Marking, Opportunity Attacks and feats

[T.G. Oskar]

Recently, I had time to see the Dungeon Master's Guide (sadly, I don't own it, mostly for money reasons), and I went straight to the third section, the one with all the alternate rules and creation tools, to see how things worked. Between those, I went for the new actions, since I was particularly intrigued by Marking (I knew it wasn't like the 4e version where you imposed a penalty on their attacks), since I was planning to add it.

A little bit caught my attention: apparently, you can make opportunity attacks without spending reactions, though limited to 1/turn. There's no rules that you can have only one character marked, so there's the assumption that, if you hit many people with melee attacks, you can execute opportunity attacks with them without spending your Reaction as long as they enable the OA.

That made me think: what does this mean for feats that use Opportunity Attacks, like Polearm Master or Sentinel? Does this make Protection a much better option, since it's not opposed by opportunity attacks anymore? Also: judging by how it's written, does that mean you can make one opportunity attack per offender (that is, whoever provokes an OA from you), or one OA overall (aside from the one provided by your Reaction)? And, finally, does that mean you can make two OA per round by combining Marking and your Reaction?

This really provides for nice tanking opportunities, depending on interpretation. That really made me excited to add it (and get the book, of course).

[Ziegander]

Are the facing rules any good (do you know)?

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Are the facing rules any good (do you know)?

Basically advantage when you attack someone from behind, shields only block attacks in front and on the shield side, and advantage while flanking. Didn't try them myself but I've heard that they make tactical positioning more dynamic.

[Ziegander]

Basically advantage when you attack someone from behind, shields only block attacks in front and on the shield side, and advantage while flanking. Didn't try them myself but I've heard that they make tactical positioning more dynamic.

But definitely require a grid. Any suggestions for keeping track of facing? Or would you just HAVE to use minis?

[silveralen]

Marking is great. The way I read it, since you make one for each character's turn, if you mark 3 people, and each tries to move on their turn, you can make a free attack on each without burning your reaction.

I need to check the wording of sentinel again, but if it works on each it makes the feat much more powerful. It also makes reach weapons crazy good with fighter. It is also a godsend for a mid level ranger looking to get mileage out of whirlwind attack.

Polearm master is nice as well, three attacks with reach can be helpful for marking for anyone who isn't a fighter. Plus your normal reaction for the other aspect.

[Ziegander]

It is also a godsend for a mid level ranger looking to get mileage out of whirlwind attack.

Oh, yeah, nice! Anything to make melee Rangers more relevant. It's too bad they get no spell support. :(

[T.G. Oskar]

But definitely require a grid. Any suggestions for keeping track of facing? Or would you just HAVE to use minis?

First of all, didn't really got to read the area of facing. Didn't even saw where the grid + minis section really was.

In any case, on TotM-format play, I'm sure a simple way to remind is to have some sort of internal marker pointing at your current facing, and a general idea of cardinal locations. Simply saying "I face east" and then point a pencil towards the right should remind you (and thus everyone) that you're facing east, so if anyone attacks you from the west, they attack you from behind. Unless you're a lefty, generally shields will be wielded with the left arm, so your shield protects you in front and left, or north and west.


Marking is great. The way I read it, since you make one for each character's turn, if you mark 3 people, and each tries to move on their turn, you can make a free attack on each without burning your reaction.

I need to check the wording of sentinel again, but if it works on each it makes the feat much more powerful. It also makes reach weapons crazy good with fighter. It is also a godsend for a mid level ranger looking to get mileage out of whirlwind attack.

I figured this much. The attack gained via marking is an opportunity attack, and you get Advantage on it, so you're pretty much keeping people near you; either they move around you (doing little), or they try to escape you, execute an OA and stop their movement with Sentinel. I can't really figure why they didn't add Marking other than "3e purists will hate it" (considering you get more OAs that way, not really; maybe it's the name?) and "too complex" (most likely, but 3e and 4e players might get the gist out of it, and if 1e/2e gamers had to deal with THAC0 and facing, marking won't distract them at all).

The thing that really got me excited was that it makes Martial characters (though mostly melee characters) more interesting, since it removes their main use of Reaction, which they can reserve for something else. Anyone with the Protection fighting style can actually use it, Eldritch Knights can use Shield or Blade Ward and still provide OAs, and makes any ability usable on Reactions more attractive. That's a nice thing for Martials.

[Eslin]

Marking is great. The way I read it, since you make one for each character's turn, if you mark 3 people, and each tries to move on their turn, you can make a free attack on each without burning your reaction.

I need to check the wording of sentinel again, but if it works on each it makes the feat much more powerful. It also makes reach weapons crazy good with fighter. It is also a godsend for a mid level ranger looking to get mileage out of whirlwind attack.

Polearm master is nice as well, three attacks with reach can be helpful for marking for anyone who isn't a fighter. Plus your normal reaction for the other aspect.

It works with sentinel, I'm a massive fan of it as a concept. Though I need to figure out a tradeoff in regards to marking, since there's no reason not to as it stands - perhaps if you mark a target, you also count as marked by it?

[Justin Sane]

Though I need to figure out a tradeoff in regards to marking, since there's no reason not to as it stands - perhaps if you mark a target, you also count as marked by it?"You can only make AoOs on marked targets" is the rule in my group. Makes it a decent tactical tradeoff. YMMV.

[ZombieRoboNinja]

I can see why marking wasn't in core, because it can slow down combat and be more to keep track of. But it is really, really good, especially for fighters, who get enough attacks at high level to really make use of it. A level 11 dual-wielding fighter with Sentinel can keep five targets basically glued to him every round (four marked targets and one with his reaction). Give him a halberd and an action surge and it's eight for a round. Give him an evoker mage buddy and that's plenty of time to roast them all extra crispy.

Monks get back a bit of their 4e multi-target flair too. They can mark four targets a round at level five with ki attacks. And let's not even get started on dual-wielding rogues dishing out 30d6 sneak attack a round...

[silveralen]

I figured this much. The attack gained via marking is an opportunity attack, and you get Advantage on it, so you're pretty much keeping people near you; either they move around you (doing little), or they try to escape you, execute an OA and stop their movement with Sentinel. I can't really figure why they didn't add Marking other than "3e purists will hate it" (considering you get more OAs that way, not really; maybe it's the name?) and "too complex" (most likely, but 3e and 4e players might get the gist out of it, and if 1e/2e gamers had to deal with THAC0 and facing, marking won't distract them at all).

The thing that really got me excited was that it makes Martial characters (though mostly melee characters) more interesting, since it removes their main use of Reaction, which they can reserve for something else. Anyone with the Protection fighting style can actually use it, Eldritch Knights can use Shield or Blade Ward and still provide OAs, and makes any ability usable on Reactions more attractive. That's a nice thing for Martials.

It actually allows for 3e lockdown fighters or 4e style defenders to exist. Sure, sentinel is needed as well to get to that level, but even at it's most basic it actually gives you a reason to divide attacks among multiple targets, something that doesn't really exist in core.


Oh, yeah, nice! Anything to make melee Rangers more relevant. It's too bad they get no spell support. :(

We actually made it so hunter's mark applied it as well, so it keeps them marked for the duration even if he doesn't attack them that turn. The guy said it reminded him of 4e ranger somewhat, apparently off round attacks were their thing (or one of their things, he really liked 4e ranger so I've heard a lot about them).


It works with sentinel, I'm a massive fan of it as a concept. Though I need to figure out a tradeoff in regards to marking, since there's no reason not to as it stands - perhaps if you mark a target, you also count as marked by it?

My group is currently trying out this variation: You may use your bonus action or reaction to mark every target you hit in melee that turn. The choice keeps it from being useless for any particular build, and means opportunity attacks don't lock you out of other reactions or bonus actions. We also ruled a few abilities (hunter's mark, vow of enmity) mark the target for their duration, and might expand that if we see other good targets.