I believe I have a solution now. And gawd help me, it involves using parlance from 5th Edition. I know! It makes me a little sick. Worse, it is to solve the same sort of problem that the 5e rule is intended to solve ... except, of course, 5e makes such a hash of it that no one knows when the rule applies and when it does not. I hope to do better; which is why I'm parading it here. I've just been adding it to my Authentic Wiki (on a page that needs more work); but I'm hoping that people will tell me: (a) that the language makes sense and doesn't need more correction; (b) that is still isn't clear enough, and where the language is clumsy; and (c) if the notion is stupid and unworkable. I expect honesty.
I'll skip republishing the first part, which can be read here. If you find the writing too small, increase the zoom on your page; the wiki's print will reformat so you can read it more easily.
I've increased the speed with which characters can move by adjusting the number of hexes per action point cost. Here's a link to action points (AP) you can follow if you need to. You will probably also want to understand the melee rule as well. These rules all mesh together to provide the best possible tactical movement freedom for players I can provide.
From the wiki:
Essentially, the character has 1 AP. If they move warily, they will travel 1 combat hex (5 ft). If they hurry at a walk, they can travel 2 or 3 combat hexes. If they run, they can travel 4 or 5 combat hexes. And if they sprint, they can travel 6 to 8 combat hexes. That really lets them zip around the combat map, while coming much closer to real speed. A character with 5 AP can move 40 combat hexes, or 61 meters/67 yards in the space of 12 seconds. Not the Olympics, but I intend to add sage abilities that would let characters move faster still. This would be an "ordinary" 17th c. healthy person running."Prior to movement, the player announces their stride as "stride-n" or "S-n," with "n" indicating the number of hexes per AP they wish to move. The stride used in the previous turn is not considered. Characters may adjust their stride mid-turn one time."
Here's the section featuring the 5e rule using a parlance that I tried hard to sidestep, but the English language offered me no alternatives:
"A Wary stride allows a combatant to travel freely within reach of an enemy without provoking an attack of opportunity. However, if any combatant indicates that they are travelling at a walk, run or sprint during combat, then after the expenditure of 1 AP in travelling, that combatant must pause after having moved that number of hexes while the DM assesses whether or not there are any enemy combatants who are able and willing to attack that combatant by missile or hand-to-hand. This attack does not allow the enemy to travel from one hex to another; nor does it subtract from the enemy's ability to attack in the enemy's next turn. It is a "free attack," and thus an "attack of opportunity." No enemy can attack if they are at that moment engaged in melee. If the travelling combatant is not within one hex of the enemy, the enemy's attack must be a missile attack. Each enemy is allowed only one attack of opportunity. Attacks against walking combatants are done at +1; against running combatants at +2; and against sprinting combatant at +3. This reflects the moving combatant's lack of awareness due to their speed of travelling."Once the attack of opportunity is resolved, the travelling combatant then continues their move, using the remainder of their AP."If a combatant finishes their move at a walk, run or sprint, then during the enemy's turn, all attacks against that combatant receive the attack of opportunity bonus as already described (+1, +2 or +3)."
Horrific, ain't it? But damn it, I have to call the rule something.
So if I understand correctly, only characters who aren't in melee may attempt the attack?
ReplyDeleteWhat problem specifically does this address? I understand the speed issue: is loss of AP not enough of a trade-off? Must we add attack of opportunity as an additional cost? Or is it simply to show the lack of awareness? Just trying to get a firm grasp on the purpose here.
I think the 5e rule (if applied clearly) is one of the few places 5e actually exacts a cost for an action. A player must gauge the risk of movement: something not at all common in that game.
I will read it over a few more times and see if it is clear enough. Or if more questions arise.
Yes, that's right. Combatants in melee can't do an attack of opportunity.
ReplyDeleteGoal: I want to continue to reward characters moving slowly on the battlefield. If combatants can zip about the battlefield without some resistant penalty, i.e., it lowers their AC and makes them more vulnerable to attack, then the turn-based combat system is essentially broken. Characters who can rush in from 20 hexes away, then retreat back 20 hexes, wrecks missile ranges and vastly increases the power to spellcasters to dive in, cast, and get out scot free.
Moreover, from any option that we create for the player (how fast do you want to move?) there should always be some kind of trade-off gamewise. Faster implies more power, so we want a counterweight that reduces the benefit ~ in this case, lower armour class in exchange for greater movement.
ReplyDelete"Reactive attack?"
ReplyDeleteSo, do I understand correctly that I could for instance Sprint for 2 AP, covering 16 hexes, slow to Wary at 1 AP and engage my attack at 2 AP for a 5-AP turn with 17 hexes of movement with two opportunities to change direction (at the start of the second sprint and wary movements)?
ReplyDeleteHow does this interact with Charging, which involves either entering the occupied hex or striking it deliberately in passing: do these provoke attacks of opportunity outside the initiative-based defender's strike?
A failed Charge into a formation as noted on that page already offers potentially a +3 AC penalty, am I understanding that a Sprint that ended in this way would confer both that AND a +3 attack bonus against the failed charge?
Can't quite think of it as "reactive," as that implies a lack of choice.
ReplyDeletePandred,
Yes, that's correct, though I recognize that seems awfully "fast." It isn't as fast as it sounds, and I've checked into how fast humans can stop from running if they know ahead of time. However, suppose you're running at an unengaged enemy: you use your first AP to sprint forward 8 hexes. You stop there, because its an attack of opportunity, 10 hexes out; the enemy draws and throws a weapon (free attack) at +3 to hit. Then you continue the rest of your move and attack.
Over the last half hour I've considered changing the opportunity rule to: "After any AP expenditure wherein the combatant moves at walking, running or sprinting speed."
This would allow the enemy to wait until you had expended your second AP before stopping time mid-stride for the attack of opportunity; that puts you 2 hexes out, which is point blank range for the enemy, allowing +4 to hit and no range penalties.
The difficulty in this is, of course, that turn-based systems twisted to look simultaneous wind up appearing unrealistic. But the turn-base is unrealistic already. It's just unrealistic the way we're used to. I'm merely saying the enemy has already had time to draw the thrown weapon prior to your deciding to run in (as the enemy guesses at your intent from your body movements), and that you're giving the enemy the initiative by rushing.
The original rule of charging from the DMG is that the character with the longest weapon attacks first; in this case, the "longest weapon" is the one that flies forward.
You're quite right to bring up charging. That happens to be the next required page on my Authentic Wiki's "wanted pages" list, so I'll be reworking the charging rules next. I was unhappy with my earlier attempt 4 years ago, so I am going to make some changes there. In effect, I'm going to combine charging with overbearing; it will still be possible to attack in passing, but that gives the charged person the initiative. If you'll remember, the original DMG gives an AC penalty to the charger... so there is some continuity here.
I'm pleased that "movement" is vastly simpler and more potentially playable than my old system of normal pace, running and sprinting. This pulls all three together.
Sorry. The +3 AC penalty in the old system would be dropped in favor of the +3 attack of opportunity in this new method.
ReplyDelete[Hm! Just thinking... I really like the idea of a character wheeling around in a wild circle and then swinging at an enemy]
ReplyDeleteIf it lessens the bad taste, I believe AoO originated with 3rd edition, so it's been around for a while.
ReplyDeletePushing concessions to realism to a side, a few strictly-gameboard considerations:
- Would it be desirable to have the combatants speed along the board's length on a turn's notice?
- Will it be practical to draw 80+ hex grids to make missile weaponry viable rather than reduce them to a mere weapon of occasion?
- This seems to lighten the penalty from encumbrance, for though it still does affect characters, its practical effect in an average "middle of the board" melee is lessened as the crucial 4th/5th Action Point no longer prevents a character from making contact like it rather often did.
- This much freedom of movement combines poorly with flanking/rear attacks, in a game-y sort of way, making them easier to achieve.
It's not hard to admit that characters moving 2-3 hexes is slow on the pace but it did have the virtue of placement being something that needed to be given careful thought. Overall, this seems a bit too drastic.
I grant that, Drain. I certainly do.
ReplyDeleteMy hope would be that tactically, this is a better representation of real life than not... and there's no shortage in real life of people rushing face to face and getting engaged. If the penalty of firing at people zipping around the board isn't stern enough to encourage them not to do it constantly, then I'd up the penalty. It is not that hard to lead a fast running target, which is why the best combat strategy is to pull together, form a unit and move in to fight.
Take Pandred's example: suppose he sprints and then fails his dexterity check, so that he ends up plowing straight for eight hexes? Is it worth taking the chance that he could then get dogpiled by the other side, who are also able to zip along at the same rate, but are willing to rush in and engage him according to the melee rules? And once engaged, if he tried to run, he needs 2 AP to leave the first hex, and then he's shot in the back as he tries to walk, run or sprint away.
I haven't tested this, obviously; but I don't necessarily think that it voids encumbrance or that is it as cut-and-dried as you suggest.
To test if I understand this correctly: if a combatant moves on the combat map at a stride length more than wary they are liable for receiving any attack of opportunity from other combatant who are not in melee or have previously had an attack of opportunity this round. So if I run past 100 kobold slingers I'm likely to die in my own turn. But my allies will live if the kobolds didn't consider to hold some of their fire. I can see big groups moving across the combat map warily until somebody triggers attacks of opportunity from either group which sparks the other to charge in as the enemy reloads. How good are monks at deflecting missiles? You could have platoons led by monks cartwheeling in front triggering aoo so their troops can charge. Judgement on the rule must wait until significant playtesting occurs.
ReplyDeleteYou have the rule right, Chris. Enemies can fire on their turn also. No one is required to fire when they have opportunity; and officers shout at their men, "Hold your fire!"
ReplyDeleteI have begun rewriting my charging rules for the Authentic Wiki:
ReplyDeletehttps://wiki.alexissmolensk.com/index.php/Charging
They're not done. I'm going to give myself a rest first; it is very trying writing.
I really like the direction these rules are going. I am getting more and more interested in trying out your combat system. If only I had some players for a game.
ReplyDeleteI read the rules on the wiki and two things stood out to me:
1. The limitation of "only one attack of opportunity", is that per per character move or per round?
2. The point at which AoO is allowed "after the expenditure of 1 AP in travelling". Is that after every one point spent or after the first point spent?
I look forward to see how the rules interact with charging.
It would be one attack of opportunity per potentially attacking combatant, per combat round. Each combatant would be free to individually pick at which point in the enemy's movement that they wanted to attack.
ReplyDeleteSomething else I need to add, when I make the Attack of Opportunity rule page. If the enemy is also moving at walking, running or sprinting speed, they also cannot make an AoO.
I had a flashback to childhood while thing of alternative names for AoO. How about "free shots?" :)
ReplyDelete