|
10 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 4:08PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Sep 10, 2012
|
Marking was a great boon given to the fighter in 4e and I would like for them to get it back.
This is my idea in which it can be implemented.
Class Features
Level 1: Combat Tactics
The fighter with his extensive combat experience has learned a number of tactics to insure his party's success. These tactics are represented as a tactical point that can be used in battle.
Benefit: You gain a single tactical point, this point may be spent to initiate a tactic. You must be able to take actions to spend this point. At the start of each of your turns you regain this tactical point. As you gain in levels, you gain additional tactics. At 1st level you have mastered Combat Challenge.
Combat Tactic - Combat Challenge
In combat it is dangerous to ignore the fighter's presence.
Benefit: Any target you attack with a weapon whether it hits or misses, can have a tactical point spent to mark the target. The mark lasts until end of your next turn. Marked target takes disadvantage to all attacks that don't include you as the target. A creature can only be subject to one mark at a time. A new mark supersedes a mark that was already in place.
I only have Combat Challenge done but other tactics can be added.
Tell me what you think of this class feature.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 4:35PM
#2
|
|
|
Ok, I've been watching a few of your posts and they are all about bringing stuff back from 4e or translating it over from 4e. If you like those mechanics, shouldn't you be playing 4e? lol. Remember the goal of a "new" edition is "new" things, not old things. If things worked in another version, draw upon that sure. But use it to make new and even more exciting mechanics rather than just bringing over the old ones.
To answer the topic, I really don't see how this isn't handled by the protector fighting style already in place. TBH I always found marking to be kind of a hassle, especially if there was more than 1 defender. I can't count the number of times my players said "Oh wait! I had that enemy marked!" and would want me to backtrack. If the mark was more of a semi permanent thing, like it didn't change targets or fade every round or every other round, I could see it working out. But all in all, I think the protector fighter is a fine start to a tanky style fighter.
My two copper.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 5:29PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Sep 30, 2006
|
this looks like an over-complicated way to achieve a very boring effect.
also, disadvantage is a really bad effect to give this. if you mark anything with the rage trait, they're just going to shrug and attack whoever they were going to anyway with a chance for +5 damage. it should just stay a -2, at least that way it can stack with other effects.
fighters in 5e aren't going to all be dedicated 'defenders' any more either, so this won't even be useful enough to justify giving it to all fighters as a class feature.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 5:49PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Apr 10, 2009
|
If it were desirable to bring this mechanic back (which I am neutral on) - it would not be a good idea to create an entirely new mechanic to regulate it.
If 'marking' were going to be a thing in 5N, it obviously should be a combat manuever triggered by spending one of the fighter's expertise dice. (The OP reads as if the poster is unaware of the existence of the current fighter manuevers. Hopefully that is not the case.)
And, as noted, disadvantage is a very powerful penalty. If it is intended to apply to multiple attackers, it is too powerful (just as Shield of Faith was downgraded).
If the mark is (as I think it probably should be) more focused - the figther marks a single target - disadvantage probably isn't too severe a penalty. The character is, essentially, trading the ability to do 4.5 points of damage for the effect so it ought to be a worthwhile penalty.
But that is what playtesting is for - if they decide to add a 'marking' manuever.
Carl
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 6:06PM
#5
|
|
|
I don't really care if they bring back the "Come at me, Bro!!" ability in Next. Though I wouldn't mind some kind of taunting ability that gives a reason, mechanically speaking, for the monsters to focus on the tin cans carrying garbage can lids and big sticks.
But if it doesn't make the muster than...ehh. I won't be heartbroken.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 6:35PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
May 19, 2011
|
If you like those mechanics, shouldn't you be playing 4e? lol. Remember the goal of a "new" edition is "new" things, not old things.
"If people like Vancian Wizard, they should go back to 3.x."
"If people want THAC0, they should go back to 2nd ed."
Simply telling people they should go play another game is not a helpful thing to say for a game who's goal is pretty much "The D&D for everyone."
If things worked in another version, draw upon that sure.
And marking was something very liked in 4e. While it shouldn't be exactly how it was in 4e, and I think OP's version Disadvantage bit is a little too strong, not putting it into the game period wouldn't be a wise idea. Before 4e, as far as I've been told from here and people irl who played pre-4e editions, Fighters have always been the ideal "defender" character and yet have never had a decent way of actually protecting their teammates outside of "Roleplay it and hope the DM is in a good mood today" or "EVERYONE INTO THE HALLWAY."
Marking was something that helped out quite a bit, and something similar should make it's way into 5e at some point.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 10:14PM
#7
|
|
|
If you like those mechanics, shouldn't you be playing 4e? lol. Remember the goal of a "new" edition is "new" things, not old things.
"If people like Vancian Wizard, they should go back to 3.x."
"If people want THAC0, they should go back to 2nd ed."
Simply telling people they should go play another game is not a helpful thing to say for a game who's goal is pretty much "The D&D for everyone."
If things worked in another version, draw upon that sure.
And marking was something very liked in 4e. While it shouldn't be exactly how it was in 4e, and I think OP's version Disadvantage bit is a little too strong, not putting it into the game period wouldn't be a wise idea. Before 4e, as far as I've been told from here and people irl who played pre-4e editions, Fighters have always been the ideal "defender" character and yet have never had a decent way of actually protecting their teammates outside of "Roleplay it and hope the DM is in a good mood today" or "EVERYONE INTO THE HALLWAY."
Marking was something that helped out quite a bit, and something similar should make it's way into 5e at some point.
All I'm trying to say is that people are all over the forums chanting "Bring this back!", but the point is that it's a new edition. If I really wanted to play a fighter with 4th edition mechanics, I would go play 4th edition. I'm not saying we shouldn't learn from the past and use some of those lessons in 5e. But just recycling old mechanics is boring and uncreative. Currently we have this issue already in 5e with the Wizard spellcasting system. But see how many people are up in arms against it? Sure it's the "DnD for everyone", but that doesn't mean its just a ramshamble of mechanics from the different editions put together.
Also, I'm not telling him not to play 5e. He's as welcome as anyone. I am a firm believer that RPGs don't be come obsolete once a new edition is out. I still play 3rd edition shadowrun, 2e and 3e dnd, BESM 2nd, etc. If you really like the mechanics of a particular edition, why not just play that? My view on it anyway.
Finally yes, older editions of DnD have had their problems making a tank like character, but so far 5e has done a wonderful job without marking. In fact many people think they did too good a job and the Defender Fighter is just plain too good 
My two copper.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 10:27PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jan 23, 2012
|
No marks in Next, please. They're annoying to track, and they contribute to the sluggish combat pacing that was in 4e. I also find that they make absolutely no sense in context to how the fight should actually be playing out. What HAPPENS when you mark someone? WHY would they take disadvantage to everything? What did you do to them to cause that? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 10:58PM
#9
|
|
|
"If people like Vancian Wizard, they should go back to 3.x."
"If people want THAC0, they should go back to 2nd ed."
You can still get 4th edition literature in shops. You can't get 2nd edition stuff at all anymore, unless you search for it on Ebay.
You're right, however, in that simply saying "you can play an older version" isn't really a valid argument - it would be if the older versions were still in print, but eventually they stop printing them, and stop making new modules for them. I prefer 2nd edition, and I would still play that if I could, but I can't get any of its material anymore unless I go hunting for it on Ebay. 3rd is on the way out, and eventually 4th will follow.
And marking was something very liked in 4e.
Well I didn't like it, so there.  I hate things that have magic or magic-like effects being attributed to non-magical characters. Marking is one such effect.
Fighter: "I have the power to magically force you to attack me, somehow!"
Monster: "But I want to hit the caster...can't....get....sword....up!"
Fighters get expertise dice to do extra damage. Guardian fighters can also defend other people. Plus they can always bullrush the enemy out of the way. I think fighters get enough to help them protect other part members.
Everything expressed in this post is my opinion, and should be taken as such. I can not declare myself to be the supreme authority on all matters...even though I am right!
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 11:03PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2007
|
Fighter: "I have the power to magically force you to attack me, somehow!"
Monster: "But I want to hit the caster...can't....get....sword....up!"
Because defensive lines and supressive fire don't mean anything in real life right?
Also, marks work more like
Fighter: "I shove my sword in your face and keep you busy with my impessive sword work"
Monster: "I shouldnt let my guard down around this guy or he's going to attack me."
Marks don't force enemies to fight the fighter, it just makes fighting him more appealing than getting stabbed for going else where.
And all other classes that have marks either magical or are doing something with similar favlour.
|
|
|
