D&D General The Linear Fighter/Quadratic Wizard Problem

[DND_Reborn]

Well if hits that deal damage continue the chain, I might have to increase the number of hits to do effects. On not since your chain can be ruined by rolling a 5.

I wouldn't since you are likely only going to get 2 or 3 hits at most.

However, I do like this concept in general because of how combat really works. Pressing your advantage represents how many people handle getting hit.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

But D&D doesn't say that. It has never said that. That's my point. If you want it to be that way, go for it! But any rules generated using that premise are homebrew.

Well, I'm not too sure what point people above have been trying to make, I think it's about if a character should or shouldn't be allowed to do things that are impossible in real life because they live in an inherently magical world.

If that's the point, there's no need for homebrew, because they can already do it, even without the explicit magic. They can hold a Rhino in place with their bare hands since level 1, Monks can catch bullets out of the air without even using Ki, if you have Evasion you can dodge a Fireball that covers the entire room you're in and take no damage, they can be hit by a comet that annihilates an army around them, and end up as the sole survivor.

Those aren't things a real person could do, so the issue isn't doing impossible things, just the degree that people are confortable with in that regard, from what I can tell.

 

[Hussar]

Well if hits that deal damage continue the chain, I might have to increase the number of hits to do effects. On not since your chain can be ruined by rolling a 5.

Any ideas for the missing Dragonstrikes' effects? I made all the Metallic ones based on their secondary breaths. But I's stuck on the Chromatics. I was doing it more based one the dragon's personality (AKA big dumb white just deals damage). Might branch out to a new thread.

Y'know, that's an interesting point. Lots of monsters have chained effects - a rend bonus to damage when two claws hit (is that still a thing in 5e?) or various grapples and restrained effects.

That would be a neat subsystem to add onto fighters. The more hits you score with your primary weapon (I'm not sure I'd want it gamed by two weapon fighters, but, then again, maybe), the bigger the secondary effect you can choose from. Probably not something you'd want to carry from round to round - 5e combats are too short for that. You're not likely to get more than 2 rounds into any one target very often. But, say on a single hit, you deal damage. On two hits, you deal damage as usual plus you get to choose some effect. Crit's automatically count as two hits.

It's a bit fiddlier than just giving the fighter some bonus dice that they can trade in for effects.

Oooh, combine the two. Every hit adds one to a dice pool. At any point, you can blow your pool of dice to create effects. That way hits could carry over from round to round and even fight to fight. Unused dice get reset on a long rest.

Add in some effects you could use out of combat - a bonus dice on Aiding skill checks or burning several for an auto success, that sort of thing.

Not too fiddly and I think would go a huge way to balancing casters and non-casters. Question though, would you give it to fighter types like rangers and paladins? Maybe a smaller dice to reflect their casting abilities? Like Barbarians, Fighters and Rogues get d8's, half-caster fighter types get d4? Would need a bit more refinement I think.

 

[Baron Opal II]

I'm not threatening anyone.

I said threatened, not threatening.

(Okay, I did say threatening, but in the context that you are finding the argument threatening to your worldview, not that you are threatening someone else.)

 

[TheSword]

I'd have to buy the pdf, but you might not be entirely wrong. It would depend on the implementation. I've toyed with maneuver systems and combat currency, but I've never come up with our seen one I'm fully happy with. I don't think it impossible though there is one.

However, I'm worried that a maneuver/currency system that I'd be happy with would turn combat into playing chess and either make playing a fighter intimidating to the novice or slow down play too much. Sometimes there are things you think you want, but any implementation you'd be happy with brings drawbacks you hate more.

Also, eastern and western martial arts use very different language to describe the principles of combat. The martial class I've always wanted would be able to describe the full range of cultural approaches while grounding them in the less mystical approaches. The mystical approaches while fine for fantasy, to me represent either a different class or more likely if implemented well, multiclassing.

What makes the Bushi work so well, is that the resource points are managed across the encounter. With the warrior gaining focus points depending on what stance they take and then being able to do do certain techniques with those focus points.

If you’ve played ghosts of Tsushima or the original Witcher game you will know what I mean. It’s very interesting. But best of all, it doesn’t just feel like spells by another name which was my criticism of a lot of attempts to make martials more flexible.

 

[HammerMan]

Perhaps 4e removed mechanical aid to PCs in that pillar, but it didn't remove the pillar.

Some of the first good utility powers were movement based and as such had exploration purposes.