Is it usable, does it fix 5E's boring combat?

>>52568014
well it certainly hands out feat equivalents like candy to everybody.
never really thought 5e combat was boring though.
adds a lot of effect tracking to combat, and adding complexity is not always better.

>>52568014
>>52569031

and it kinda runs roughshod over the battlemaster fighter archtype, by effectively making all characters battlemasters within their weapon proficiency.

>>52568014
I like the idea behind it, not sure about the execution. I feel like limiting it to two moves/weapon, and making things that should be really just universal (or at least true for the entire category, instead of just select weapons) instead of weapon dependent is a bad move.

Also, I'm about 90% sure the balance is whack as shit, but w/e.

>>52569031
Meh, it's 2 more situational abilities/weapon using combatant at best. Probably not feat equivalent.

>>52569063
Not at all. Battlemaster's maneuvers are more numerous and much, much more effective than these. Also, bear in mind the battlemaster does get these benefits, too.

>>52569063
Oh Jesus, as if the stock battlemaster wasn't gimped already.

Why can't fighters have nice things WITHOUT having to get a dozen feats or micro-feats to do them?

Makes me want to go back to AD&D 1E.

>>52568014
Jesus dude those effect basically read: "If you have no imagination, here's this"
All of this should come naturally from your desriptions in combat and maybe an extra roll or something (if the GM deems it necessary)

>>52568014
>Fixing D&D
Just use a different fucking system

>>52568014
5e's combat is only boring for 4rries and pathaboos

This pdf is garbage

>>52570582
But wouldn't you only go back to AD&D if you wanted the fighter to have nothing?

>>52570942
Other way around. In 1E the Fighter had "everything"; his combat options were limited only by the player's imagination, not by vast charts of feats that had to be painstakingly acquired over many levels.

>>52571036
That's a pretty retarded way of looking at it.

Why not just ask your DM to perform other actions the same way you'd have to in AD&D?

There's even some precedent for this with the variant rules in the DMG that feature maneuvers that aren't as good as the battlemaster versions because anyone can use them.

>>52571078
His next argument is going to be that because 5e mentions specific things that can be done, most DMs will only allow those things to be done. 1e, because it didn't even give examples, encouraged people to think creatively.

He'll extrapolate from personal experience to make a sweeping statement about how EVERYONE played the game, without producing any supporting evidence other than testimony.

I stopped reading after short draw. Wasting an attack to get advantage on the next attack is pointless bullshit.

>>52568014
Combat is boring only if you're boring. Stop looking at encounters as turns where you roll 2d6+2 damage and use your imagination, skills, spells, surroundings and use your goddamn imagonation. It's the whole point of the game, and 5e combat and rules are so freeform you can easily improvise any course of action.
Just stop being such a dullard, anon

>>52568014
It actually nerfs the standard already-in-the-PHB Push/Shove attack. They're adding more insulating steps for the target, and limits what may be targeted.

"Concealed Blade" is already how that works.

>Creatures within 5 feet...
>Additionally, adjacent creatures...
Creatures within 5 feet are already adjacent.

The "Unmount" ability would normally just be a push/shove against a mounted target.

This reads like it was written by somebody who doesn't have a good grasp on what already exists within 5e's core rules.

>>52571036
>his combat options were limited only by the player's imagination, not by vast charts of feats that had to be painstakingly acquired over many levels.
How is that any different than 5e?

>>52571226
Yeah, Rogues don't exist in my world either!

>>52568014
I dig it, but I'm a sucker for this sort of stuff. It does unfortunately make the Battlemaster kind of repetitive, though.

>>52568014
5e doesn't have boring combat, only unimaginative players.

But, this is pretty cool.

>>5257127
Whoa, yeah man! If... If I just house rule fun in, it'll be fun! It's not like the combat system has to stand on its own! We'll just have the customer build the rest of the system! Great idea, anon!

In my experience 5e's combat is boring when focusing on miniatures, but more breezy and well paced with a GM who's good at theater of the mind.
And if you have a GM who is BAD at theater of the mind you get the worst of both worlds.

>>52572979
Meant for >>52571278
Phoneposting is suffering

File: 1491291825604.png (222KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 900x900px

>>52572979
Don't bother. 5ggots refuse to listen to reason and are schizophrenic. In this very thread we have two somehow predominant, contradictory trains of thought

>>52570709
>>52570902
>>52571078
>>52571221
>>52571278
>>52572961
>just use your imagination and houserule stuff! The sky's the limit! Combat is only boring if you're boring!

>>52569063
>>52571226
>>52571492
>>52572608
>>52569031
>>52569070
>H-hey! Don't do that! You're fucking with the balance! You need to play the game exactly as it was written or else you're punishing your players!

Absolute fucking retards, to a man

>>52571278
>5e's combat rules are freeform
Yeah, no. What it does is provide rails on which more flexible combat can be introduced. 5e's greatest strength and greatest flaw is the fact that it's relatively barebones and easily homebrewable, which is a good thing because it needs to be homebrewed early and often.

>>52573873
Of course, the obvious counter to this is,

>"If it's not explicitly spelled out in the rules, then you can't do it nyaa~!"
>"If you try and do it anyway, you're a bad player nyaa~!"

4erries, every time.

>>52572979
>>52573873
>if a GM does their job by adjudicating interactions it's a houserule
I can't conceive of what it's like to have such a fundamental misunderstanding of how RPGs work, and the role of a GM.
You may as well have just told me you think the Earth is flat or that god personally speaks to you.

Also >>52573873, I think you need a permit for a strawman that big. Out of the 12 posts you link to only 5 say anything approaching what you're claiming.

File: wizard on the subway.jpg (523KB, 1000x1374px) Image search: [Google]

523KB, 1000x1374px

Not a fan of previous editions, but I and everyone I game with have been enjoying the hell out of 5e, combat included. We do a lot of shoving people out of windows, knocking out support pillars, that sort of thing. The DM's good at giving us complex environments to fight in (campaign's in a city full of aqueducts and waterwheels and shit, which helps) and the paladin makes athletics checks to grapple and smash things as often as she does a regular attack.

Good times, man.

>>52573933
>muh 4e boogeyman
Only ever played 4 sessions of 4e in my life, KYS desu

>>52574025
>strawman
Literally how. Half the posts are telling the people to houserule it and ignore the rules, the other half are bitching about how unbalanced houeruling is and that DMs shouldn't do that

File: reactionface.1830.jpg (620KB, 2169x1444px) Image search: [Google]

620KB, 2169x1444px

>>52574453
>Literally how. Half the posts are telling the people to houserule it and ignore the rules, the other half are bitching about how unbalanced houeruling is and that DMs shouldn't do that

It's not houseruling. It's how the game works. You have stats and skills. If you want to do something, you roll one of those against a DC set by the DM. There are more specific rules for specific situations and magic powers and such, but basically, that's the game.

And I don't see anyone arguing that houseruling isn't balanced. I do see a couple of people arguing that the book in the OP is a problem because if, for example, you add a special ability to the game that allows you to try to knock someone off a horse, you change the assumption from "anyone can try to do that" to "you can only try to do that if you have this special ability."

>>52570942
Because AD&D fighters are actually good at fighting versus the other classes

>>52568014
Yes/no

>>52573933
>4erries
You do know there are games out there that are both not D&D and actually good, right?

Right?

(Try 13th Age.)

>>52574680
13th Age is... an interesting attempt, but I wouldn't call it good, even accounting for taste.

(I actually prefer 4e to it, and it's about on par with 5e).

>>52571221
Yeah I see that all the time.
I was hoping he would do it himself so I could laugh in his stupid face.

>>52573873
>every 5ggot is one poor schizophrenic dude constantly samefagging
Makes perfect sense

>>52568014
A couple maneuvers feel pretty weak or limited in when they can be used to the point where I might suggest tweaking or swapping. The concept is nice, however, and I might borrow some inspiration from this when building a houserule of my own that I've been considering that will functionally do the same.

>>52568014
>Kobold Press

>TFW that name used to be respected among 3PP
>TFW all they put out these days is trash

>>52573873
point 1 boring people with little imagination do in fact create boring experiences from thier imagination.
point 2 fucking with balance is a big deal in a game, and it is easy to homebrew/houserule without fucking with the balance.

how can you be this retarded and still remember to breath on your own.

p.s. you have added nothing of value to the discussion.

>>52568014
It's great, a small step.

t. Non brainlet

>>52573873
Average 5e player is a literal sub IQ 90 brainlet.

>>52571078
Because the mechanic you default to to do that is different and unfavorable to you compared to AD&D's.