Ok, so this is of varying use depending on how you handle initiative and it may run afoul of the "bookkeeping simplicity" concept and involves a small amount of metagaming But here it goes -
Tactical Adjustment - your battlemaster can evaluate the tactical situation and adjust their combat effectiveness to optimal timing. As a bonus action on your turn, you can spend one superiority dice and adjust your initiative higher or lower by up to the amount rolled on the dice plus your dexterity bonus. If using fixed initiative, this adjustment must be decided at the time the bonus action is used and becomes your new initiative score as of the next combat round. If using recurring initiative rolls, it must be decided at the time of the next roll during the current combat.
My intent on this is twofold... first is the ability to potentially "turn the tables" on an oppoent as a fight progresses by getting 2 actions in a row. The other is the ability to adjust your turn to better coordinate with your party. Yes you can delay for specific circumstance but it is my understanding that you use your reaction for that and couldn't use your bonus action on that later reaction because it isn't your turn. And potentially lose it altogether depending on how strict your GM is about your "conditions". The timing of some battlemaster maneuvers can be important but sacrificing a lot to delay and just getting a reaction is not often offset by that. An example is wanting to trip someone but they immediately follow me in initiative. I trip them, get a few advantages attacks and then they get back up. Or I wait on a reaction, and have limited options because it is "Not my turn" and I burn my reaction (so no riposte or AoO). With this I could lower my initiative for next turn, dodge to offset their doubled up action, trip them next turn and then the whole party can pile on before they get a chance to stand back up
As far as I can find there is no way to just adjust when you take your whole turn in RAW. Seemed like a cool way and thematic fit for battlemaster.
A potential concern is a spell or effect that lasts Until your next turn could be slightly extended.
Also, deliberately did not use plus your initiative bonus due to Alert feat. Too big a swing possible with that, but wanted some bonus because it doesn't do damage and a 1 would feel like a wasted use
What I mean is, what if instead of the Battlemaster changing his own initiative value were he to change the enemy's? It could maybe work like this:
Tactical Adjustment (or Hindering Strike) - With your attack you can hinder an enemy, slowing his action and possibly granting an opening for your allies to act before the enemy. As a bonus action, roll a superiority dice: your next attack will add the value of the superiority dice to the damage inflicted to the target and modify the initiative value of the target by that same amount + half your proficienecy bonus (rounded up). The new initiative value of the target will come into effect at the beginning of the next round of combat.
What do you think? (I understand it takes things from the completely opposite point of view than your proposed maneuver, but I have the impression something similar to this might be more in line with the other maneuvers already available)
Edit: Oh, btw, I love the idea per-se, good one :)
The idea sounds very interesting, raising your initiative using SP die. Though it seem little bit over powered to put it as a bonus action as you shift the initiative and be able to deal damage still which thematically feels odd. Since the character thinks about the tactical advantage during the fight and needs to position him/herself in combat which may take more time than you think. But i am no expert and that was just an opinion.
Edit: It also could be very weak since with levels the initiative rolls will be crazy and the ability maybe rendered useless.
Born under the watch of something from the furthest corners of the far realms.... It knows all.... it sees all... and it asks: "What is it that you want to see?"... and my answer is... ALL"
Hindering strike sounds more specific, but also easier to align with other maneuvers. Maybe change it to on hit though? Also aligning it with other "strike" type abilities. Additionally, like using prof bonus as that represents combat experience (they should change parry to this imo). However think I would go for full bonus instead of half. When restricted to one mob, adjusting it by just 2 potentially feels weak when also doing no damage. So more drop or lose prof altogether and still do damage?
That covers the "turning tables" piece but is really very minor on the potential for coordinating better overall with your group. I have found that I could be way more effective with my other abilities if I could shift to where I go after the mobs but before most of the party. That is why I made it variable. As noted RAW, you can't really voluntarily lower your initiative and still get a normal turn. If I want someone to go before me, I have to use my reaction which means no bonus action then and no potential to use action surge and losing AoO and Riposte options. And then potential to lose it altogether if conditions aren't met for some reason. Since playing my battlemaster, I have had the thought, "would really like to change my initiative a bit at this point."
Not even always to do with an opponent, but that, say trip ceases to be an option because our heavy hitting archer rogue goes just after me.
No maneuver takes your whole action. Only commanders strike comes close and that is a bonus action plus one of your attacks. Design-wise they are all on hit, reaction, bonus action or no action cost at all. As you note, this could be rendered useless by a large disparity in initiative so I think burning potential 3 or 4 attacks is totally out of line as you level. Understand the concern though. This concept does feel situationally powerful but I don' think it is out of line
Hindering strike sounds more specific, but also easier to align with other maneuvers. Maybe change it to on hit though? Also aligning it with other "strike" type abilities. Additionally, like using prof bonus as that represents combat experience (they should change parry to this imo). However think I would go for full bonus instead of half. When restricted to one mob, adjusting it by just 2 potentially feels weak when also doing no damage. So more drop or lose prof altogether and still do damage?
That covers the "turning tables" piece but is really very minor on the potential for coordinating better overall with your group. I have found that I could be way more effective with my other abilities if I could shift to where I go after the mobs but before most of the party. That is why I made it variable. As noted RAW, you can't really voluntarily lower your initiative and still get a normal turn. If I want someone to go before me, I have to use my reaction which means no bonus action then and no potential to use action surge and losing AoO and Riposte options. And then potential to lose it altogether if conditions aren't met for some reason. Since playing my battlemaster, I have had the thought, "would really like to change my initiative a bit at this point."
Not even always to do with an opponent, but that, say trip ceases to be an option because our heavy hitting archer rogue goes just after me.
No maneuver takes your whole action. Only commanders strike comes close and that is a bonus action plus one of your attacks. Design-wise they are all on hit, reaction, bonus action or no action cost at all. As you note, this could be rendered useless by a large disparity in initiative so I think burning potential 3 or 4 attacks is totally out of line as you level. Understand the concern though. This concept does feel situationally powerful but I don' think it is out of line
The way I worded it you would still do damage (and add the superiority dice to it as most current maneuvers), and you can "modify", so that would mean increasing or decreasing. Increasing an enemy's initiative could just be putting him in a position where he feels forced to act faster/before the Fighter or another party member (there are several ways this can be justified with). As for using the full proficiency bonus, yeah, it might actually be a better option, gives more freedom. I'd also change the wording to "you can modify (increase or decrease) the initiative value of the target to up to the superiority dice value + your proficiency bonus". As for Arlong's comment on the initiative, short of stacking character bonuses from subclasses or the Alert feat, there is no much scaling in the initiative in this edition, so the maneuver remains easily valid and useful for a good 75% of the game (things after lvl 16-17 do tend to become a bit crazy, so there it might be debatable).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
Yeah, I would generally be hesitant to have an ability that gives a benefit to you enemy with the thought that you can then exploit it later. Enemies have a pesky habit of not doing what you expect. Like using that bump to avoid my AoO, move away and hurt or kill a party member before I go again. That would be crappy. So if I am affecting the enemy I would tend to want to penalize them a la the first take on Hindering strike. Or benefit/risk be to myself so if something dumb happens it doesnt hurt the party or other players.
Going to propose both options to my GM and see what he thinks. Thanks for the discussion
Ok, so this is of varying use depending on how you handle initiative and it may run afoul of the "bookkeeping simplicity" concept and involves a small amount of metagaming But here it goes -
Tactical Adjustment - your battlemaster can evaluate the tactical situation and adjust their combat effectiveness to optimal timing. As a bonus action on your turn, you can spend one superiority dice and adjust your initiative higher or lower by up to the amount rolled on the dice plus your dexterity bonus. If using fixed initiative, this adjustment must be decided at the time the bonus action is used and becomes your new initiative score as of the next combat round. If using recurring initiative rolls, it must be decided at the time of the next roll during the current combat.
My intent on this is twofold... first is the ability to potentially "turn the tables" on an oppoent as a fight progresses by getting 2 actions in a row. The other is the ability to adjust your turn to better coordinate with your party. Yes you can delay for specific circumstance but it is my understanding that you use your reaction for that and couldn't use your bonus action on that later reaction because it isn't your turn. And potentially lose it altogether depending on how strict your GM is about your "conditions". The timing of some battlemaster maneuvers can be important but sacrificing a lot to delay and just getting a reaction is not often offset by that. An example is wanting to trip someone but they immediately follow me in initiative. I trip them, get a few advantages attacks and then they get back up. Or I wait on a reaction, and have limited options because it is "Not my turn" and I burn my reaction (so no riposte or AoO). With this I could lower my initiative for next turn, dodge to offset their doubled up action, trip them next turn and then the whole party can pile on before they get a chance to stand back up
As far as I can find there is no way to just adjust when you take your whole turn in RAW. Seemed like a cool way and thematic fit for battlemaster.
A potential concern is a spell or effect that lasts Until your next turn could be slightly extended.
Also, deliberately did not use plus your initiative bonus due to Alert feat. Too big a swing possible with that, but wanted some bonus because it doesn't do damage and a 1 would feel like a wasted use
How about taking it from the other way around?
What I mean is, what if instead of the Battlemaster changing his own initiative value were he to change the enemy's? It could maybe work like this:
Tactical Adjustment (or Hindering Strike) - With your attack you can hinder an enemy, slowing his action and possibly granting an opening for your allies to act before the enemy. As a bonus action, roll a superiority dice: your next attack will add the value of the superiority dice to the damage inflicted to the target and modify the initiative value of the target by that same amount + half your proficienecy bonus (rounded up). The new initiative value of the target will come into effect at the beginning of the next round of combat.
What do you think? (I understand it takes things from the completely opposite point of view than your proposed maneuver, but I have the impression something similar to this might be more in line with the other maneuvers already available)
Edit: Oh, btw, I love the idea per-se, good one :)
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
The idea sounds very interesting, raising your initiative using SP die. Though it seem little bit over powered to put it as a bonus action as you shift the initiative and be able to deal damage still which thematically feels odd. Since the character thinks about the tactical advantage during the fight and needs to position him/herself in combat which may take more time than you think. But i am no expert and that was just an opinion.
Edit: It also could be very weak since with levels the initiative rolls will be crazy and the ability maybe rendered useless.
Born under the watch of something from the furthest corners of the far realms.... It knows all.... it sees all... and it asks: "What is it that you want to see?"... and my answer is... ALL"
Good feedback.
Hindering strike sounds more specific, but also easier to align with other maneuvers. Maybe change it to on hit though? Also aligning it with other "strike" type abilities. Additionally, like using prof bonus as that represents combat experience (they should change parry to this imo). However think I would go for full bonus instead of half. When restricted to one mob, adjusting it by just 2 potentially feels weak when also doing no damage. So more drop or lose prof altogether and still do damage?
That covers the "turning tables" piece but is really very minor on the potential for coordinating better overall with your group. I have found that I could be way more effective with my other abilities if I could shift to where I go after the mobs but before most of the party. That is why I made it variable. As noted RAW, you can't really voluntarily lower your initiative and still get a normal turn. If I want someone to go before me, I have to use my reaction which means no bonus action then and no potential to use action surge and losing AoO and Riposte options. And then potential to lose it altogether if conditions aren't met for some reason. Since playing my battlemaster, I have had the thought, "would really like to change my initiative a bit at this point."
Not even always to do with an opponent, but that, say trip ceases to be an option because our heavy hitting archer rogue goes just after me.
No maneuver takes your whole action. Only commanders strike comes close and that is a bonus action plus one of your attacks. Design-wise they are all on hit, reaction, bonus action or no action cost at all. As you note, this could be rendered useless by a large disparity in initiative so I think burning potential 3 or 4 attacks is totally out of line as you level. Understand the concern though. This concept does feel situationally powerful but I don' think it is out of line
Increasing an enemy's initiative could just be putting him in a position where he feels forced to act faster/before the Fighter or another party member (there are several ways this can be justified with).
As for using the full proficiency bonus, yeah, it might actually be a better option, gives more freedom. I'd also change the wording to "you can modify (increase or decrease) the initiative value of the target to up to the superiority dice value + your proficiency bonus".
As for Arlong's comment on the initiative, short of stacking character bonuses from subclasses or the Alert feat, there is no much scaling in the initiative in this edition, so the maneuver remains easily valid and useful for a good 75% of the game (things after lvl 16-17 do tend to become a bit crazy, so there it might be debatable).
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
Yeah, I would generally be hesitant to have an ability that gives a benefit to you enemy with the thought that you can then exploit it later. Enemies have a pesky habit of not doing what you expect. Like using that bump to avoid my AoO, move away and hurt or kill a party member before I go again. That would be crappy. So if I am affecting the enemy I would tend to want to penalize them a la the first take on Hindering strike. Or benefit/risk be to myself so if something dumb happens it doesnt hurt the party or other players.
Going to propose both options to my GM and see what he thinks. Thanks for the discussion
No problem, happy to be of possible assistance :)
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games