D&D 5E What should be in the Advanced Tactical Module?

[Jeff Carlsen]

I think that a gang up rule in conjunction with facing rules would work better than traditional flanking.

A tactical module should probably include more rules and options for forced movement.

It would also be the appropriate place for rules for hitting allies when shooting into melee.

The biggest thing, though, would be actions or maneuvers that involve two or more allies.

 

[Gorgoroth]

I personally want to see flanking give +1 to hit from each opponent surrounding an enemy. When you "gang up" it should be a very good tactical choice. Same thing for the enemies. In our group yesterday, four of us had AC 18, I want it to be uber easy to beat up on the lone guy, as it is in real life (not that I condone such things). That rule alone would give a huge incentive for the PCs to split up more, ironically, because those at the fringes will also likely get thumped. Much better to split up and fight the enemies 1:1

 

[darjr]

I also want grid/hex less rules. It would be even cooler if they could come up with a way to not even need some measure or ruler. Though that is asking a lot. I want to use that Warhammer terrain!

 

[Obryn]

This may be surprising, but as a fan of 4e, the tactical combat module is (so far) the least interesting optional module for Next, to me.

-O

 

[darjr]

Huh, interesting.

I should also add that I'm not that interested in a tactical miniatures game aspect of the game. Though I would love some advice and guidelines and maybe some rules to do things more free form kinda like in Warhammer fantasy 3rd or even FATE Core. But something more, I don't want detailed fiddly tactical rules, but I want to use that warhammer terrain, or I want an excuse to use it.

 

[Ratskinner]

I should also add that I'm not that interested in a tactical miniatures game aspect of the game. Though I would love some advice and guidelines and maybe some rules to do things more free form kinda like in Warhammer fantasy 3rd or even FATE Core. But something more, I don't want detailed fiddly tactical rules, but I want to use that warhammer terrain, or I want an excuse to use it.

Every time I try to make D&D more like FATE Core....I end up thinking "Why not just play FATE Core?"

I do think I'd like to see tactical options be a little more fluid, but I'm not sure how to work that with D&D's general architecture of acquiring fiddly bits of character development as you advance.

 

[Ratskinner]

This may be surprising, but as a fan of 4e, the tactical combat module is (so far) the least interesting optional module for Next, to me.

I mentioned in another thread, there seem to be a few very distinct and deeply-felt reasons why people like 4e (if they do).

I suspect that for the "tactical combat" folks, a good module will do it.

For the more esoterically motivated, I wonder if the "4e-narrative" module is as impossible as is often presumed. However, that's probably a topic for another thread.

 

[darjr]

Every time I try to make D&D more like FATE Core....I end up thinking "Why not just play FATE Core?"

I do think I'd like to see tactical options be a little more fluid, but I'm not sure how to work that with D&D's general architecture of acquiring fiddly bits of character development as you advance.

Good point. But I think if you start with the non mini's non grid part of Next that is already there and try to stay away from counting squares but include things like simple line of site determination it can be done. The big stickler in my mind is how do you get away from 'counting inches' as a replacement for counting squares. I suppose folks could just fudge it and use the size of a mini's base as a rough measurement but that's still a bit to fiddly, maybe...

 

[Ratskinner]

I also want grid/hex less rules. It would be even cooler if they could come up with a way to not even need some measure or ruler. Though that is asking a lot. I want to use that Warhammer terrain!

Attacks of opportunity are already in DDN. Will there be an option for 4e style OA and making shifting an action anyone can use? Will there be an option for 3e-style AoO with standing-up and the like provoking. Just with this one rule there are three different way to do it.

This bring up the point of how the tactical rules will be packaged. If there are 20 different tactical rules (to randomly pull a number of the air) that’s a lot of different combinations that could emerge. For the sake of manageability the rules will have to be grouped in some fashion. I think the simplest way to group them and cover everyone would be to have a 3e tactical rules package, a 4e tactical rules package, and a lighter 5e tactical rules package. On top of these then a few other options (such as facing) can be added. The packages would simplify the use of this module and the adventurous could mix and match if they want.

2e had (by the end) a lot of tactical options that lived fairly well together without being packaged, many of which didn't require grids. Granted, it wasn't as much as 4e with its zillion moves, but a decent number. Which makes me think we might see a "medium" option for tactics.

Honestly, as this development process goes on, this game looks increasingly like a 2e++. Which I count as a good thing.

 

[Ratskinner]

Good point. But I think if you start with the non mini's non grid part of Next that is already there and try to stay away from counting squares but include things like simple line of site determination it can be done. The big stickler in my mind is how do you get away from 'counting inches' as a replacement for counting squares. I suppose folks could just fudge it and use the size of a mini's base as a rough measurement but that's still a bit to fiddly, maybe...

Oh sure. We used to fudge it quite a bit during the 2e era. I ran plenty of fun combats with just a sketch on a chalkboard, often in isometric-ish views. The problem would be de-programming people to look for grids. (That and all those dungeon-tiles with grids on.) I think, for those worried about DM abuse, that you'd need to implement some system for determining with certainty the success of a positioning maneuver (i.e. when someone got to declare that monster X was "flanked" or not.) There's no reason why that can't be handled without a grid.