If you spend your turns in combat yelling and Dodging without actually having any effect, your party is probably going to become pretty upset with you not contributing. If this becomes your go-to strategy, the DM might very well just ignore it all out of hand. Precisely because there are actual features/mechanics in the game that are geared around trying to have the enemy attack you, and even then, these are at the DM's discretion. Just because your Kender successfully Taunt-ed, doesn't mean that the bandit is going to attack you; it just means that they will have disadvantage to attack anyone else.
I mean, if you insist on arguing against this strawman of "you don't do anything else other than shouting random insults and Dodging" then sure you win, you have defeated the argument you yourself invented. Congrats! But that is not what I am talking about and I would hesitantly suggest is not what the other people arguing for Dodging & taunting to be a viable option / tactic are talking about. But here, let me give you a concrete example:
The party is fighting a group of Merrow, one of the party gets paralyzed by a Hold Person spell by a Merrow priest who then dives into the water. Do you: 1) attempt to kill all the 6 remaining Merrow in a single round before they crit-kill your paralyzed friend. 2) abandon your paralyzed friend and dive into the water after the priest in the hope of being able to hit them and break their concentration. 3) stomp on the nest of Merrow eggs to draw their attention and then Dodge. [No it would not take an action to step on some caviar]
Clearly, option #3 if not objectively the best option, is at least clearly a viable tactic. You see "Tactics" (as this is the "tip and tactics" forum, not the "game mechanics" forum) are things that are situational that you have to adapt to the behaviour & environment you find yourself in. They are choices, that sometimes are good and sometimes are not. If you always do the exact same thing in combat regardless of the enemies & environment then that isn't a tactic, that is a character build.
I mean, if you insist on arguing against this strawman of "you don't do anything else other than shouting random insults and Dodging" then sure you win, you have defeated the argument you yourself invented. Congrats! But that is not what I am talking about and I would hesitantly suggest is not what the other people arguing for Dodging & taunting to be a viable option / tactic are talking about. But here, let me give you a concrete example:
The party is fighting a group of Merrow, one of the party gets paralyzed by a Hold Person spell by a Merrow priest who then dives into the water. Do you: 1) attempt to kill all the 6 remaining Merrow in a single round before they crit-kill your paralyzed friend. 2) abandon your paralyzed friend and dive into the water after the priest in the hope of being able to hit them and break their concentration. 3) stomp on the nest of Merrow eggs to draw their attention and then Dodge. [No it would not take an action to step on some caviar]
Clearly, option #3 if not objectively the best option, is at least clearly a viable tactic.
Option #3 is not a taunt. Taunting is communication (also, I would dispute that effectively trampling a nest of eggs is not an action, though just running on top of it and being indifferent to the fate of what is under your feet is not an action and may be sufficient).
There is no question that you can construct situations where NPCs will choose to attack a dodging PC. No such situation was described or implied by the OP, and 'taunting' is not a major part of any of them.
...and remove the opportunity for one of the casters to drop a bonfire on the nest of eggs instead?
Can't take that away from my teammates.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
The party is fighting a group of Merrow, one of the party gets paralyzed by a Hold Person spell by a Merrow priest who then dives into the water. Do you: 1) attempt to kill all the 6 remaining Merrow in a single round before they crit-kill your paralyzed friend. 2) abandon your paralyzed friend and dive into the water after the priest in the hope of being able to hit them and break their concentration. 3) stomp on the nest of Merrow eggs to draw their attention and then Dodge. [No it would not take an action to step on some caviar]
I see no "taunting" anywhere in there, and like Pantagruel, I would rule that stomping on a nest of eggs would require your action
I'm also not sure why you think destroying the eggs will do anything but ensure the merrows will be hell-bent on killing the entire party -- not just the person who did the stomping
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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)
Now, if they are a decently high intelligence, and especially if they are magical, it would be 100% reasonable for them to target the magic user, particularly if one of their companions starting acting like they've been charmed.
What if the magic user is the one Dodging?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
The fact that the scenarios where "taunting" is a useful strategy and that the actions done to "taunt" are becoming increasingly elaborate is really kind of admitting that the idea of taunting and dodging is not actually something that would routinely be useful.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The party is fighting a group of Merrow, one of the party gets paralyzed by a Hold Person spell by a Merrow priest who then dives into the water. Do you: 1) attempt to kill all the 6 remaining Merrow in a single round before they crit-kill your paralyzed friend. 2) abandon your paralyzed friend and dive into the water after the priest in the hope of being able to hit them and break their concentration. 3) stomp on the nest of Merrow eggs to draw their attention and then Dodge. [No it would not take an action to step on some caviar]
I see no "taunting" anywhere in there, and like Pantagruel, I would rule that stomping on a nest of eggs would require your action
I'm also not sure why you think destroying the eggs will do anything but ensure the merrows will be hell-bent on killing the entire party -- not just the person who did the stomping
I agree. If you intend to deal damage (i.e. stomping to crush), I would even rule you have to make an unarmed attack.
And even if you stomped on their eggs, they're still probably going to take revenge on you by killing your paralyzed friend. You've already stomped their eggs, so they have no reason to rush over to you.
What? Seriously? You'd have a roll to hit for smashing an egg smaller than a chicken egg? Do I also have to roll to open a door? Or to eat a steak?
My character can jump 20ft or climb up a ladder as part of their movement, but smooshing some frog spawn on the ground : Roll to Hit!
I mean, if you insist on arguing against this strawman of "you don't do anything else other than shouting random insults and Dodging" then sure you win, you have defeated the argument you yourself invented. Congrats! But that is not what I am talking about and I would hesitantly suggest is not what the other people arguing for Dodging & taunting to be a viable option / tactic are talking about. But here, let me give you a concrete example:
The party is fighting a group of Merrow, one of the party gets paralyzed by a Hold Person spell by a Merrow priest who then dives into the water. Do you: 1) attempt to kill all the 6 remaining Merrow in a single round before they crit-kill your paralyzed friend. 2) abandon your paralyzed friend and dive into the water after the priest in the hope of being able to hit them and break their concentration. 3) stomp on the nest of Merrow eggs to draw their attention and then Dodge. [No it would not take an action to step on some caviar]
Clearly, option #3 if not objectively the best option, is at least clearly a viable tactic.
Option #3 is not a taunt. Taunting is communication (also, I would dispute that effectively trampling a nest of eggs is not an action, though just running on top of it and being indifferent to the fate of what is under your feet is not an action and may be sufficient).
There is no question that you can construct situations where NPCs will choose to attack a dodging PC. No such situation was described or implied by the OP, and 'taunting' is not a major part of any of them.
So then 99% of RPG taunts are not a "taunt" because they are magical abilities, spells, visual distractions, special attacks etc... Even Goading Attack would not be a taunt by your definition then because you do not need to be able to speak to use it. Taunting as a game mechanic is drawing aggro, regardless of the what you do to cause it to happen.
So then 99% of RPG taunts are not a "taunt" because they are magical abilities, spells, visual distractions, special attacks etc... Even Goading Attack would not be a taunt by your definition then because you do not need to be able to speak to use it. Taunting as a game mechanic is drawing aggro, regardless of the what you do to cause it to happen.
Since there is no Taunting game mechanic in 5e, yeah, most of us (maybe even all of us?) are using the dictionary definition of the word rather than whatever it is you're trying to port in from video games
Reckless Attack is not a taunt, but it's probably the most reliable way in the game to "draw aggro"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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)
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
So then 99% of RPG taunts are not a "taunt" because they are magical abilities, spells, visual distractions, special attacks etc... Even Goading Attack would not be a taunt by your definition then because you do not need to be able to speak to use it. Taunting as a game mechanic is drawing aggro, regardless of the what you do to cause it to happen.
Yes, an MMO taunt is a forced aggro mechanic. D&D has a number of them, but but only one is called a taunt, none of them are actually forced aggro mechanics (just disadvantage or penalty to attacking another target), and none of them are available without specific character abilities, and a lot aren't compatible with dodging. Thus, the assumption is that 'taunt' means 'dictionary definition of taunt'.
The list of MMO taunt-like mechanics in 5e that I know of is
Barbarian (Ancestral Guardians, Ancestral Protectors): requires you to hit the target on your turn, and thus precludes dodge.
Barbarian (Ancestral Guardians, Spirit Shield): requires you to sustain your rage, which usually requires attacking, at least until the 2024 book comes out. Otherwise compatible.
Fighter (fighting style: protector or interceptor): usable when dodging. Generally terrible, though.
Fighter (battle master, goading strike): requires hitting the target with an attack, so generally not usable when dodging. Also, generally terrible.
Fighter (cavalier, unwavering mark): requires hitting the target with an attack, so generally not usable when dodging.
Paladin (compelled duel): usable when dodging. Generally terrible, though.
Rogue (swashbuckler, panache): requires an action. Lasts a minute, though, so you can use dodge in later turns.
So from what I'm reading some of you are absolutely certain that under no circumstance is it better to Dodge than Attack. Your argument stands that anytime you have a chance to take a swing, you should do that rather than avoid incoming damage.
You sure about that?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
Fighter (battle master, goading strike): requires hitting the target with an attack, so generally not usable when dodging. Also, generally terrible.
Goading attack is great on a ranged attack
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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)
So from what I'm reading some of you are absolutely certain that under no circumstance is it better to Dodge than Attack.
No, no-one is claiming that AFAICT. Rather, the claim is that it requires specialized and fairly rare conditions for dodge to be better than attacking, and that the conditions described by the OP are nowhere close to qualifying.
Fighter (battle master, goading strike): requires hitting the target with an attack, so generally not usable when dodging. Also, generally terrible.
Goading attack is great on a ranged attack
Menacing Attack is vastly superior unless the monster is immune to the frightened condition (which is not a super rare immunity, but still only around 25% of monsters, and will frequently make the monster unable to attack at all).
Fighter (battle master, goading strike): requires hitting the target with an attack, so generally not usable when dodging. Also, generally terrible.
Goading attack is great on a ranged attack
Menacing Attack is vastly superior unless the monster is immune to the frightened condition (which is not a super rare immunity, but still only around 25% of monsters, and will frequently make the monster unable to attack at all).
In melee, yes, Menacing is better
At range, things like terrain, playstyle etc can lead to line of sight being cut off, even before you consider possible immunity
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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)
A front line fighter-type taking the Dodge action ABSOLUTELY has its place. If I'm playing a fighter, and 2-3 enemies with the ability to sneak attack focus on me, you'd better believe i'm taking the dodge action (which eliminates their ability to sneak attack). My teammates can then pick them off while they're either missing me, or hitting me for only a fraction of the damage they'd normally do.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
A front line fighter-type taking the Dodge action ABSOLUTELY has its place. If I'm playing a fighter, and 2-3 enemies with the ability to sneak attack focus on me, you'd better believe i'm taking the dodge action (which eliminates their ability to sneak attack). My teammates can then pick them off while they're either missing me, or hitting me for only a fraction of the damage they'd normally do.
No one is saying there's never any possible reason to dodge, but simply going by printed stat blocks and my personal experience, that's an extremely uncommon type of encounter, and so doesn't really contradict the point that barring specific and uncommon circumstances it's better to spend your action to attack rather than dodge.
Maybe you don't fight a lot of rogues, but since rogues frequently make better fighters than fighters, most people fight a LOT of them. There are also quite a few villains in pre-made adventures and monsters in several sources that get sneak attack, pack tactics, or the equivalent under a different name - all of which are ruined by the Dodge action taking away their advantage or imposing disadvantage.
So from what I'm reading some of you are absolutely certain that under no circumstance is it better to Dodge than Attack. Your argument stands that anytime you have a chance to take a swing, you should do that rather than avoid incoming damage.
You sure about that?
I don't think anyone is saying that at all. Dodge has it's place. If you're low on health, or blocking a path, and being multi-attacked, dodge is an excellent selection. Most of the time however, an attack is a better choice to make.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I mean, if you insist on arguing against this strawman of "you don't do anything else other than shouting random insults and Dodging" then sure you win, you have defeated the argument you yourself invented. Congrats! But that is not what I am talking about and I would hesitantly suggest is not what the other people arguing for Dodging & taunting to be a viable option / tactic are talking about. But here, let me give you a concrete example:
The party is fighting a group of Merrow, one of the party gets paralyzed by a Hold Person spell by a Merrow priest who then dives into the water. Do you:
1) attempt to kill all the 6 remaining Merrow in a single round before they crit-kill your paralyzed friend.
2) abandon your paralyzed friend and dive into the water after the priest in the hope of being able to hit them and break their concentration.
3) stomp on the nest of Merrow eggs to draw their attention and then Dodge. [No it would not take an action to step on some caviar]
Clearly, option #3 if not objectively the best option, is at least clearly a viable tactic. You see "Tactics" (as this is the "tip and tactics" forum, not the "game mechanics" forum) are things that are situational that you have to adapt to the behaviour & environment you find yourself in. They are choices, that sometimes are good and sometimes are not. If you always do the exact same thing in combat regardless of the enemies & environment then that isn't a tactic, that is a character build.
Option #3 is not a taunt. Taunting is communication (also, I would dispute that effectively trampling a nest of eggs is not an action, though just running on top of it and being indifferent to the fate of what is under your feet is not an action and may be sufficient).
There is no question that you can construct situations where NPCs will choose to attack a dodging PC. No such situation was described or implied by the OP, and 'taunting' is not a major part of any of them.
...and remove the opportunity for one of the casters to drop a bonfire on the nest of eggs instead?
Can't take that away from my teammates.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
I see no "taunting" anywhere in there, and like Pantagruel, I would rule that stomping on a nest of eggs would require your action
I'm also not sure why you think destroying the eggs will do anything but ensure the merrows will be hell-bent on killing the entire party -- not just the person who did the stomping
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)
What if the magic user is the one Dodging?
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
The fact that the scenarios where "taunting" is a useful strategy and that the actions done to "taunt" are becoming increasingly elaborate is really kind of admitting that the idea of taunting and dodging is not actually something that would routinely be useful.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
What? Seriously? You'd have a roll to hit for smashing an egg smaller than a chicken egg? Do I also have to roll to open a door? Or to eat a steak?
My character can jump 20ft or climb up a ladder as part of their movement, but smooshing some frog spawn on the ground : Roll to Hit!
So then 99% of RPG taunts are not a "taunt" because they are magical abilities, spells, visual distractions, special attacks etc... Even Goading Attack would not be a taunt by your definition then because you do not need to be able to speak to use it. Taunting as a game mechanic is drawing aggro, regardless of the what you do to cause it to happen.
Since there is no Taunting game mechanic in 5e, yeah, most of us (maybe even all of us?) are using the dictionary definition of the word rather than whatever it is you're trying to port in from video games
Reckless Attack is not a taunt, but it's probably the most reliable way in the game to "draw aggro"
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)
Marking is a mechanic which is reliable.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Yes, an MMO taunt is a forced aggro mechanic. D&D has a number of them, but but only one is called a taunt, none of them are actually forced aggro mechanics (just disadvantage or penalty to attacking another target), and none of them are available without specific character abilities, and a lot aren't compatible with dodging. Thus, the assumption is that 'taunt' means 'dictionary definition of taunt'.
The list of MMO taunt-like mechanics in 5e that I know of is
So from what I'm reading some of you are absolutely certain that under no circumstance is it better to Dodge than Attack. Your argument stands that anytime you have a chance to take a swing, you should do that rather than avoid incoming damage.
You sure about that?
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Goading attack is great on a ranged attack
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)
No, no-one is claiming that AFAICT. Rather, the claim is that it requires specialized and fairly rare conditions for dodge to be better than attacking, and that the conditions described by the OP are nowhere close to qualifying.
Menacing Attack is vastly superior unless the monster is immune to the frightened condition (which is not a super rare immunity, but still only around 25% of monsters, and will frequently make the monster unable to attack at all).
In melee, yes, Menacing is better
At range, things like terrain, playstyle etc can lead to line of sight being cut off, even before you consider possible immunity
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)
A front line fighter-type taking the Dodge action ABSOLUTELY has its place. If I'm playing a fighter, and 2-3 enemies with the ability to sneak attack focus on me, you'd better believe i'm taking the dodge action (which eliminates their ability to sneak attack). My teammates can then pick them off while they're either missing me, or hitting me for only a fraction of the damage they'd normally do.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
No one is saying there's never any possible reason to dodge, but simply going by printed stat blocks and my personal experience, that's an extremely uncommon type of encounter, and so doesn't really contradict the point that barring specific and uncommon circumstances it's better to spend your action to attack rather than dodge.
Maybe you don't fight a lot of rogues, but since rogues frequently make better fighters than fighters, most people fight a LOT of them. There are also quite a few villains in pre-made adventures and monsters in several sources that get sneak attack, pack tactics, or the equivalent under a different name - all of which are ruined by the Dodge action taking away their advantage or imposing disadvantage.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
I don't think anyone is saying that at all. Dodge has it's place. If you're low on health, or blocking a path, and being multi-attacked, dodge is an excellent selection. Most of the time however, an attack is a better choice to make.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha