Just keep in mind that if melee gets boosted to make melee PCs 'equal' to ranged PCs, the same will happen for monsters and NPCs.
The boosts can be with the things melee should be better at which is holding the line. Like Improve attacks of opportunity, how they work, what you can do with them, when they trigger etc.
I like this. Back in 3.5 or 4 you gained more opportunity attacks based on dex I believe, but based on proficency bonus would help a frontliner hold the line better and be more intrigal to the battle.
Not difficult terrain. They mean obstacles. It's very rare it find an area of land that is has 50' open areas that are completely devoid of obstacles: trees, rocks, hills, old walls, carts, buildings, fences, ditches, gullies, etc... All can provide various degrees of cover to either side from ranged attacks. Enemies should have full cover from ranged attacks just as often as they start 50'+ feet away from the party.
The most common form of cover in natural surroundings is brush, boulders, and trees. Brush is difficult terrain and soft cover (in 5e terms, lightly or heavily concealed, no cover). Boulders vary in size but most of them are difficult terrain and no more than half cover. Trees vary in size but most are no more than half cover, and many of them are difficult terrain (depending on roots and low hanging branches). In any case, full cover means "congratulations, neither of us can attack one another", which isn't actually an advantage.
Just keep in mind that if melee gets boosted to make melee PCs 'equal' to ranged PCs, the same will happen for monsters and NPCs.
The boosts can be with the things melee should be better at which is holding the line. Like Improve attacks of opportunity, how they work, what you can do with them, when they trigger etc.
I like this. Back in 3.5 or 4 you gained more opportunity attacks based on dex I believe, but based on proficency bonus would help a frontliner hold the line better and be more intrigal to the battle.
Yup and ranged attacks and spell casting triggered attacks of opportunity. Stop having them cost a reaction, let a wide range of things trigger them, give more of them a round or let them be more potent or have additional effects like stopping movement, disrupting spells etc. Then sure even if they can't keep up with a ranged specialists overall damage they will have some control options built in which makes it worth it.
Stop having them cost a reaction, let a wide range of things trigger them, give more of them a round or let them be more potent or have additional effects like stopping movement, disrupting spells etc. Then sure even if they can't keep up with a ranged specialists overall damage they will have some control options built in which makes it worth it.
So basically go back to a system that was so disruptive and unwieldy that it was widely hated and rightly limited for 5e?
'Cause like, I feel that maybe you didn't play during the period where builds made to exploit Attacks of Opportunity were absolutely wrecking the action economy for every fight (to the point that feats that let you do all sorts of disruptive BS with AoO's were considered as essential for a 'competitive' martial build as Sharpshooter and Crossbow Mastery are for a ranged build now).
This feels like it's from the 'let's get rid of the mice by introducing a bunch of snakes' school of problem solving.
So basically go back to a system that was so disruptive and unwieldy that it was widely hated and rightly limited for 5e?
There's a reason that system existed, so its removal should have seen compensating changes to make melee better in other ways. Those compensating changes were not made.
So basically go back to a system that was so disruptive and unwieldy that it was widely hated and rightly limited for 5e?
There's a reason that system existed, so its removal should have seen compensating changes to make melee better in other ways. Those compensating changes were not made.
The problem is too many actions when it’s not your turn slows the game down. So anything to make martials better shouldn’t be more actions. The problem is the best way to make them better comes from one of the least liked editions. 4e made everyone equal, but nothing really felt unique.
The problem is too many actions when it’s not your turn slows the game down. So anything to make martials better shouldn’t be more actions. The problem is the best way to make them better comes from one if the least liked editions. 4e made everyone equal, but nothing really felt unique.
Not sure how much the things people disliked about 4e related to how it handled the balance of melee vs ranged. The main ways 4e helped the balance of melee vs ranged were
Charge was available (basically the same as 3e). Because charge only works with melee weapons, this makes it very hard to kite.
Opportunity attacks applied to ranged attacks and spells (similar to 3e). I liked how 4e did this better than how 3e did this, because melee spells didn't provoke opportunity attacks but there was no special defensive casting rule.
Reduced range for ranged weapons and spells (longbow had short range 100', the most common range for ranged spells was 50').
By far the easiest change to make for 5e would be adding some form of charge action, meaning 'attack during turn 1' range increases from 30' to 60' (or more with movement abilities) and kiting is basically impossible.
Stop having them cost a reaction, let a wide range of things trigger them, give more of them a round or let them be more potent or have additional effects like stopping movement, disrupting spells etc. Then sure even if they can't keep up with a ranged specialists overall damage they will have some control options built in which makes it worth it.
So basically go back to a system that was so disruptive and unwieldy that it was widely hated and rightly limited for 5e?
'Cause like, I feel that maybe you didn't play during the period where builds made to exploit Attacks of Opportunity were absolutely wrecking the action economy for every fight (to the point that feats that let you do all sorts of disruptive BS with AoO's were considered as essential for a 'competitive' martial build as Sharpshooter and Crossbow Mastery are for a ranged build now).
This feels like it's from the 'let's get rid of the mice by introducing a bunch of snakes' school of problem solving.
I feel like I've been playing longer than you have been alive and I recognize tactical choices beyond I hit them are good for the game. Without real AoO or similar options there are no tanks, there is no line and ranged combat if it does roughly the same damage will reign supreme. Everyone insisting we can only have the bonk fighter makes the game worse. The easy way to avoid the mythical tons of out of action actions is not to trigger AoO, so don't cast spells in melee,(have the melee spell exemption per 4e) don't shoot ranged in melee, don't move through melee, keep 5es forced movement does not trigger rule, and wow the action numbers are suddenly the same most rounds unless people intentionally trigger them for a tactical reason. But melee now has a purpose and its damage potential not being as good as a DPS build works. When all martials are just different flavors of DPS the game gets narrowed down too much.
3e had AoO galore it just didn't have all the forced movement options which could combo it into a build as easily and people played the heck out of 3e/3.5. I suspect if we had a covid like event and gaming youtubers like critical role at the time it would easily be as big as 5e got, probably bigger.
The problem is too many actions when it’s not your turn slows the game down. So anything to make martials better shouldn’t be more actions. The problem is the best way to make them better comes from one if the least liked editions. 4e made everyone equal, but nothing really felt unique.
Not sure how much the things people disliked about 4e related to how it handled the balance of melee vs ranged. The main ways 4e helped the balance of melee vs ranged were
Charge was available (basically the same as 3e). Because charge only works with melee weapons, this makes it very hard to kite.
Opportunity attacks applied to ranged attacks and spells (similar to 3e). I liked how 4e did this better than how 3e did this, because melee spells didn't provoke opportunity attacks but there was no special defensive casting rule.
Reduced range for ranged weapons and spells (longbow had short range 100', the most common range for ranged spells was 50').
By far the easiest change to make for 5e would be adding some form of charge action, meaning 'attack during turn 1' range increases from 30' to 60' (or more with movement abilities) and kiting is basically impossible.
A good charge and reduced ranges would help balance them, but I think you still need something for holding a line. Otherwise the roles are reduced to just DPR for martials. Some method of line holding, or tanking should be core to the martial role so people who want to protect and not just attack can exist. AoO worked though they could be refined, but there could be other options like giving aura like abilities to all martials where a Fighter creates such a threat its difficult terrain within 20 feet of them, if people attack anyone other than them within their threat range the attacks are at disadvantage etc.
3e had AoO galore it just didn't have all the forced movement options which could combo it into a build as easily and people played the heck out of 3e/3.5. I suspect if we had a covid like event and gaming youtubers like critical role at the time it would easily be as big as 5e got, probably bigger.
3e was a bit unwieldy and the whole 5' step did tend to produce fairly static combats, but I feel it should be possible to do something about "I run around the front line and attack the back line and don't draw any opportunity attacks because I never got out of range of the front line" without going that far. Treating any creature's threatened area as difficult terrain (can ignore at the cost of an AoO) might do the job.
3e had AoO galore it just didn't have all the forced movement options which could combo it into a build as easily and people played the heck out of 3e/3.5. I suspect if we had a covid like event and gaming youtubers like critical role at the time it would easily be as big as 5e got, probably bigger.
3e was a bit unwieldy and the whole 5' step did tend to produce fairly static combats, but I feel it should be possible to do something about "I run around the front line and attack the back line and don't draw any opportunity attacks because I never got out of range of the front line" without going that far. Treating any creature's threatened area as difficult terrain (can ignore at the cost of an AoO) might do the job.
Why is your front line only 10ft in front of your back line? Weren't you the one saying your combats often start with enemies 50'-80' away?
If your party is usually that closely packed together, there are: Interception and Protection fighting styles that can give DA on the enemy attack, or Sentinel that would allow you to punish them for attacking someone else just as much as an AoO.
The problem is too many actions when it’s not your turn slows the game down. So anything to make martials better shouldn’t be more actions. The problem is the best way to make them better comes from one if the least liked editions. 4e made everyone equal, but nothing really felt unique.
Not sure how much the things people disliked about 4e related to how it handled the balance of melee vs ranged. The main ways 4e helped the balance of melee vs ranged were
Charge was available (basically the same as 3e). Because charge only works with melee weapons, this makes it very hard to kite.
Opportunity attacks applied to ranged attacks and spells (similar to 3e). I liked how 4e did this better than how 3e did this, because melee spells didn't provoke opportunity attacks but there was no special defensive casting rule.
Reduced range for ranged weapons and spells (longbow had short range 100', the most common range for ranged spells was 50').
By far the easiest change to make for 5e would be adding some form of charge action, meaning 'attack during turn 1' range increases from 30' to 60' (or more with movement abilities) and kiting is basically impossible.
A good charge and reduced ranges would help balance them, but I think you still need something for holding a line. Otherwise the roles are reduced to just DPR for martials. Some method of line holding, or tanking should be core to the martial role so people who want to protect and not just attack can exist. AoO worked though they could be refined, but there could be other options like giving aura like abilities to all martials where a Fighter creates such a threat its difficult terrain within 20 feet of them, if people attack anyone other than them within their threat range the attacks are at disadvantage etc.
Tanking mechanics in 5e:
Ancestral Guardian - DA on all attacks vs creatures other than you Cavalier Fighter - DA on all attacks vs creatures other than you Grapple & Drag - make it impossible for enemy to melee creature other than you, and impose DA on ranged attacks. Grapple & Shove - DA on all attacks Compel Duel - force an enemy to stay within 30 ft of you. Warding Bond - take 50% of the damage for someone else. Sentinel - stop enemies running past you, punish them for attacking someone other than you. Conquest / Vengeance Paladin - both get CD options to keep enemies in place. Wrathful Smite (Paladin) - frighten enemies so they can't run past you. Armourer Artificer - DA on all attacks vs creatures other than you Battlemaster Fighter - Goading Attack, DA on all attacks vs creatures other than you [Probably more that I am blanking on]
You know the real secret though? Tanking is largely unnecessary in 5e, almost all classes will have an AC between 17-20 (Bard & non-Hexblade Warlock excepted) - i.e. 30% variation in melee damage taken, and hit points typically only vary by ~20% between classes, and most backliners get MORE defenses again AoE damage than frontliners do. There are PLENTY of mechanics to support tanking in 5e, we just don't see them because they aren't needed. Generally you are better off dealing damage, than sacrificing DPR to tank better.
The problem is too many actions when it’s not your turn slows the game down. So anything to make martials better shouldn’t be more actions. The problem is the best way to make them better comes from one if the least liked editions. 4e made everyone equal, but nothing really felt unique.
Not sure how much the things people disliked about 4e related to how it handled the balance of melee vs ranged. The main ways 4e helped the balance of melee vs ranged were
Charge was available (basically the same as 3e). Because charge only works with melee weapons, this makes it very hard to kite.
Opportunity attacks applied to ranged attacks and spells (similar to 3e). I liked how 4e did this better than how 3e did this, because melee spells didn't provoke opportunity attacks but there was no special defensive casting rule.
Reduced range for ranged weapons and spells (longbow had short range 100', the most common range for ranged spells was 50').
By far the easiest change to make for 5e would be adding some form of charge action, meaning 'attack during turn 1' range increases from 30' to 60' (or more with movement abilities) and kiting is basically impossible.
A good charge and reduced ranges would help balance them, but I think you still need something for holding a line. Otherwise the roles are reduced to just DPR for martials. Some method of line holding, or tanking should be core to the martial role so people who want to protect and not just attack can exist. AoO worked though they could be refined, but there could be other options like giving aura like abilities to all martials where a Fighter creates such a threat its difficult terrain within 20 feet of them, if people attack anyone other than them within their threat range the attacks are at disadvantage etc.
Tanking mechanics in 5e:
Ancestral Guardian - DA on all attacks vs creatures other than you Cavalier Fighter - DA on all attacks vs creatures other than you Grapple & Drag - make it impossible for enemy to melee creature other than you, and impose DA on ranged attacks. Grapple & Shove - DA on all attacks Compel Duel - force an enemy to stay within 30 ft of you. Warding Bond - take 50% of the damage for someone else. Sentinel - stop enemies running past you, punish them for attacking someone other than you. Conquest / Vengeance Paladin - both get CD options to keep enemies in place. Wrathful Smite (Paladin) - frighten enemies so they can't run past you. Armourer Artificer - DA on all attacks vs creatures other than you Battlemaster Fighter - Goading Attack, DA on all attacks vs creatures other than you [Probably more that I am blanking on]
You know the real secret though? Tanking is largely unnecessary in 5e, almost all classes will have an AC between 17-20 (Bard & non-Hexblade Warlock excepted) - i.e. 30% variation in melee damage taken, and hit points typically only vary by ~20% between classes, and most backliners get MORE defenses again AoE damage than frontliners do. There are PLENTY of mechanics to support tanking in 5e, we just don't see them because they aren't needed. Generally you are better off dealing damage, than sacrificing DPR to tank better.
There are not plenty, there is a limited range of tanking options in 5e and that is after a bunch of supplements, in just the PH its pathetic. And they made the bad choice of making it less necessary which again just moved everyone into the same role of DPR. The game is lessened if everything is a nail and you are just choosing what color your hammer is.
Why is your front line only 10ft in front of your back line? Weren't you the one saying your combats often start with enemies 50'-80' away?
It's not exactly rare to have two relatively compact groups that are at a moderate distance from one another. The way runarounds work in 5e is more an aesthetic issue than really a functional issue: the visual is "Get behind me and I'll protect you", not "get 15' behind me and I'll protect you".
3e had AoO galore it just didn't have all the forced movement options which could combo it into a build as easily and people played the heck out of 3e/3.5. I suspect if we had a covid like event and gaming youtubers like critical role at the time it would easily be as big as 5e got, probably bigger.
3e was a bit unwieldy and the whole 5' step did tend to produce fairly static combats, but I feel it should be possible to do something about "I run around the front line and attack the back line and don't draw any opportunity attacks because I never got out of range of the front line" without going that far. Treating any creature's threatened area as difficult terrain (can ignore at the cost of an AoO) might do the job.
Yeah 3es system had issues, 4es did as well, 5es does, all systems will have problems. hopefully they will do something though so the only effective role isn't DPR for martials.
Yeah 3es system had issues, 4es did as well, 5es does, all systems will have problems. hopefully they will do something though so the only effective role isn't DPR for martials.
I assume you mean combat role. For non-combat role part of me wonders whether they should add expertise to fighters and barbarians, and remove it from bards and rangers, on the theory of "being really good at skills is your compensation for not having spells".
Yeah 3es system had issues, 4es did as well, 5es does, all systems will have problems. hopefully they will do something though so the only effective role isn't DPR for martials.
I assume you mean combat role. For non-combat role part of me wonders whether they should add expertise to fighters and barbarians, and remove it from bards and rangers, on the theory of "being really good at skills is your compensation for not having spells".
Yeah I meant combat role. Experts have a solid out of combat role at least, i hope the warrior pack adds something for combat roles past I hit you a bit harder.
Why is your front line only 10ft in front of your back line? Weren't you the one saying your combats often start with enemies 50'-80' away?
It's not exactly rare to have two relatively compact groups that are at a moderate distance from one another. The way runarounds work in 5e is more an aesthetic issue than really a functional issue: the visual is "Get behind me and I'll protect you", not "get 15' behind me and I'll protect you".
I mean... that feels more like lack of imagination or dumb hollywood tropes than reality to me. Why would standing directly in front of someone protect them from a 15' tall T-rex? I makes no sense.
I like this. Back in 3.5 or 4 you gained more opportunity attacks based on dex I believe, but based on proficency bonus would help a frontliner hold the line better and be more intrigal to the battle.
The most common form of cover in natural surroundings is brush, boulders, and trees. Brush is difficult terrain and soft cover (in 5e terms, lightly or heavily concealed, no cover). Boulders vary in size but most of them are difficult terrain and no more than half cover. Trees vary in size but most are no more than half cover, and many of them are difficult terrain (depending on roots and low hanging branches). In any case, full cover means "congratulations, neither of us can attack one another", which isn't actually an advantage.
Yup and ranged attacks and spell casting triggered attacks of opportunity. Stop having them cost a reaction, let a wide range of things trigger them, give more of them a round or let them be more potent or have additional effects like stopping movement, disrupting spells etc. Then sure even if they can't keep up with a ranged specialists overall damage they will have some control options built in which makes it worth it.
So basically go back to a system that was so disruptive and unwieldy that it was widely hated and rightly limited for 5e?
'Cause like, I feel that maybe you didn't play during the period where builds made to exploit Attacks of Opportunity were absolutely wrecking the action economy for every fight (to the point that feats that let you do all sorts of disruptive BS with AoO's were considered as essential for a 'competitive' martial build as Sharpshooter and Crossbow Mastery are for a ranged build now).
This feels like it's from the 'let's get rid of the mice by introducing a bunch of snakes' school of problem solving.
There's a reason that system existed, so its removal should have seen compensating changes to make melee better in other ways. Those compensating changes were not made.
The problem is too many actions when it’s not your turn slows the game down. So anything to make martials better shouldn’t be more actions. The problem is the best way to make them better comes from one of the least liked editions. 4e made everyone equal, but nothing really felt unique.
Not sure how much the things people disliked about 4e related to how it handled the balance of melee vs ranged. The main ways 4e helped the balance of melee vs ranged were
By far the easiest change to make for 5e would be adding some form of charge action, meaning 'attack during turn 1' range increases from 30' to 60' (or more with movement abilities) and kiting is basically impossible.
I feel like I've been playing longer than you have been alive and I recognize tactical choices beyond I hit them are good for the game. Without real AoO or similar options there are no tanks, there is no line and ranged combat if it does roughly the same damage will reign supreme. Everyone insisting we can only have the bonk fighter makes the game worse. The easy way to avoid the mythical tons of out of action actions is not to trigger AoO, so don't cast spells in melee,(have the melee spell exemption per 4e) don't shoot ranged in melee, don't move through melee, keep 5es forced movement does not trigger rule, and wow the action numbers are suddenly the same most rounds unless people intentionally trigger them for a tactical reason. But melee now has a purpose and its damage potential not being as good as a DPS build works. When all martials are just different flavors of DPS the game gets narrowed down too much.
3e had AoO galore it just didn't have all the forced movement options which could combo it into a build as easily and people played the heck out of 3e/3.5. I suspect if we had a covid like event and gaming youtubers like critical role at the time it would easily be as big as 5e got, probably bigger.
A good charge and reduced ranges would help balance them, but I think you still need something for holding a line. Otherwise the roles are reduced to just DPR for martials. Some method of line holding, or tanking should be core to the martial role so people who want to protect and not just attack can exist. AoO worked though they could be refined, but there could be other options like giving aura like abilities to all martials where a Fighter creates such a threat its difficult terrain within 20 feet of them, if people attack anyone other than them within their threat range the attacks are at disadvantage etc.
3e was a bit unwieldy and the whole 5' step did tend to produce fairly static combats, but I feel it should be possible to do something about "I run around the front line and attack the back line and don't draw any opportunity attacks because I never got out of range of the front line" without going that far. Treating any creature's threatened area as difficult terrain (can ignore at the cost of an AoO) might do the job.
Why is your front line only 10ft in front of your back line? Weren't you the one saying your combats often start with enemies 50'-80' away?
If your party is usually that closely packed together, there are: Interception and Protection fighting styles that can give DA on the enemy attack, or Sentinel that would allow you to punish them for attacking someone else just as much as an AoO.
Tanking mechanics in 5e:
Ancestral Guardian - DA on all attacks vs creatures other than you
Cavalier Fighter - DA on all attacks vs creatures other than you
Grapple & Drag - make it impossible for enemy to melee creature other than you, and impose DA on ranged attacks.
Grapple & Shove - DA on all attacks
Compel Duel - force an enemy to stay within 30 ft of you.
Warding Bond - take 50% of the damage for someone else.
Sentinel - stop enemies running past you, punish them for attacking someone other than you.
Conquest / Vengeance Paladin - both get CD options to keep enemies in place.
Wrathful Smite (Paladin) - frighten enemies so they can't run past you.
Armourer Artificer - DA on all attacks vs creatures other than you
Battlemaster Fighter - Goading Attack, DA on all attacks vs creatures other than you
[Probably more that I am blanking on]
You know the real secret though? Tanking is largely unnecessary in 5e, almost all classes will have an AC between 17-20 (Bard & non-Hexblade Warlock excepted) - i.e. 30% variation in melee damage taken, and hit points typically only vary by ~20% between classes, and most backliners get MORE defenses again AoE damage than frontliners do. There are PLENTY of mechanics to support tanking in 5e, we just don't see them because they aren't needed. Generally you are better off dealing damage, than sacrificing DPR to tank better.
There are not plenty, there is a limited range of tanking options in 5e and that is after a bunch of supplements, in just the PH its pathetic. And they made the bad choice of making it less necessary which again just moved everyone into the same role of DPR. The game is lessened if everything is a nail and you are just choosing what color your hammer is.
It's not exactly rare to have two relatively compact groups that are at a moderate distance from one another. The way runarounds work in 5e is more an aesthetic issue than really a functional issue: the visual is "Get behind me and I'll protect you", not "get 15' behind me and I'll protect you".
Yeah 3es system had issues, 4es did as well, 5es does, all systems will have problems. hopefully they will do something though so the only effective role isn't DPR for martials.
I assume you mean combat role. For non-combat role part of me wonders whether they should add expertise to fighters and barbarians, and remove it from bards and rangers, on the theory of "being really good at skills is your compensation for not having spells".
Yeah I meant combat role. Experts have a solid out of combat role at least, i hope the warrior pack adds something for combat roles past I hit you a bit harder.
I doubt that, but I guess it's technically possible.
I'm 37, my first edition was 2nd.
I mean... that feels more like lack of imagination or dumb hollywood tropes than reality to me. Why would standing directly in front of someone protect them from a 15' tall T-rex? I makes no sense.
Then, yes I have been playing it longer than you have been alive.