-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
The "Bubble"
- Thread starter antpasqu
- Start date
DeathMutant
First Post
I have two house rules that relate to this situation and eliminate it as an "issue."
1) If you use a Move action to Standup you get a free Shift -- just like what happens if there is a creature in your square. Note that using Acrobat Boots, to Standup as a Minor action, does not grant the free Shift.
2) You can make a "Partial Charge" which is a Charge that only requires 1 square of movement but does not grant the +1 to hit.
1) If you use a Move action to Standup you get a free Shift -- just like what happens if there is a creature in your square. Note that using Acrobat Boots, to Standup as a Minor action, does not grant the free Shift.
2) You can make a "Partial Charge" which is a Charge that only requires 1 square of movement but does not grant the +1 to hit.
In my oppinion this fix is actually a "break".
The knock prone powers are among the less damaging effects. Lets face it: if you knock someone prone you do nothing to him per se. The guy can just stand and fight you normally.
If you use that "fix", in my oppinion you are reducing dramatically the tactical use of many powers/effects (shield bash comes to my mind, as many defensive monster powers).
Note that if some PC use Dazing Strike, or even Bell Ringer on someone and move away she is doing something much more effective, and you are not "fixing" those.
Fanaelialae
Legend
I also use the Lunge/ Partial Charge houserule.
We've been using it for quite some time now and my players love it. While it certainly does make prone and daze less exploitable, we find those conditions to still be worth plenty on both sides of the screen.
We've been using it for quite some time now and my players love it. While it certainly does make prone and daze less exploitable, we find those conditions to still be worth plenty on both sides of the screen.
DeathMutant
First Post
"Lunge", that's a great name for it, thanks!
My players love the option too. So much, actually, that they are disappointed when it cannot be used in a LFR game.
Fanaelialae
Legend
"Lunge", that's a great name for it, thanks!
My players love the option too. So much, actually, that they are disappointed when it cannot be used in a LFR game.
In all fairness, the term Lunge isn't my own creation but was suggested to me by someone on these boards.
Yeah, in another campaign we play the DM doesn't use Lunge and the one player who plays in both games is constantly grumbling about being unable to lunge, despite that he uses the bubble to his own advantage, being a rogue who likes to daze.
Stuntman
First Post
This and other house rules used to nerf the prone condition are totally unnecessary. A number of members already suggested many ways to deal with being knocked prone all within the rules. Shouldn't we just find ways to get around it instead of changing the rules?
I've seen a number of clever ways players use to deal with the prone condition. One of the better ways is to have an ally stand in the prone character's square. When the prone character stands up, he automatically gets to shift. He then shifts towards the creature that knocked him prone and now gets to attack.
I don't think there is really a need to add house rules to nerf prone. There are already good tactics (that some people probably don't know about) to deal with prone conditions. It's just a matter of finding them.
cdrcjsn
First Post
This. Use your party. Delay until an ally goes and allows you to do this.
Fanaelialae
Legend
Honestly meaning no offense, one man's good tactic can appear to another as a cludgy workaround.
I don't see bursting the "bubble" as a severe nerf to daze or prone. First, it applies on both sides of the screen (and thus merely represents a shift in tactics). Secondly, both daze and prone still do a lot for you (combat advantage, reduction of actions, attack penalty/ denial of opportunity attacks). Adding lunge just prevents prone and daze from granting melee immunity when combined with a shift.
Removing situational immunity is technically a nerf, but the alternative just irritates the heck out of my players and me; it may have been intentional, but it certainly seems to us like an exploit of "game physics". It reminds us of the hunter dead zone that irritated us back when we played WoW and we certainly don't want that in our D&D (not that I'm suggesting D&D is WoW; I think such comparisons are absurd).
If it doesn't bother you, that's cool. I'm in a campaign where the DM doesn't use Lunge and I shut up and deal with it when I play in his game. When my other group and I play (we've got two campaigns going with this group) we use Lunge because we prefer it.
Thanks
Thanks for all the responses and suggestions whether in support or not. I wonder if the designers intended the Bubble. If I knock someone prone and don't move away he can just get back up and attack me. If I knock someone prone and move back more than 1 square he can get up and charge me. I find it hard to believe the designers intended this small zone of uselessness.
To the post about it not coming up often, I just have to say it seems to come up every session with my groups. It also seems to betray the reality of combat as designed for D&D.
Thanks for all the responses and suggestions whether in support or not. I wonder if the designers intended the Bubble. If I knock someone prone and don't move away he can just get back up and attack me. If I knock someone prone and move back more than 1 square he can get up and charge me. I find it hard to believe the designers intended this small zone of uselessness.
To the post about it not coming up often, I just have to say it seems to come up every session with my groups. It also seems to betray the reality of combat as designed for D&D.
