D&D 5E Too Few Player Options During Combat?

[Emerikol]

My preference for a game's martial characters is mostly they just attack with their weapon. Any thinking to be done is about the tactics of the situation. So you don't want to get surrounded by enemies because that is really bad. At lower levels, you tend to fall back to defensible positions like narrow choke points. So the movement in the game is important but when you get next to an enemy you mostly just hit it as hard as you can.

 

[TwoSix]

I think the implicit answer coming from the forum right now is that there isn't a core solution to my problem and I need to pray that 6th edition has more complex rules.

I don't think the pendulum is going to swing back to crunchier rules in the core D&D line for quite a while (if ever.) PF2 and 4e are both much better fits for your group's taste preferences, and are both really good games.

 

[Blue]

A more consistent approach would be to let you substitute one of your attacks to do whatever it is the Battle Master ability is, using an ability check, and not doing damage. I actually tried this, but as with grapple and shove, most players would rather do damage.

The basic "problem" with 5e is movement is largely unrestricted, there are no positional advantages, and modifiers are pretty limited. Not only is your chance to hit is typically high, you rarely spend resources on a missed attack roll. In 4e, by contrast, positioning matters quite a bit, to-hit bonuses are not all that high, and you absolutely can waste your tiny number of daily abilities. Much of 4e combat revolves around achieving position and applying statuses so that somebody can fire off a big daily ability with minimal chance to miss. This makes combat incredibly interesting and engaging, but also very, very slow. Every encounter is almost like a chess game.

To a point. We found that once we got to paragon it became rather rote - first few rounds everyone attacks with these set of per-encounter powers to put on conditions, that also do damage so there's little opportunity cost to doing so. Especially since in relative terms the if you weren't a striker the damage was at best moderate, so the delta for attacks that weren't the best damage was low. If needed fire off dailies either debuff or from strikers to finish.

We used Alea tools - colored magnets that attached to mini bases - to track statuses, and we had a term for when the status magnets were taller than the mini itself because it happened so often.

 

[pogre]

Howdy All,

Has anyone else found that player's don't really have all that many meaningful or interesting options/abilities during combat? (Obviously setting aside full time caster types). When COVID finally blows over I want to get back into in-person DMing but I can't help but feel like combat in 5e is way too 'bleh' and static.

Does anyone else feel this way? Has anyone else found a solution if they indeed see it as a problem?

I don't feel this way. I rather like the more simplistic approach of 5e over 4e or 3.5e.

However, if you are sticking with 5e I'm afraid you are going to have to either:
1. Create house rules; or
2. Develop a social agreement at your table where the players trust the DM to adjudicate different actions on the fly.

I gather these are not satisfactory to you - thus, the reasons you see so many people suggesting alternative systems. That can be a frustrating response to read, but unfortunately, I think it is a fair evaluation of where your "solution" lies.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

If you fight your battles against faceless enemies on a featureless plane with a Champion fighter, sure.

This comes up so often. Does anyone have really cool, interaction-heavy maps? Some GMs will ask each player for an idea.

I'm playing Cyberpunk and nearly every random encounter has elevation, cover, and random objects to interact with. Of course, a computer game can hold a lot of data.

 

[Umbran]

Why are we trying to overthink it?

Because, what seems okay at the spur of the moment may later be a source of many balance issues.

 

[iserith]

Because, what seems okay at the spur of the moment may later be a source of many balance issues.

While consistency is an important thing at the table in my view (so players can make informed decisions), a ruling with unintended consequences can just be fixed later. No big deal. It's not like it must be a permanent precedent.

 

[clearstream]

Howdy All,

Has anyone else found that player's don't really have all that many meaningful or interesting options/abilities during combat? (Obviously setting aside full time caster types). When COVID finally blows over I want to get back into in-person DMing but I can't help but feel like combat in 5e is way too 'bleh' and static.

Does anyone else feel this way? Has anyone else found a solution if they indeed see it as a problem?

The groups I have been DMing always seem to have a lot of options and variety, beyond spell casters. What level are you playing at, and are you using a grid?

 

[clearstream]

Actually, players have many options in combat. Push and grapple being some of them.

The problem is that 99% of the time, none of these options compare to "making an attack", so in essence it comes down to having few options...

You can push the enemy down the top of the tower. That's 30 feet down, a heck of a fall! The enemy takes 10 damage and gets up. Might as well attack it for 15 damage and it might not get up at all. Killing your enemy faster is usually the most efficient way to win the fight.

Now they are at the bottom of the tower, while you are at the top

That however is in itself tributary to the fact that "killing all your opponents" is usually the only way to win a fight in D&D. Especially since the enemy will likely fight to the death. So the issue is in part due to our ineptitude as DMs at varying the goals and objectives of a fight.

This is an important point. If the only way to win is kill everything, and your foes are likewise all-in, all-the-time (i.e. they all want to kill you, without any fears or doubts), then combat is a lot less varied.

 

[Weiley31]

DriveThruRPG

www.drivethrurpg.com

Beyond Damage Dice Archives

koboldpress.com

Aside from adding Dynamic parts/Skill Challenges to your map/encounters, I like these from Kobold Press. I know you said that 3PP isn't up to WoTC quality/standards, Kobold Press is usually agreed upon by most(not all) players that their 3PP content is usually pretty good. These allow you to do various combat type maneuvers with weapons instead of just "smacking em" with a stack stick basically. Some of them, like stabbing your Great Sword into the ground to stop an enemy's knockback/push/shove attack is pretty neat. Others, like the Monk's Unarmed allows you to do a shove/push attack against an enemy, as an reaction, in place of a opportunity attack.

And a number of these use the usual 8+Prof+Modifier or, in case of the Monk, their Ki Saving Throw calculation. So at least you don't have to make up a rule on the spot since it uses similar systems to 5E currently.