One particular change I've seen other groups (Like MCDM) adopt to their new game system is the lack of universal attacks of opportunity.
In these systems the ability to use your reaction to perform an Attack of Opportunity is no inherent. Instead, it can be attained through things like class/subclass perks or Feats.
What are your thoughts? I've seen people saying that every creature having the ability to make an Attack of Opportunity makes combat boring, as you general pick a foe and just stuck by that one until they are dead because leaving their space can be seen as "too dangerous" or not optimal. Do people feel like this is true, or do you see players often leaving melee range and activating an Attack of Opportunity?
What's MCDM? My Chemical Dungeon Master? Or McDonald's Man or something, lol,
Okay serious answer now: if an Attack of Opportunity were to shift into an ability that some creatures would have, it wouldn't necessarily make combat any different. Just like players don't generally know the stat block of a monster they're fighting (I know that's sometimes a stretch, but you know what I mean. Homebrew and all); nobody would know which monster has AoO and which wouldn't. So, people would do the same tactics they currently do, mostly, because they wouldn't want to risk a monster having AoO upon leaving it's space.
Of course, tying it to Feats for players can be interesting. Then you open up all kinds of wacky ideas, albeit making War Caster that much better than it currently is.
I like Colville's design ideas in general. In this case, I think the OA is a useful tool for everyone to have access to, and I think it factors into any consideration of using one's reaction. Do I take a swing at the goblin running away, or do I wait in case I need to react to something else before my turn?
That's very understandable, however I suppose it depends on the rarity of the ability to perform an Attack of Opportunity. For instance, Legendary Resistance is a thing, along with Counterspell. However in general casters don't think about those until an enemy does it (or if they know how a monster operates, like a Dragon). In the case of the ability to do an Attack of Opportunity being very rare, people would be more likely to move away from opponents until one of them took an AoO, much like casters don't factor Legendary Resistance into which spells they are willing to cast until a creature uses a Legendary Resistance.
It would be something that would need to be "trained out" of people, as many are just used to it being a thing at this point.
I suppose the point of it would be to make it a somewhat rare ability so it would be surprising when creatures or PC's used it.
All this would really do is nerf PC features and abilities that allow you to avoid opportunity attacks (swashbuckler and rogues in general, Mobile feat etc.) or are designed to burn reactions with them
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
A better 'fix' is to add more default reactions. Maybe a parry reaction. Or a block reaction. Or a drop prone reaction.
Just basic defensive stuff that makes sense people would wanna try to do.
Then you have interesting choices to make with your reaction. Then you have interesting tactical decisions like can you force an enemy into needing to parry as a reaction? Because if you can you may be able to reposition without getting hit yourself.
Removing options isn't the solution. Adding reaction based alternatives is.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I note no. OA is a core mechanic and an integral part of the game that drives builds, abilities and tactics. Booming Blade Warcasters & Dissonant Whisperes’ are there to prove.
A better 'fix' is to add more default reactions. Maybe a parry reaction. Or a block reaction. Or a drop prone reaction.
Just basic defensive stuff that makes sense people would wanna try to do.
Then you have interesting choices to make with your reaction. Then you have interesting tactical decisions like can you force an enemy into needing to parry as a reaction? Because if you can you may be able to reposition without getting hit yourself.
Removing options isn't the solution. Adding reaction based alternatives is.
They don't want a lot of effective repeatable defense options; combat in 5e is supposed to run quickly, in the sense of number of rounds. There's already a feat for parrying or the maneuver if you want it, and I believe a few specific monster blocks have a similar feature. Standardizing it would just drag out most encounters unless they completely reworked the underlying math of expected dpr to HP. Not saying it's absolutely unworkable, but it seems like it would run contra to one of the big design tenets they used for 5e combat.
When discussing how to fix a problem with the system, you are intrinsically arguing that their initial design had a problem. Saying their initial design runs contrary to the proposed fix is a given. It should, their initial design has the problem. We want to fix it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
When discussing how to fix a problem with the system, you are intrinsically arguing that their initial design had a problem. Saying their initial design runs contrary to the proposed fix is a given. It should, their initial design has the problem. We want to fix it.
I suppose it depends on what exactly we're talking about. If the question is specifically in regards to 5e, then that assumes we're attempting a minor tweak on the system while leaving the underlying design principles in places. If you're going after the system as a whole, you're not talking about fixing a problem in a system, you're talking about overhauling an existing system into something distinct. 5e was deliberately designed with few defense or reaction options, ergo if you're looking to make large-scale changes to that portion, you're either going to knock the whole combat system off kilter, which isn't really a fix, or you're completely overhauling the system, at which point you're not really playing 5e anymore.
When discussing how to fix a problem with the system, you are intrinsically arguing that their initial design had a problem. Saying their initial design runs contrary to the proposed fix is a given. It should, their initial design has the problem. We want to fix it.
I suppose it depends on what exactly we're talking about. If the question is specifically in regards to 5e, then that assumes we're attempting a minor tweak on the system while leaving the underlying design principles in places. If you're going after the system as a whole, you're not talking about fixing a problem in a system, you're talking about overhauling an existing system into something distinct.
No, it was to specifically fix the ubiquitous Op Attack, and we could do it without overhauling the Op Attack. Without even touching the Op Attack.
5e was deliberately designed with few defense or reaction options, ergo if you're looking to make large-scale changes to that portion, you're either going to knock the whole combat system off kilter, which isn't really a fix, or you're completely overhauling the system, at which point you're not really playing 5e anymore.
I don't think this is even true. There are a lot of defensive reactions in even just the PHB.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I feel like they are overused a little because they have very little competition.
Reactions, in general, are used for a choice selection of spells, and then for opportunity attacks. So, when people don't have those spells, they tend to make opportunity attacks.
I have considered moving Dodge into a reaction, which is made when you are hit by an attack from a creature. You can force them to reroll.
Then keep Dodge as an action to do what it does now, giving disadvantage on all attacks.
This will make people choose between a one-use offense and a one-use defense as their "default" reactions. It also makes combat a little more dynamic - but also can make combats longer, especially if the enemy is constantly dodging as a reaction.
It needs polishing, but I do think the problem with AoO is that they are the only consistent option for reactions.
I feel like they are overused a little because they have very little competition.
Reactions, in general, are used for a choice selection of spells, and then for opportunity attacks. So, when people don't have those spells, they tend to make opportunity attacks.
I have considered moving Dodge into a reaction, which is made when you are hit by an attack from a creature. You can force them to reroll.
Then keep Dodge as an action to do what it does now, giving disadvantage on all attacks.
This will make people choose between a one-use offense and a one-use defense as their "default" reactions. It also makes combat a little more dynamic - but also can make combats longer, especially if the enemy is constantly dodging as a reaction.
It needs polishing, but I do think the problem with AoO is that they are the only consistent option for reactions.
The problem with that is a) you're stepping on the toes of specific features that boost AC, reduce damage, or force a reroll already and b) from a more abstract standpoint, your in the moment ability to dodge is covered by the DEX bonus to AC. Honestly, now that I look at it, there are a fair number of reactions out there, although they're not evenly distributed across classes.
A better 'fix' is to add more default reactions. Maybe a parry reaction. Or a block reaction. Or a drop prone reaction.
Just basic defensive stuff that makes sense people would wanna try to do.
Then you have interesting choices to make with your reaction. Then you have interesting tactical decisions like can you force an enemy into needing to parry as a reaction? Because if you can you may be able to reposition without getting hit yourself.
Removing options isn't the solution. Adding reaction based alternatives is.
I've often thought that it "feels" like certain kinds of saving throws ought to require a reaction. Particularly, Dexterity ones, as they're usually imagined as your character physically getting out of the way of something, just like a Parry or an Uncanny Dodge. Of course, making that true would throw all kinds of stuff out of balance, but still. You could imagine it becoming pretty interesting, too.
Also, I can't tell you how many times I've heard new players say something to the effect of, [when attacked] "Can I try to dodge?" Which, yes, I understand that this reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of AC and whatnot, but there's still an element of like, wouldn't it be nice to be able to say yes? Wouldn't it be nice if a player's natural instinct towards how a system worked was correct?
Eh, it's a turn based game. Barring a few specific reaction-speed modifiers, whether you get hit or not is up to the dice. Are there any TTRPG's that let you just declare your attempt to dodge in response to being attacked? Every one I can think of simply assumes that general attempting to dodge is a part of being in combat.
I feel like they are overused a little because they have very little competition.
Reactions, in general, are used for a choice selection of spells, and then for opportunity attacks. So, when people don't have those spells, they tend to make opportunity attacks.
I have considered moving Dodge into a reaction, which is made when you are hit by an attack from a creature. You can force them to reroll.
Then keep Dodge as an action to do what it does now, giving disadvantage on all attacks.
This will make people choose between a one-use offense and a one-use defense as their "default" reactions. It also makes combat a little more dynamic - but also can make combats longer, especially if the enemy is constantly dodging as a reaction.
It needs polishing, but I do think the problem with AoO is that they are the only consistent option for reactions.
The problem with that is a) you're stepping on the toes of specific features that boost AC, reduce damage, or force a reroll already and b) from a more abstract standpoint, your in the moment ability to dodge is covered by the DEX bonus to AC. Honestly, now that I look at it, there are a fair number of reactions out there, although they're not evenly distributed across classes.
Your ability to continuously be hard to injure is represented by AC. Not, per se, dodge. An incapacitated character in full plate is hard to hit and not because he's dodging everything.
Your ability to throw extra effort into avoiding one specific attack sounds a LOT like a reaction.
IMO, it'd work well if you took it as a reaction when attacked, and it just forced disadvantage on the attack. Simple. Quick.
Though I still think it works better as a Parry/Block, and would require having a weapon or shield in hand. (Or DM approved suitable improvised weapon)
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I feel like they are overused a little because they have very little competition.
Reactions, in general, are used for a choice selection of spells, and then for opportunity attacks. So, when people don't have those spells, they tend to make opportunity attacks.
I have considered moving Dodge into a reaction, which is made when you are hit by an attack from a creature. You can force them to reroll.
Then keep Dodge as an action to do what it does now, giving disadvantage on all attacks.
This will make people choose between a one-use offense and a one-use defense as their "default" reactions. It also makes combat a little more dynamic - but also can make combats longer, especially if the enemy is constantly dodging as a reaction.
It needs polishing, but I do think the problem with AoO is that they are the only consistent option for reactions.
The problem with that is a) you're stepping on the toes of specific features that boost AC, reduce damage, or force a reroll already and b) from a more abstract standpoint, your in the moment ability to dodge is covered by the DEX bonus to AC. Honestly, now that I look at it, there are a fair number of reactions out there, although they're not evenly distributed across classes.
Your ability to continuously be hard to injure is represented by AC. Not, per se, dodge. An incapacitated character in full plate is hard to hit and not because he's dodging everything.
Your ability to throw extra effort into avoiding one specific attack sounds a LOT like a reaction.
IMO, it'd work well if you took it as a reaction when attacked, and it just forced disadvantage on the attack. Simple. Quick.
Though I still think it works better as a Parry/Block, and would require having a weapon or shield in hand. (Or DM approved suitable improvised weapon)
They've already got features for that. And, again, 5e is oriented towards fast-paced combat. That kind of universal defense would just drag everything out. Plus enemies could take the reaction as well, so it doesn't really do anything besides draw out combat and make single shot attack roll spells significantly less viable.
PS: And it would nerf rogues hard too, given that they usually only get one or two attacks and can't use Sneak Attack if they have disadvantage.
I feel like they are overused a little because they have very little competition.
Reactions, in general, are used for a choice selection of spells, and then for opportunity attacks. So, when people don't have those spells, they tend to make opportunity attacks.
I have considered moving Dodge into a reaction, which is made when you are hit by an attack from a creature. You can force them to reroll.
Then keep Dodge as an action to do what it does now, giving disadvantage on all attacks.
This will make people choose between a one-use offense and a one-use defense as their "default" reactions. It also makes combat a little more dynamic - but also can make combats longer, especially if the enemy is constantly dodging as a reaction.
It needs polishing, but I do think the problem with AoO is that they are the only consistent option for reactions.
The problem with that is a) you're stepping on the toes of specific features that boost AC, reduce damage, or force a reroll already and b) from a more abstract standpoint, your in the moment ability to dodge is covered by the DEX bonus to AC. Honestly, now that I look at it, there are a fair number of reactions out there, although they're not evenly distributed across classes.
Your ability to continuously be hard to injure is represented by AC. Not, per se, dodge. An incapacitated character in full plate is hard to hit and not because he's dodging everything.
Your ability to throw extra effort into avoiding one specific attack sounds a LOT like a reaction.
IMO, it'd work well if you took it as a reaction when attacked, and it just forced disadvantage on the attack. Simple. Quick.
Though I still think it works better as a Parry/Block, and would require having a weapon or shield in hand. (Or DM approved suitable improvised weapon)
They've already got features for that.
No, they don't.
And, again, 5e is oriented towards fast-paced combat.
Not especially.
That kind of universal defense would just drag everything out.
No, it wouldn't. Dodge already exists, and this is even less effective.
Plus enemies could take the reaction as well, so it doesn't really do anything besides draw out combat and make single shot attack roll spells significantly less viable.
No. It doesn't.
Parry/Block wouldn't do anything against ranged attacks. That's what the previously mention Drop Prone reaction would be for.
But, obviously dropping prone has its own issues. Like. Being prone.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
One particular change I've seen other groups (Like MCDM) adopt to their new game system is the lack of universal attacks of opportunity.
In these systems the ability to use your reaction to perform an Attack of Opportunity is no inherent. Instead, it can be attained through things like class/subclass perks or Feats.
What are your thoughts? I've seen people saying that every creature having the ability to make an Attack of Opportunity makes combat boring, as you general pick a foe and just stuck by that one until they are dead because leaving their space can be seen as "too dangerous" or not optimal. Do people feel like this is true, or do you see players often leaving melee range and activating an Attack of Opportunity?
What's MCDM? My Chemical Dungeon Master? Or McDonald's Man or something, lol,
Okay serious answer now: if an Attack of Opportunity were to shift into an ability that some creatures would have, it wouldn't necessarily make combat any different. Just like players don't generally know the stat block of a monster they're fighting (I know that's sometimes a stretch, but you know what I mean. Homebrew and all); nobody would know which monster has AoO and which wouldn't. So, people would do the same tactics they currently do, mostly, because they wouldn't want to risk a monster having AoO upon leaving it's space.
Of course, tying it to Feats for players can be interesting. Then you open up all kinds of wacky ideas, albeit making War Caster that much better than it currently is.
I know what you're thinking: "In that flurry of blows, did he use all his ki points, or save one?" Well, are ya feeling lucky, punk?
Nailed it.
I like Colville's design ideas in general. In this case, I think the OA is a useful tool for everyone to have access to, and I think it factors into any consideration of using one's reaction. Do I take a swing at the goblin running away, or do I wait in case I need to react to something else before my turn?
"Not all those who wander are lost"
That's very understandable, however I suppose it depends on the rarity of the ability to perform an Attack of Opportunity. For instance, Legendary Resistance is a thing, along with Counterspell. However in general casters don't think about those until an enemy does it (or if they know how a monster operates, like a Dragon). In the case of the ability to do an Attack of Opportunity being very rare, people would be more likely to move away from opponents until one of them took an AoO, much like casters don't factor Legendary Resistance into which spells they are willing to cast until a creature uses a Legendary Resistance.
It would be something that would need to be "trained out" of people, as many are just used to it being a thing at this point.
I suppose the point of it would be to make it a somewhat rare ability so it would be surprising when creatures or PC's used it.
I like every character being able to make Opportunity Attacks, it make moving in combat more dangerous and require tactical consideration.
It's also secretely a great way for DMs to speed up dragging combat by having enemies flee without disengaging first. ☺
All this would really do is nerf PC features and abilities that allow you to avoid opportunity attacks (swashbuckler and rogues in general, Mobile feat etc.) or are designed to burn reactions with them
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
That's a good point that some PC features would need to be reworked, as their usefulness would decrease significantly.
A better 'fix' is to add more default reactions. Maybe a parry reaction. Or a block reaction. Or a drop prone reaction.
Just basic defensive stuff that makes sense people would wanna try to do.
Then you have interesting choices to make with your reaction. Then you have interesting tactical decisions like can you force an enemy into needing to parry as a reaction? Because if you can you may be able to reposition without getting hit yourself.
Removing options isn't the solution. Adding reaction based alternatives is.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I note no. OA is a core mechanic and an integral part of the game that drives builds, abilities and tactics. Booming Blade Warcasters & Dissonant Whisperes’ are there to prove.
They don't want a lot of effective repeatable defense options; combat in 5e is supposed to run quickly, in the sense of number of rounds. There's already a feat for parrying or the maneuver if you want it, and I believe a few specific monster blocks have a similar feature. Standardizing it would just drag out most encounters unless they completely reworked the underlying math of expected dpr to HP. Not saying it's absolutely unworkable, but it seems like it would run contra to one of the big design tenets they used for 5e combat.
When discussing how to fix a problem with the system, you are intrinsically arguing that their initial design had a problem. Saying their initial design runs contrary to the proposed fix is a given. It should, their initial design has the problem. We want to fix it.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I suppose it depends on what exactly we're talking about. If the question is specifically in regards to 5e, then that assumes we're attempting a minor tweak on the system while leaving the underlying design principles in places. If you're going after the system as a whole, you're not talking about fixing a problem in a system, you're talking about overhauling an existing system into something distinct. 5e was deliberately designed with few defense or reaction options, ergo if you're looking to make large-scale changes to that portion, you're either going to knock the whole combat system off kilter, which isn't really a fix, or you're completely overhauling the system, at which point you're not really playing 5e anymore.
No, it was to specifically fix the ubiquitous Op Attack, and we could do it without overhauling the Op Attack. Without even touching the Op Attack.
I don't think this is even true. There are a lot of defensive reactions in even just the PHB.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I feel like they are overused a little because they have very little competition.
Reactions, in general, are used for a choice selection of spells, and then for opportunity attacks. So, when people don't have those spells, they tend to make opportunity attacks.
I have considered moving Dodge into a reaction, which is made when you are hit by an attack from a creature. You can force them to reroll.
Then keep Dodge as an action to do what it does now, giving disadvantage on all attacks.
This will make people choose between a one-use offense and a one-use defense as their "default" reactions. It also makes combat a little more dynamic - but also can make combats longer, especially if the enemy is constantly dodging as a reaction.
It needs polishing, but I do think the problem with AoO is that they are the only consistent option for reactions.
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
The problem with that is a) you're stepping on the toes of specific features that boost AC, reduce damage, or force a reroll already and b) from a more abstract standpoint, your in the moment ability to dodge is covered by the DEX bonus to AC. Honestly, now that I look at it, there are a fair number of reactions out there, although they're not evenly distributed across classes.
I've often thought that it "feels" like certain kinds of saving throws ought to require a reaction. Particularly, Dexterity ones, as they're usually imagined as your character physically getting out of the way of something, just like a Parry or an Uncanny Dodge. Of course, making that true would throw all kinds of stuff out of balance, but still. You could imagine it becoming pretty interesting, too.
Also, I can't tell you how many times I've heard new players say something to the effect of, [when attacked] "Can I try to dodge?" Which, yes, I understand that this reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of AC and whatnot, but there's still an element of like, wouldn't it be nice to be able to say yes? Wouldn't it be nice if a player's natural instinct towards how a system worked was correct?
I dunno.
Eh, it's a turn based game. Barring a few specific reaction-speed modifiers, whether you get hit or not is up to the dice. Are there any TTRPG's that let you just declare your attempt to dodge in response to being attacked? Every one I can think of simply assumes that general attempting to dodge is a part of being in combat.
Your ability to continuously be hard to injure is represented by AC. Not, per se, dodge. An incapacitated character in full plate is hard to hit and not because he's dodging everything.
Your ability to throw extra effort into avoiding one specific attack sounds a LOT like a reaction.
IMO, it'd work well if you took it as a reaction when attacked, and it just forced disadvantage on the attack. Simple. Quick.
Though I still think it works better as a Parry/Block, and would require having a weapon or shield in hand. (Or DM approved suitable improvised weapon)
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
They've already got features for that. And, again, 5e is oriented towards fast-paced combat. That kind of universal defense would just drag everything out. Plus enemies could take the reaction as well, so it doesn't really do anything besides draw out combat and make single shot attack roll spells significantly less viable.
PS: And it would nerf rogues hard too, given that they usually only get one or two attacks and can't use Sneak Attack if they have disadvantage.
No, they don't.
Not especially.
No, it wouldn't. Dodge already exists, and this is even less effective.
No. It doesn't.
Parry/Block wouldn't do anything against ranged attacks. That's what the previously mention Drop Prone reaction would be for.
But, obviously dropping prone has its own issues. Like. Being prone.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.