I'm thinking of this from a players point of view. We're in a quest where we have to recapture a sword, so at one point I was thinking of just challenging the bearer. Combat sounds dull. Even multiple attacks fees off. It feels like something where there is an attack roll, possibly with a maneuver. Then there is some sort of parry action, maybe something with dex/strength+level. One might allow a bonus action as well. If only one party has extra attacks, let the one with extra attack roll again, but let the defender decide whether to sacrifice their attack for a second parry. Anyway, that was the sort of mechanics that I was thinking.
If it's a duel, or even a regular combat, I would follow the rules for good action scenes:
1. The stakes must be clear. What the character stands to gain or lose needs to be established before the conflict begins.
2. The staging must be interesting. Aside from interesting locales and areas, have at least two environmental features that could be leveraged for offense or defense.
3. The scene must be character driven. The character involved must have a clear motivation for engaging, and their character arc should move forward, whatever happens in the duel.
4. The plot must move forward. Whether the scene introduces a new character, reveals new facets about that character, or introduces or changes a plot point, there must be a significant and obvious change after it is over.
Number 2 is tricky to manage- offensive use of environmental features isn't a big thing in D&D and defense is usually just cover, meaning either if both sides are ranged they'll just bunker down- drawing things out to little to no advantage to one side- or if they're melee they'll just come to grips and it won't really come up in the first place.
Number 2 is tricky to manage- offensive use of environmental features isn't a big thing in D&D and defense is usually just cover, meaning either if both sides are ranged they'll just bunker down- drawing things out to little to no advantage to one side- or if they're melee they'll just come to grips and it won't really come up in the first place.
Off the cuff, I'd look at the ranged attack and AC attributes of both duelists and work the math out to about 4 rounds, give or take, presuming that they both make effective use of the features. For potent attackers, the defensive feature option would be good. For participants with powerful defenses, offensive options should expedite matters.
Having a shootout in a cave with steam to provide round to round shifting of obscurement might be good to balance out a combat where one shot might determine everything. For ranged attackers who prefer to use cover, I would also provide cover because that's a core fantasy of ranged attackers, but I'd also provide offensive buffs to both to expedite combat. Maybe they're in a magic room where everything is lighted up like a Christmas Tree.
Melee attackers like to move around or push their enemies so I'd provide zones where starting your turn in them damages you or debuffs you, so Push masteries are a little more relevant.
Number 2 is tricky to manage- offensive use of environmental features isn't a big thing in D&D and defense is usually just cover, meaning either if both sides are ranged they'll just bunker down- drawing things out to little to no advantage to one side- or if they're melee they'll just come to grips and it won't really come up in the first place.
Off the cuff, I'd look at the ranged attack and AC attributes of both duelists and work the math out to about 4 rounds, give or take, presuming that they both make effective use of the features. For potent attackers, the defensive feature option would be good. For participants with powerful defenses, offensive options should expedite matters.
Except again, using terrain for attack bonuses isn't a 5e paradigm so you're gonna need to invent if from the ground up and hand hold the player(s) through it, and all defense features will do is drag on the fight by raising effective AC.
Having a shootout in a cave with steam to provide round to round shifting of obscurement might be good to balance out a combat where one shot might determine everything. For ranged attackers who prefer to use cover, I would also provide cover because that's a core fantasy of ranged attackers, but I'd also provide offensive buffs to both to expedite combat. Maybe they're in a magic room where everything is lighted up like a Christmas Tree.
Technically stuff like heavy steam doesn't actually move the needle much, since both sides being unable to see the other causes both advantage and disadvantage on the roll, rendering it moot. And if you're just going to buff attacks to counter buffs to defense, what's the point in the first place?
Melee attackers like to move around or push their enemies so I'd provide zones where starting your turn in them damages you or debuffs you, so Push masteries are a little more relevant.
Do they? I my experience melee characters on both sides of the aisle tend to camp in place while they focus on a target, and I'm not sure rewarding only one of all the Masteries would actually be a good move- there's 3 push weapons, all of which are fairly niche picks imo, so it's pretty likely that either the player(s) won't have them, or they'll be secondary weapons and so they'd have to forgo any bonuses they'd be getting if they have a magic weapon as their main, which would either mean they don't bother with Push or there's potential for frustration that they can't use their signature weapon for what should be a very character focused fight.
Except again, using terrain for attack bonuses isn't a 5e paradigm so you're gonna need to invent if from the ground up and hand hold the player(s) through it, and all defense features will do is drag on the fight by raising effective AC.
The point of a defensive feature is to lengthen the combat, yes. If the prospective encounter is calculated to go too fast, defensive features would solve that. And yes, the features would need to be invented by the DM.
Technically stuff like heavy steam doesn't actually move the needle much, since both sides being unable to see the other causes both advantage and disadvantage on the roll, rendering it moot. And if you're just going to buff attacks to counter buffs to defense, what's the point in the first place?
Heavy obscurement is a requirement to attempt to Hide. It's specifically to allow certain actions to be attempted by certain classes if they prefer to use them to reposition or give them time to activate various magic.
Do they? I my experience melee characters on both sides of the aisle tend to camp in place while they focus on a target, and I'm not sure rewarding only one of all the Masteries would actually be a good move- there's 3 push weapons, all of which are fairly niche picks imo, so it's pretty likely that either the player(s) won't have them, or they'll be secondary weapons and so they'd have to forgo any bonuses they'd be getting if they have a magic weapon as their main, which would either mean they don't bother with Push or there's potential for frustration that they can't use their signature weapon for what should be a very character focused fight.
Obviously, you would put a feature that rewards Push for a player that likes doing that sort of thing. I don't know what you want to do with your group. You can do whatever you want. That's the beauty of D&D. Feel free to do whatever you want.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm thinking of this from a players point of view. We're in a quest where we have to recapture a sword, so at one point I was thinking of just challenging the bearer. Combat sounds dull. Even multiple attacks fees off. It feels like something where there is an attack roll, possibly with a maneuver. Then there is some sort of parry action, maybe something with dex/strength+level. One might allow a bonus action as well. If only one party has extra attacks, let the one with extra attack roll again, but let the defender decide whether to sacrifice their attack for a second parry. Anyway, that was the sort of mechanics that I was thinking.
If it's a duel, or even a regular combat, I would follow the rules for good action scenes:
1. The stakes must be clear. What the character stands to gain or lose needs to be established before the conflict begins.
2. The staging must be interesting. Aside from interesting locales and areas, have at least two environmental features that could be leveraged for offense or defense.
3. The scene must be character driven. The character involved must have a clear motivation for engaging, and their character arc should move forward, whatever happens in the duel.
4. The plot must move forward. Whether the scene introduces a new character, reveals new facets about that character, or introduces or changes a plot point, there must be a significant and obvious change after it is over.
Number 2 is tricky to manage- offensive use of environmental features isn't a big thing in D&D and defense is usually just cover, meaning either if both sides are ranged they'll just bunker down- drawing things out to little to no advantage to one side- or if they're melee they'll just come to grips and it won't really come up in the first place.
Off the cuff, I'd look at the ranged attack and AC attributes of both duelists and work the math out to about 4 rounds, give or take, presuming that they both make effective use of the features. For potent attackers, the defensive feature option would be good. For participants with powerful defenses, offensive options should expedite matters.
Having a shootout in a cave with steam to provide round to round shifting of obscurement might be good to balance out a combat where one shot might determine everything. For ranged attackers who prefer to use cover, I would also provide cover because that's a core fantasy of ranged attackers, but I'd also provide offensive buffs to both to expedite combat. Maybe they're in a magic room where everything is lighted up like a Christmas Tree.
Melee attackers like to move around or push their enemies so I'd provide zones where starting your turn in them damages you or debuffs you, so Push masteries are a little more relevant.
Except again, using terrain for attack bonuses isn't a 5e paradigm so you're gonna need to invent if from the ground up and hand hold the player(s) through it, and all defense features will do is drag on the fight by raising effective AC.
Technically stuff like heavy steam doesn't actually move the needle much, since both sides being unable to see the other causes both advantage and disadvantage on the roll, rendering it moot. And if you're just going to buff attacks to counter buffs to defense, what's the point in the first place?
Do they? I my experience melee characters on both sides of the aisle tend to camp in place while they focus on a target, and I'm not sure rewarding only one of all the Masteries would actually be a good move- there's 3 push weapons, all of which are fairly niche picks imo, so it's pretty likely that either the player(s) won't have them, or they'll be secondary weapons and so they'd have to forgo any bonuses they'd be getting if they have a magic weapon as their main, which would either mean they don't bother with Push or there's potential for frustration that they can't use their signature weapon for what should be a very character focused fight.
The point of a defensive feature is to lengthen the combat, yes. If the prospective encounter is calculated to go too fast, defensive features would solve that. And yes, the features would need to be invented by the DM.
Heavy obscurement is a requirement to attempt to Hide. It's specifically to allow certain actions to be attempted by certain classes if they prefer to use them to reposition or give them time to activate various magic.
Obviously, you would put a feature that rewards Push for a player that likes doing that sort of thing. I don't know what you want to do with your group. You can do whatever you want. That's the beauty of D&D. Feel free to do whatever you want.