|
8 months ago ::
Oct 06, 2012 - 7:28AM
#41
|
Date Joined:
Apr 28, 2009
|
I think you can play with disadvantage a bit: Mace - a mace can deliver a crushing blow. When you attempt to deliver a crushing blow, make an attack with disadvantage, if you hit, treat the hit as a critical hit dealing damage accordingly.
Hmm... seems like a 5E Power Attack. Could maybe apply to more weapon groups?
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 06, 2012 - 7:45AM
#42
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
sesdun: I really like the Close Quarters combat rules.
Thanks!
sesdun: Regarding the 'At Bay' mechanic I feel that the stopping effect happen at the wrong point in the round. It should trigger on enemy movement, not on attacks.
I'm trying to limit reactions. They slow combat down.
sesdun: It should also work against a creature one step larger.
That's going to be a bone of contention with many people. See Reinhart's comment above dismissing the notion of a polearm wielder holding an owlbear at bay. I think the ability to hole large creatures at bay would make a good ability for a polearm specialization.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 06, 2012 - 8:56AM
#43
|
|
|
@wrecan
Personally I kind of like reactions. They don't really slow combat down (if a creature takes 5 attacks to down, it does not matter if 2 of those are reactions), it just puts some irregularity to the order of actions. But that's probably a matter of preference.
Maybe a grapple check or strenght check of some kind is needed to hold a big creature at bay. That would allow some creatures to easily swat the polearm away and others to be stopped.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 06, 2012 - 9:06AM
#44
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
Personally I kind of like reactions. They don't really slow combat down (if a creature takes 5 attacks to down, it does not matter if 2 of those are reactions), it just puts some irregularity to the order of actions.
What I mean is that it slows down the time between a person's turns. If I don't have many reactions, normally I wait for four other players to act before I go again. But if two of those people also have reactions, then it's as if I was playing with six other players. Sure, the villain is defeated, but I have less a role.
But that's probably a matter of preference.
Agreed.
Maybe a grapple check or strenght check of some kind is needed to hold a big creature at bay. That would allow some creatures to easily swat the polearm away and others to be stopped.
Grab rules get complicated.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 06, 2012 - 9:42AM
#45
|
|
|
Loving it even more. However, I disagree with the super-disadvantage that can't be negated.
It's difficult to pull these attacks off, but if you have advantage over your enemy, it should be an even chance to pull off your tricky attack.
Besides, it creates a burden on players to reemerge super-disadvantage with weapons. Opens the door for other super-disadvantage rules, etc.
Possibly merits a re-think.
Th rest of this is really shaping up nicely.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 06, 2012 - 9:47AM
#46
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
The problem is that advantage is too easy to get and these features are too good to allow every time you can get advantage. Axes always make critical hits with advantage, for instance. Spears always pin opponents. It's too potent. I wish I could come up with a different reroll mechanic that works like disadvantage but doesn't interact with it.
I guess the rule could be that if you want to invoke the weapon's family feature you take a -5 on your attack. Mathematically, that's about the same as having advantage.
Also, if we use regular advantage rules, I need to once again come up with a good mace feature.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 06, 2012 - 10:04AM
#47
|
|
|
Alternately, you could have the special attacks only work when you have advantage.
Or when you beat AC by 5 or more.
Or require advantage and an enemy to make a saving throw to negate the effect. DC = 10 (11 if masterwork) and +1 for each magical +1 of the weapon.
Just to throw some ideas out.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 06, 2012 - 10:14AM
#48
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
Those are all interesting ideas. I'll have to think it over.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 06, 2012 - 11:09AM
#49
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2012
|
Just some thoughts - Family Benefits
You can only gain the features associated with a weapon's family if you are proficient in the weapon. In order to gain the benefit of a weapon's familial feature (other than shields and unarmed), you must choose to take disadvantage on the attack roll, and you must not be attacking a creature resistant to the weapon's damage type. You must roll twice and take the lower result, even if you have advantage from other sources. This is the one circumstance in which advantage and disadvantage do not cancel one another out. The feature manifests if the disadvantaged attack is successful. Here are the rules pertaining to each weapon family:
I definitely don't like the "super disadvantage," as bawylie called it. Whether advantage is easy to get largely depends on the DM and the players, and giving players a choice in whether to take advantage or do something cool is far preferable, I think. The idea of requiring advantage to do them is decent but I'm not 100% on that either.
- Axe: Weapons in this family are "brutal". A hit is treated as a critical hit.
Decent. Way cooler than before, but if you were to flip things and require advantage there would be no choice at all between using advantage or doing this. Might not matter, depending on what way you go.
- Blade: Weapons in this family are "deflective". In addition to the damage inflicted by the attack, a hit means the target takes damage as normal, and the target's next action cannot target you with a melee attack.
This is really similar to at bay. I much preferred the last option as it offered a substantial defensive bonus that scalled well and didn't mimic something a lot of blades would have anyway. If you're trying to make it better to reflect taking disadvantage, I'd suggest keeping the old bonus but apply it to all melee attacks rather than just your target, similar to a defense action but you get your attack at disadvantage and it only triggers if you hit.
- Crossbow/Pick: Weapons in these families are "puncturing". In addition to the damage inflicted by the attack, the target incurs a -2 to AC until its armor can be repaired. At the DM's discretion, this feature may also apply to creatures that are made of stone or metal (such as some golems), that have exoskeletons (such as giant insects), or that benefit from carapaces (such as turtle dragons). For such creatures, the penealty applies until it it is fully healed of all damage.
This could be really horrible if monsters start using it to chew up the PC's armour. I have a more extreme experience with an ability like this where I had a BBEG that was a binder with that "double damage vs objects" vestige who was wielding an adamantite sword breaker with sundering cleave. I almost had a mutany on my hands after that encounter.
Is this per hit? So theoretically four crossbowmen waiting in ambush could pincushion a dude and inflict a -8 to their AC until they can get back to a smith and repair it? Harsh. Far and away the nastiest ability here. Recommend you only allow it to apply once and last the encounter or make it last until the end of their next turn.
- Mace: Weapons in this family are "penetrating". If the unmodified result of the higher of the two dice rolled on the disadvantaged attack is an 18, 19, or 20, you inflict half damage on the opponent.
Is this in additon to your normal damage on a hit? If so, letting the mace exceed weapon damage under 5e's system is absolutely huge. They don't even let dual wield feats do that. If it's not in addition to your damage on a hit, then the values required are far too high. Really not sure what else to suggest though, but I wonder if there needs to be that much of a distinction between a mace and a hammer. I get that they're different and wielded differently, but the basic idea is the same and some kind of pushing thing is more in keeping with the whole bashing people about thing. oh, what about this? Mace: Weapons in this family are "overpowering." A successful hit means that target is considered at close quarters regardless of what's surrounding them until the end of your next turn. Maybe that's too strong? I was kinda thinking you'd smash their guard back, sorta like how Skywalker loses it on Vader and just wales on him until he can't properly wield his weapon. Prone would be waaay to strong though.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 06, 2012 - 11:26AM
#50
|
Date Joined:
Aug 17, 2007
|
This would make an awesome module.
'That's just, like, your opinion, man.'
|
|
|
