Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="General Barron" data-source="post: 2805163" data-attributes="member: 32468">The changes proposed here are actually quite simple. One of them actually REMOVES words from the rules (5' step provoking AoO as normal), while the other is dead simple (5' step of opportunity). I don't see how those two things are going to take several minutes to figure out... <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/paranoid.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":uhoh:" title="Paranoid&nbsp; &nbsp; :uhoh:" data-shortname=":uhoh:" />So if it's a simple change, then all that is left to look at is how it would change the game. I like the idea that in melee you would be better off with a sword than a bow. I like the idea that spellcasters would be vulnerable in melee. I like the idea that potions are riskier to use, and so you have to be careful about whom you pick a fight with one-on-one.Whether any of that is 'realistic' or not is beside the point; it is the end result that I am after.I actually haven't had a chance to play at all, with that darn RL always getting in the way <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />. But I do have lots of experience with 2nd ed combat &amp; tactics rules, which never had the 5' step to begin with (with all the results listed above), and it worked fine.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="General Barron, post: 2805163, member: 32468"] The changes proposed here are actually quite simple. One of them actually REMOVES words from the rules (5' step provoking AoO as normal), while the other is dead simple (5' step of opportunity). I don't see how those two things are going to take several minutes to figure out... :uhoh: So if it's a simple change, then all that is left to look at is how it would change the game. I like the idea that in melee you would be better off with a sword than a bow. I like the idea that spellcasters would be vulnerable in melee. I like the idea that potions are riskier to use, and so you have to be careful about whom you pick a fight with one-on-one. Whether any of that is 'realistic' or not is beside the point; it is the end result that I am after. I actually haven't had a chance to play at all, with that darn RL always getting in the way ;). But I do have lots of experience with 2nd ed combat & tactics rules, which never had the 5' step to begin with (with all the results listed above), and it worked fine. [/QUOTE]

Verification