Martial Combat Expanded

[Bannan_mantis]

so I've tried to create a new expansion to martial combat which is here= https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/H1-l85qFRr . This has a few design goals to fill which are these=


1) provide a larger number of options for things martials can do in combat

2) don't impede on a simple hack and slash playstyle, essentially provide options but have a simple attacking strategy still completely fine since some people play martials for the simplicity

3) balance out the weapons, feats and fighting styles a bit more

4) give more substance and power to different weapon combos and warrior types



For option 1 I believe I hit the nail on the head with the manuevers on offer which I hope are flavourful. For option 2 I think it's also ok as most of these are trade-offs of attack, damage, AC or etc. so for this reason just attacking is still an acceptable choice (hopefully.) For option 3 I buffed up some weapons which I felt were weirdly weak and changed how some feats worked, also for weapon mastery feats I've done calculations on average damage for some of them on fighter which you can find here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TQsN_90yqvoJVSJeAezEHg3dd8UpknMGCbS4UlTrXQE/edit?usp=sharing but I haven't done calculations for all of them so the feats are something I'm definitely planning on being worked upon in the future more. Finally for option 4 I feel for now I've been able to do that a bit with testudo on shortswords allowing for a more roman warrior feel and reason to wield a shortsword and shield over a longsword and shield, shiv for being a close-quarters brutalist, improvised weapon's universal skill for fighting like Jacky Chan and Dueling's extra feature for being a no-shield and one-handed style duelist.

Overall though this is definitely being changed in the future and is only a first draft but feedback and opinions are appreciated on possible changes. Also this is a large document so if there's typos or bad descriptions please say.

(btw Tarasque Man is my reddit username in case people are curious to why it's called that)

[Frozenstep]

You may or may not have accomplished all your goals, I'm not sure. There's definitely a lot of interesting ideas in that document.

The problem is that you've introduced like 2 magnitudes of complexity. Armor class bonuses/penalties that only last a turn, or some that stack permanently, changing static bonuses based on how many hands you put on something...

I feel 5e does best when you have fewer but more impactful choices. Power attack lets you choose how many of an accuracy bonus from 1 to 3, for the same bonus to damage? There's too many choices and too little difference in that, that's the kind of thing that bogs down combat the most.

[Bannan_mantis]

You may or may not have accomplished all your goals, I'm not sure. There's definitely a lot of interesting ideas in that document.

The problem is that you've introduced like 2 magnitudes of complexity. Armor class bonuses/penalties that only last a turn, or some that stack permanently, changing static bonuses based on how many hands you put on something...

I feel 5e does best when you have fewer but more impactful choices. Power attack lets you choose how many of an accuracy bonus from 1 to 3, for the same bonus to damage? There's too many choices and too little difference in that, that's the kind of thing that bogs down combat the most.

Hmmm good point. I will say while designing this complexity was it's main target which will come at the cost of simplicity, some people enjoy levels of complexity in combat (I know I would) but others don't so that's why this is designed to be an optional part of play from it not making characters more powerful on a numbers level (I.e. damage and defence.)

I will say your second point is something I will try to consider though. Looking through I can see what you mean so I might try to look through and change a few things to make them more impactful in gameplay. Also in terms of choices I personally really love a ton of different choices to make in combat and the idea of being able to do a ton of different things as a warrior in the same way casters have a ton of different spell choices but I can see what you mean and in it's current state the differences between attacks and maneuvers is a lot smaller than the difference between spells.

Edit: in terms of making the choices more impactful do you think a increased level of tradeoffs would work? Like larger advantages but additionally larger disadvantages?

[Frozenstep]

Hmmm good point. I will say while designing this complexity was it's main target which will come at the cost of simplicity, some people enjoy levels of complexity in combat (I know I would) but others don't so that's why this is designed to be an optional part of play from it not making characters more powerful on a numbers level (I.e. damage and defence.)

I will say your second point is something I will try to consider though. Looking through I can see what you mean so I might try to look through and change a few things to make them more impactful in gameplay. Also in terms of choices I personally really love a ton of different choices to make in combat and the idea of being able to do a ton of different things as a warrior in the same way casters have a ton of different spell choices but I can see what you mean and in it's current state the differences between attacks and maneuvers is a lot smaller than the difference between spells.

Edit: in terms of making the choices more impactful do you think a increased level of tradeoffs would work? Like larger advantages but additionally larger disadvantages?

Rather than look at complexity as a main target, you should be looking at it like a cost. You're trying to buy tactical variety and expanded player choices, but it will come at a cost (greater complexity for the player and the DM's). If you are designing this for people who can handle a lot of complexity, you can buy a lot more, but that doesn't mean you should take bad deals (aka adding a lot of complexity that doesn't really give you tactically interesting options).

Now see...I fully want martials to have a variety of options, and am willing to see some extra complexity for it. But if possible, I'd avoid temporary bonuses/penalties to AC, because that's the kind of thing that adds a lot of complexity at the table, needing to keep track of all the different modifiers going on. Instead of using those features, try finding another simpler way to add a benefit/drawback.

For example, from your trident weapon, leaping strike gets you 5 feet of extra range and 1 extra point of damage. Kind of minor. In trade for that, we have to deal with temporary modifiers. Instead, we could increase the extra damage on the attack, but the big leaping strike makes you a target...so you provoke opportunity attacks from anything in range when you use the feature, and from wherever you move to before making the attack. This makes it great against targets that have used up their reaction on something else, or who are restrained/prone, but really dumb against a grouped up band of enemies. We've gotten a similar increase in variety for a cheaper price in terms of complexity. You could use this same idea in some other places, maybe adding advantage/disadvantage on the opportunity attack as needed if the benefit is greater/lesser.

That ties into the second point. Bigger advantages/disadvantages make smart plays more important. For power attack, a -1 to hit, +1 to damage just doesn't really feel like you made a choice that really made a tactical difference. A single, bigger choice (-5 +10 on current feats) is far less complex, but in practice feels more like a real choice.

Of course, if you want these choices balanced against the simplest choice of attacking every round, you'll probably want to avoid going too far in increasing the tradeoffs. Otherwise you'll get into situations where the basic players are left very very far behind because the complex players also normal attack every round, up until a situation cuts down on a tradeoff for one of their attacks and they get a huge benefit (like for a power attack feat, running into a situation where you have advantage). Yet you still want the complex players to see a benefit for playing complex, so they feel their efforts are worth it. I always default to 20% advantage as being a number significant enough to feel good, but not so large that losing it makes the game unplayable).

So besides triggering of opportunity attacks, I'll say modifiers that are always the same when you use the option to attack/damage rolls are fine, since they're one-and-done, no need to remember for a round/combat/certain conditions. For maneuvers specifically, you could also use features that require advantage on the attack roll to use, and basically negate the advantage as a downside.

I will say the weapons you've added have nice features that are simple. I like some of the ideas like aerodynamic.

[Bannan_mantis]

Rather than look at complexity as a main target, you should be looking at it like a cost. You're trying to buy tactical variety and expanded player choices, but it will come at a cost (greater complexity for the player and the DM's). If you are designing this for people who can handle a lot of complexity, you can buy a lot more, but that doesn't mean you should take bad deals (aka adding a lot of complexity that doesn't really give you tactically interesting options).

Now see...I fully want martials to have a variety of options, and am willing to see some extra complexity for it. But if possible, I'd avoid temporary bonuses/penalties to AC, because that's the kind of thing that adds a lot of complexity at the table, needing to keep track of all the different modifiers going on. Instead of using those features, try finding another simpler way to add a benefit/drawback.

For example, from your trident weapon, leaping strike gets you 5 feet of extra range and 1 extra point of damage. Kind of minor. In trade for that, we have to deal with temporary modifiers. Instead, we could increase the extra damage on the attack, but the big leaping strike makes you a target...so you provoke opportunity attacks from anything in range when you use the feature, and from wherever you move to before making the attack. This makes it great against targets that have used up their reaction on something else, or who are restrained/prone, but really dumb against a grouped up band of enemies. We've gotten a similar increase in variety for a cheaper price in terms of complexity. You could use this same idea in some other places, maybe adding advantage/disadvantage on the opportunity attack as needed if the benefit is greater/lesser.

That ties into the second point. Bigger advantages/disadvantages make smart plays more important. For power attack, a -1 to hit, +1 to damage just doesn't really feel like you made a choice that really made a tactical difference. A single, bigger choice (-5 +10 on current feats) is far less complex, but in practice feels more like a real choice.

Of course, if you want these choices balanced against the simplest choice of attacking every round, you'll probably want to avoid going too far in increasing the tradeoffs. Otherwise you'll get into situations where the basic players are left very very far behind because the complex players also normal attack every round, up until a situation cuts down on a tradeoff for one of their attacks and they get a huge benefit (like for a power attack feat, running into a situation where you have advantage). Yet you still want the complex players to see a benefit for playing complex, so they feel their efforts are worth it. I always default to 20% advantage as being a number significant enough to feel good, but not so large that losing it makes the game unplayable).

So besides triggering of opportunity attacks, I'll say modifiers that are always the same when you use the option to attack/damage rolls are fine, since they're one-and-done, no need to remember for a round/combat/certain conditions. For maneuvers specifically, you could also use features that require advantage on the attack roll to use, and basically negate the advantage as a downside.

I will say the weapons you've added have nice features that are simple. I like some of the ideas like aerodynamic.


Hmm ok good point, well after considering this I tried to look out for a few maneuvers that could use some changes which are as follows:

Armour-breaking blow - the whole way the AC reduction works and is explained might be a bit too much, might turn it into more of a static reduction possibly but not so sure
Leaping strike - feels a bit too bland and plus you're point about AC reductions are important
Remise - AC reduction for the 1 turn problem
Power attack - bland, could be developed more
Forceful strike - tried to make this a inbetween of shove and basic attacking but might impose something like a strength save and a larger amount of distance covered
Flowing Counter/ Lock Weapon - feels a bit complex so might change a bit of how this works, not so sure though
Guard Break - same as power attack
Versatile - the extra damage types are kinda interesting but I feel like this is a bit bland on it's own, might just be me though
Lunge - with wrath guard as an option I feel like this loses a lot of it's usefulness considering people can take a guard and get a similar benefit

But yeah on another side note what do you think about removing some of the more middle man stances, basically removing the roof guard and plow guard since they're a bit too in the middle of things and without them high guard and ox guard are the main choices for your which are both more drastic and impactful.

But I gotta say I like your idea of expending advantage, might add something where you can expend advantage on some attacks for special things like maybe removing the damage reduction on some attacks like cleave or pin-point accuracy or maybe increase the distance enemies move when you use forceful strike.

[Frozenstep]

Hmm ok good point, well after considering this I tried to look out for a few maneuvers that could use some changes which are as follows:

Armour-breaking blow - the whole way the AC reduction works and is explained might be a bit too much, might turn it into more of a static reduction possibly but not so sure
Leaping strike - feels a bit too bland and plus you're point about AC reductions are important
Remise - AC reduction for the 1 turn problem
Power attack - bland, could be developed more
Forceful strike - tried to make this a inbetween of shove and basic attacking but might impose something like a strength save and a larger amount of distance covered
Flowing Counter/ Lock Weapon - feels a bit complex so might change a bit of how this works, not so sure though
Guard Break - same as power attack
Versatile - the extra damage types are kinda interesting but I feel like this is a bit bland on it's own, might just be me though
Lunge - with wrath guard as an option I feel like this loses a lot of it's usefulness considering people can take a guard and get a similar benefit

But yeah on another side note what do you think about removing some of the more middle man stances, basically removing the roof guard and plow guard since they're a bit too in the middle of things and without them high guard and ox guard are the main choices for your which are both more drastic and impactful.

But I gotta say I like your idea of expending advantage, might add something where you can expend advantage on some attacks for special things like maybe removing the damage reduction on some attacks like cleave or pin-point accuracy or maybe increase the distance enemies move when you use forceful strike.

Armor-breaking blow: I'd make a one time static reduction that lasts until the end of combat, maybe make it so it takes 10 minutes to repair or something as flavor.
Leaping strike: You could have it as an opportunity attack-drawing attack that nets you extra damage and distance, or maybe have it do a bit more damage per 5/10 feet you fall before making the strike (up to a limit, probably no more then 20 feet or else you're really just encouraging flyers rather then hardcore parkour)

Forceful strike will probably need to be a strength save at the least, but also perhaps a consideration for creature size. Would be unusual for a 20,000 pounds dragon to get pushed back so easily (but then again, repelling blast...).

I'm sure other ideas will come in time.

[Bannan_mantis]

ok so after some work I've come to a revised version with some changes. First off it's more based around a spell like system where you just learn a certain amount of maneuvers based on character levels and you can use those maneuvers on multiple different weapons as long as you meet the prerequisites of the maneuver (for example, to use the snipe action you need a long range weapons.) Feel like this is good for making them more universal so you don't need to track weapons and their maneuvers you just track your maneuvers. Building on from this the special attack actions from before (snipe, bash, bleed and stab) are all maneuvers and the stances are too to make more things build upon this so once people grasp maneuvers most other things will just come too you after it hopefully which should make it easier to play. Also just in general I tried to increase the effect maneuvers had making them more impactful as choices

Additionally I expanded upon class traits and built a few things around giving certain classes more flavor in combat. Fighters get more maneuvers than anyone else, the whole advantage expending on maneuvers can be easily accessible by barb's reckless attack giving them a powerhouse feel (I also let reckless attack be used with dexterity so finesse barbs can get this same uniqueness), rogues can now use dirty tricks which are like special maneuvers they can do by spending sneak attack and monks just have more uses of ki. This was to partially try and make them each feel more unique in playstyle too get them all functioning differently in combat. Additionally I added a few more options and changed the unarmed striking for fighters making them go from a copy of weapon combat to more of a tactical maneuver heavy choice which doesn't deal the damage of weapons but has more versatility and greater maneuver options.

Overall I feel this helped to expand upon some parts of the first draft but also gave a few more things so outside opinions would be appreciated. Also I am thinking of giving rogues more dirty tricks in the future since right now it feels slightly limited. Anyway here's the revised version: https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/bYPAO4Ms