A couple days ago, I was fantasizing about one of my fighter characters using their shield to protect a civilian from a dragon's breath weapon. However, I noticed while going through the P.H.B. that there wasn't an action that allows you to protect your allies or an objective, so I came up with one of my own:
Defend Action
When you take the Defend action, choose one target to protect. The target must be a creature or an object that you can see and is no more than one size larger than you. Until the start of your next turn, the target gains three-quarter's cover while you are within 5 feet of it and not incapacitated.
I also decided that this could be used to rework the Protection Fighting Style (which I've found to be underwhelming and in direct competition with the Interception Fighting Style):
Protection Fighting Style (Revised)
On your turn, you can take the Defend action as a bonus action. You must be wielding a shield.
Would this action and fighting style be overpowered mechanics or interesting additions?
I really like the idea! But maybe 3/4 cover (+5 AC) for the cost of one action is a bit much though. What about something in the lines of using a reaction to trade places with the creature you're protecting within 5ft, before the attack roll?
but yes, what makes the idea balanced is that in order to defend someone, you put yourself in harm’s way. so either you take their hit, or they share your armor class something like that.
Having looked at the base game rules. To make this competitive with other features, i think the fully swapping places within 5ft and taking their hit on reaction makes most sense as a non-class based action. Effectively you spend your action to ensure their survival if they are hit.
Maybe an alternate rule that they share your armor class and share the damage?
I made a homebrew artificer subclass that has something like this. It's one of the capstone abilities so it doesn't come online until level 15 and has a pretty big cost to activate:
Weaveshield
If you take the Dodge action while wielding at least one weaveblade, you and any creature of your choice within 5 feet of you is protected with three-quarters cover until the start of your next turn. If any creature you select is targeted for an attack, you expend your reaction for this round. If any creature you have selected to benefit from this moves further than 5 feet away from you, they lose this benefit. You can use this feature a number of times equal to your Intelligence modifier, and you regain all expended uses of it when you finish a long rest.
I don't think this kind of thing makes sense as a universal action. The 'Get Down Mr. President!' move is very evocative of selfless defenders, and it requires quick reflexes, conviction, and presumably the ability to take the hit better than the other guy.
This isn't the kind of move everyone should be able to do, it should be the kind of move that distinguishes some classes or builds from others. It's something a fighter or paladin should be able to do, and something a wizard or rogue should not be able to do. The presence or absence of these kinds of abilities are what defines classes in the first place. That being said, I think making it a Fighting Style seems like a pretty decent option.
I think a reasonable compromise would be to amend the help to allow you to spend your action to impose disadvantage on one attack roll made against an allied creature within 5 ft. In that context, it's costly and situational, but allows you to protect a target with forethought.
I don't think this kind of thing makes sense as a universal action. The 'Get Down Mr. President!' move is very evocative of selfless defenders, and it requires quick reflexes, conviction, and presumably the ability to take the hit better than the other guy.
This isn't the kind of move everyone should be able to do, it should be the kind of move that distinguishes some classes or builds from others. It's something a fighter or paladin should be able to do, and something a wizard or rogue should not be able to do. The presence or absence of these kinds of abilities are what defines classes in the first place. That being said, I think making it a Fighting Style seems like a pretty decent option.
id argue that choice is up to the player. if they want their rogue to finally commit a selfless act they should have mechanics to support that decision. You shouldn't have to be a paladin to throw yourself in front of a metaphorical bullet. Think of the cost it would have story wise and in game for the wizard to save the paladin. They wont want to do it usually, but theres situations that necessitate it. But yes perhaps only martial/melee characters can do it quickly enough. Others have to make a skill check on reaction.
I don't think this kind of thing makes sense as a universal action. The 'Get Down Mr. President!' move is very evocative of selfless defenders, and it requires quick reflexes, conviction, and presumably the ability to take the hit better than the other guy.
This isn't the kind of move everyone should be able to do, it should be the kind of move that distinguishes some classes or builds from others. It's something a fighter or paladin should be able to do, and something a wizard or rogue should not be able to do. The presence or absence of these kinds of abilities are what defines classes in the first place. That being said, I think making it a Fighting Style seems like a pretty decent option.
id argue that choice is up to the player. if they want their rogue to finally commit a selfless act they should have mechanics to support that decision. You shouldn't have to be a paladin to throw yourself in front of a metaphorical bullet. Think of the cost it would have story wise and in game for the wizard to save the paladin. They wont want to do it usually, but theres situations that necessitate it. But yes perhaps only martial/melee characters can do it quickly enough. Others have to make a skill check on reaction.
And I'd argue that by that logic my fighter should be able to cast fireball because I put in my backstory that he learned fireball... Or maybe my wizard should be able to Wild Shape into a dragon because my imagination shouldn't be constrained by the rules... By the way he's 300 years old so it just makes sense that he knows every language, right?
At some point, your choice of class needs to matter, or the class itself doesn't matter. If this action was a fighting style it would belong to thematically appropriate classes and, the "mechanics to support that [rogue's] decision" would be multiclassing into fighter.
If you want it to be a one-time, emotional climax thing, you can just ask the DM to do that. It falls under "Improvising an Action" in the PHB. But that is very different from encoding it in the rules as a normal thing anyone can do at any time.
I don't think this kind of thing makes sense as a universal action. The 'Get Down Mr. President!' move is very evocative of selfless defenders, and it requires quick reflexes, conviction, and presumably the ability to take the hit better than the other guy.
This isn't the kind of move everyone should be able to do, it should be the kind of move that distinguishes some classes or builds from others. It's something a fighter or paladin should be able to do, and something a wizard or rogue should not be able to do. The presence or absence of these kinds of abilities are what defines classes in the first place. That being said, I think making it a Fighting Style seems like a pretty decent option.
id argue that choice is up to the player. if they want their rogue to finally commit a selfless act they should have mechanics to support that decision. You shouldn't have to be a paladin to throw yourself in front of a metaphorical bullet. Think of the cost it would have story wise and in game for the wizard to save the paladin. They wont want to do it usually, but theres situations that necessitate it. But yes perhaps only martial/melee characters can do it quickly enough. Others have to make a skill check on reaction.
And I'd argue that by that logic my fighter should be able to cast fireball because I put in my backstory that he learned fireball... Or maybe my wizard should be able to Wild Shape into a dragon because my imagination shouldn't be constrained by the rules... By the way he's 300 years old so it just makes sense that he knows every language, right?
At some point, your choice of class needs to matter, or the class itself doesn't matter. If this action was a fighting style it would belong to thematically appropriate classes and, the "mechanics to support that [rogue's] decision" would be multiclassing into fighter.
If you want it to be a one-time, emotional climax thing, you can just ask the DM to do that. It falls under "Improvising an Action" in the PHB. But that is very different from encoding it in the rules as a normal thing anyone can do at any time.
Yeah that does make sense. But dont take me for a fool just cos i said a thing. Im aware how the balance works. And what youre describing would be minmaxing and abusing such leniency. But yes, perhaps we dont need the mechanic, and just need improvised actions and maybe a note of how we handle this situation. And as such, maybe theres a fighting style that gets this as a flat ability, whereas others have to roll well to pull it off.
As i understand it, this is a storytelling game of imagination, and the fact that you picked the class Wizard, doesnt have to define your entire character. It is a tool. Just as is multiclassing. You dont have to multiclass to justify your wizard using swords and heavy armour. Just figure out some drawback you can give him for getting that proficiency etc.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MoonyWych
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
A couple days ago, I was fantasizing about one of my fighter characters using their shield to protect a civilian from a dragon's breath weapon. However, I noticed while going through the P.H.B. that there wasn't an action that allows you to protect your allies or an objective, so I came up with one of my own:
I also decided that this could be used to rework the Protection Fighting Style (which I've found to be underwhelming and in direct competition with the Interception Fighting Style):
Would this action and fighting style be overpowered mechanics or interesting additions?
I really like the idea! But maybe 3/4 cover (+5 AC) for the cost of one action is a bit much though. What about something in the lines of using a reaction to trade places with the creature you're protecting within 5ft, before the attack roll?
or at least only half cover.
but yes, what makes the idea balanced is that in order to defend someone, you put yourself in harm’s way. so either you take their hit, or they share your armor class something like that.
MoonyWych
Having looked at the base game rules. To make this competitive with other features, i think the fully swapping places within 5ft and taking their hit on reaction makes most sense as a non-class based action.
Effectively you spend your action to ensure their survival if they are hit.
Maybe an alternate rule that they share your armor class and share the damage?
MoonyWych
I made a homebrew artificer subclass that has something like this. It's one of the capstone abilities so it doesn't come online until level 15 and has a pretty big cost to activate:
How to: Replace DEX in AC | Jump & Suffocation stats | Spell & class effect buff system | Wild Shape effect system | Tool Proficiencies as Custom Skills | Spells at higher levels explained | Superior Fighting/Martial Adept Fix | Snippet Codes Explored - Subclasses | Snippet Math Theory | Homebrew Weapons Explained
My: FEATS | MAGIC ITEMS | MONSTERS | SUBCLASSES Artificer Specialist: Weaveblade
Dndbeyond images not loading WORKAROUND FIXED!!! (TY Jay_Lane for original instructions)
I don't think this kind of thing makes sense as a universal action. The 'Get Down Mr. President!' move is very evocative of selfless defenders, and it requires quick reflexes, conviction, and presumably the ability to take the hit better than the other guy.
This isn't the kind of move everyone should be able to do, it should be the kind of move that distinguishes some classes or builds from others. It's something a fighter or paladin should be able to do, and something a wizard or rogue should not be able to do. The presence or absence of these kinds of abilities are what defines classes in the first place. That being said, I think making it a Fighting Style seems like a pretty decent option.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I think a reasonable compromise would be to amend the help to allow you to spend your action to impose disadvantage on one attack roll made against an allied creature within 5 ft. In that context, it's costly and situational, but allows you to protect a target with forethought.
id argue that choice is up to the player. if they want their rogue to finally commit a selfless act they should have mechanics to support that decision. You shouldn't have to be a paladin to throw yourself in front of a metaphorical bullet. Think of the cost it would have story wise and in game for the wizard to save the paladin. They wont want to do it usually, but theres situations that necessitate it. But yes perhaps only martial/melee characters can do it quickly enough. Others have to make a skill check on reaction.
MoonyWych
Gnomarchy so i suppose that would function like a more expensive protector fighting style. Seems fair i like it
MoonyWych
And I'd argue that by that logic my fighter should be able to cast fireball because I put in my backstory that he learned fireball... Or maybe my wizard should be able to Wild Shape into a dragon because my imagination shouldn't be constrained by the rules... By the way he's 300 years old so it just makes sense that he knows every language, right?
At some point, your choice of class needs to matter, or the class itself doesn't matter. If this action was a fighting style it would belong to thematically appropriate classes and, the "mechanics to support that [rogue's] decision" would be multiclassing into fighter.
If you want it to be a one-time, emotional climax thing, you can just ask the DM to do that. It falls under "Improvising an Action" in the PHB. But that is very different from encoding it in the rules as a normal thing anyone can do at any time.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Yeah that does make sense. But dont take me for a fool just cos i said a thing. Im aware how the balance works. And what youre describing would be minmaxing and abusing such leniency. But yes, perhaps we dont need the mechanic, and just need improvised actions and maybe a note of how we handle this situation. And as such, maybe theres a fighting style that gets this as a flat ability, whereas others have to roll well to pull it off.
As i understand it, this is a storytelling game of imagination, and the fact that you picked the class Wizard, doesnt have to define your entire character. It is a tool. Just as is multiclassing. You dont have to multiclass to justify your wizard using swords and heavy armour. Just figure out some drawback you can give him for getting that proficiency etc.
MoonyWych