clumsily) designed as a bonus action spell (It obviously has its roots in 4E encounter power design - which would combine with a teleport utility just fine.). And of course there's the whole two-weapon fighting debacle.

*13th Age keeps delays and the ability to downgrade actions and is much simpler in its core than 5e - so these restrictions are not necessary to avoid too much complexity.

So how could one unlock the action economy?

• allow trade out 15 feet of movement to perform an additional bonus action?
• Let the warlord grants be free actions and ignore that they are out of turn.
• Any character with the extra attacks can perform additional opportunity attacks without spending a reaction instead use one of those extra attacks