Maneuvering Attack

[Pex]

This situation came up a while ago in a game I'm in. DM allowed it. All players involved were ok with it. It was funny. It was cool. No problems. I'm just curious if you would allow this to happen.

It's very important for another party member to move from where she is. Problem is the bad guy's next turn happens before hers which could put her in jeopardy. It's the Battle Master's turn. The only other people around him are party members, not including the one who needs to move. Moving to an enemy is not an option. Battle Master attacks a party member and uses Maneuvering Attack. Attack roll is made. Non-lethal damage inflicted, including the Superiority die. Party member who needs to move is granted movement per Maneuvering Attack and flees to safety. Party escapes.

[Unoriginal]

This situation came up a while ago in a game I'm in. DM allowed it. All players involved were ok with it. It was funny. It was cool. No problems. I'm just curious if you would allow this to happen.

It's very important for another party member to move from where she is. Problem is the bad guy's next turn happens before hers which could put her in jeopardy. It's the Battle Master's turn. The only other people around him are party members, not including the one who needs to move. Moving to an enemy is not an option. Battle Master attacks a party member and uses Maneuvering Attack. Attack roll is made. Non-lethal damage inflicted, including the Superiority die. Party member who needs to move is granted movement per Maneuvering Attack and flees to safety. Party escapes.

How I would have ruled it:

There is no "non-lethal damage" in 5e. You can choose for your attack to be non-lethal if you put your target to 0 HPs, but the damage inflicted does not change in nature.

So yes, it possible to use Maneuvring Attack this way, but the damage would be regular damage.

[Mobius Twist]

Using up a maneuver is consuming a resource. Most of the time, you get a lot of benefits out of that. This time, it's just half-speed movement. My ruling would likely be "You spend your attack action as if you attacked, no substitutions. Go ahead and make the maneuver. No opportunity attack benefit for the movement, as there is no attacked creature."

[Tanarii]

Probably let it fly once for cinematic effect, but I'd make it clear that attacking party members as a general rule to trigger abilities is a bit off, please don't make it a standard practice.

I'd want to try to figure out a way to make the HPs a sacrifice of some kind on the part of the adjacent party member instead of an actual attack. I'd probably be happier if the BM just rolled damage and took that much themself, possibly skipping the attack roll, since they're likely to be high AC compared to say an adjacent squishy caster. OTOH the BM might be able to afford the HP loss more.

That actually wouldn't be too bad a (specific by ability) house rule for some BM triggered abilities that give a bonus to an ally after an attack. Maybe even a global rule for such abilities. Take damage yourself, no roll needed, trigger ability. Although I'm sure it'd be abusable.

[Dienekes]

Honestly, I'm trying to come up with a situation where spending your Action and a Maneuver Die and dealing no damage to any target and giving an ally half their speed while also expending their Reaction is overpowered and I'm coming up blank.

I'd probably just let them do that without having them attack anyone. It's more in the spirit of what's going on: The Fighter issuing combat orders.

[Mastikator]

As far as I understand "non-lethal" only has any meaning if you inflict a killing blow, as long as the target survives the attack then damage is damage.

Besides that yeah sure I'd allow it. As per the maneuver's wording this is perfectly legal

[wilhelmdubdub]

DM let me use Vicious Mockery as a bard on a barbarian to maintain rage. He let the barb auto fail the roll and allowed me to take a one on a die. We kinda house ruled that if you are "going easy" on damage you had to apply the strength dex or casting modifier, but could choose to take ones on any damage die.

[Composer99]

DM let me use Vicious Mockery as a bard on a barbarian to maintain rage. He let the barb auto fail the roll and allowed me to take a one on a die. We kinda house ruled that if you are "going easy" on damage you had to apply the strength dex or casting modifier, but could choose to take ones on any damage die.

This reminds me of the protagonist goading Minsc into a rage, allowing him to escape from a stout cage in Baldur's Gate 2. I approve.