[3.5] Tactical Move Actions (wip)

[Pechvarry]

I've had this idea in the back of my brain for the better part of 6 months, now. Every time I try to focus on it, it kinda fizzles away and stuff. So this is a cry for help and input. I'm really not entirely sure what I'm after.

Objective:
More move-equivalent actions with a focus on tactical positioning.

What I'm picturing is something like a readied move action that doesn't actually affect your initiative. A sort of melee contingency -- You spend your move action to state a behavior your character is abiding by for the round and the opponent may or may not play into it.

So... in a medieval combat, what kind of stances would one take? Evade at all costs? Dodge & Roll behind? "The Wall"?

Things I'm expecting:
-Everyone can make use of them, but melee combatants should get the most use out of them. Tying abilities to BAB or opposed checks with BAB added to them could work well, as I'd appreciate the skillful fighter being better at tactical positioning than the wildshaped druid.
-Ideally, these wouldn't be something a character would do every round. Though if a decent one can be worked out for tanking (particularly something encouraging sword-and-board tanking over reach abuse), I wouldn't mind that happening 80% of combats.
-Probably 1 dedicated tanking maneuver, one tanking/intercepting move, 1-2 based on evasion or distancing opponents, and one based on aiding allies would be nice.
-Some moves designed to foil other moves. Or perhaps some of them are designed such that it's their nature to foil other moves, creating a bit of paper/rock/scissors. Maybe both.
-Movement as a result of these actions aren't necessary, but shouldn't be shied away from.

Example: Perhaps a swashbuckling rogue will use a duck & roll maneuver to automatically end up behind the charging barbarian who missed him. Perhaps in this instance, the barbarian missed because he failed his opposed BAB check against the rogue. Moreover, the Barbarian could have countered this by spending a move action to harry the rogue into a position to block certain other options, such as a duck & roll. In this instance, the cost is being forced to wait 1 round until he can ubercharge the poor rogue.

I figure something like 3-6 of these would be ideal. New rules for players to learn, sure, but I think if I could make this idea coherent, it could introduce a fun layer to combat without making it overly complex.

I understand this is incredibly vague. I'm hoping someone out there gets a spark of inspiration from it and posts some ideas, though.

[imp_fireball]

Perhaps in this instance, the barbarian missed because he failed his opposed BAB check against the rogue.

Maybe if the barbarian missed his charge attack against the rogue. No need for opposed BAB or any of that 'edge' business (some house rule that gave people with the higher BAB the 'edge' which was a small bonus on certain checks).
-----

I actually had an idea (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8346565) called 'perks' - instead of gaining HD when you level up, you could take a flexible, dynamic template that grants you abilities for LA (so, like, you'd level up but take the LA instead and then buy it off later). One of those would be additional attack/defense options.

A sample attack option would be an attack as a free action against someone who's space you tumble through - call it 'cartwheel drive smash' or whatever.

This could be interesting since you don't have to take the perks - while my perks might allow additional things to be done in an action (not to mention more powerful stuff for higher cost per LA such as a bonus feat), yours require readied actions, so it still balances out. Both basically grant multiple things that, by themselves, aren't worth an option from a tactical feat or really fall into a ToB maneuver.

[Pechvarry]

Yeah, edge is interesting but a bit odd to play with. All the same, a determined charger will hit. And if he happens to be 6-headed Hydra, then these house rules do nothing to help the little man. The idea isn't necessarily to balance melee against mages, but if the full casters end up with the most use out of them, I have failed to make an interesting sub-system for melee (and archers, while I'm at it).

The other thing I'm trying to avoid is something you touched on -- ToB maneuvers. I don't want them to be types of attacks or martial arts techniques. I want them to represent an ability for the cunning combatant to sieze an advantage in the opponent's position.

And as move actions, it should ideally set said combatants up nicely for using Standard Action ToB maneuvers. :smallbiggrin:

This started as me thinking about ways to make tanking an easier thing in the system without feeling like a video game. It occurred to me that if I were an armored knight protecting my squishy ally behind me, I'd be spending my time interdicting my foe. In D&D, I'm probably spending a ready action to move and do no damage, or I'm making weak AoOs the opponent ignores anyway. Nobody shoving a huge shield in your face is going to be easy to ignore.

But why stop there? Assuredly, the other party roles would appreciate more ways to better make sure their schtick comes into play.

[imp_fireball]

But why stop there? Assuredly, the other party roles would appreciate more ways to better make sure their schtick comes into play.

Okay, sure. But don't give casters anything new. Except maybe stuff for their familiars.


a determined charger will hit.

Well, sure he will - maybe make the rogue flank the barbarian for one round on his next turn? If the barb has improved uncanny dodge, the rogue could act as if 1d4 levels higher or 2 levels higher or whatever you want it to be.