Translating 5e Movement Economy to 3.5e

[BlackOnyx]

Basically give the cleric dip for travel devotion to all the martial characters?

Hmm...perhaps not exactly what I'd envisioned, but I suppose it could have a similar effect (at least how as far as how movement on the board would play out in practice).

Travel devotion would end up granting additional movement (which may exacerbate kiting concerns), eats up a swift action (which could hurt some martial builds, particularly those based out of ToB?), and still has some stricter limitations on how movement must be spent (all movement must be utilized or otherwise wasted during the discrete action in which it is granted).

Still though...an interesting idea to consider.

Failing a Tumble check results in an AoO from the foe you tumble past. Falling prone is not associated with Tumble, normally.

Huh. Thank you for bringing that to my attention.

It seems this was one of those house rules I'd always assumed was a written rule since I'd never bothered to look.

If the result of failing a tumble check is simply failing to avoid the attack, that makes using tumble a lot less risky. Good thing to be aware of.

I think Tumble DC 15 + BAB is too high. I suggest 15 + (My foe's BAB - My BAB). It's usually medium BAB characters that Tumble, so I think that would keep it interesting over many levels.

Hmm...interesting idea. My only thought is that it seems somewhat odd that having a better to-hit would also make it harder for others to hit you...

I might have to think on that one a bit more. I would hate to make it too difficult for melee focused characters to take advantage of the new movement scheme compared to their ranged/caster counterparts.

The problem I see with this is that it really favours two-handed or sword and board characters. This would basically give them the ability to just do a full attack and move, while TWF characters and monks still have to worry about getting a full attack. I think the best way to do this would be to keep it simple, just say "You may move up to your speed during a full attack. This movement may be broken up between attacks." This seems like a better idea to me that turning standard attacks into full attacks but only with one weapon, which is a distinction without a difference for a lot of martial characters.

Mm. Fair. I'd hate to de-incentivize players who like to go down the route of gaining additional attacks.



That said, after reading through some of these responses and reflecting on some of my own games, I've actually started to find myself hesitant to go down the route of buffing full attacks to that extent.

It may be a bit of an edge case, but in my last e6 game, one of my players—a shapeshift variant orcish druid—ended up splicing together a few vile feats and special items with Girallon's Blessing to frightening effect...the idea of some martials spreading out five/six attacks over their full range of movement while others struggle to reach two gives me a bit of pause.

As things stand, bonus attacks are fairly easy to come by in 3.5e if you know where to look. The ceiling for 5e seems to be a lot lower and that's probably why that sort of movement scheme works as well as it does under that system.



Thinking on it a bit more, making it that easy to use all of a character's additional/bonus attacks during a full attack also negates a lot of the attractiveness of many of the abilities/options you see in ToB.

If you have the choice of performing one slightly flashy/flavorful standard attack that might hit or four attacks against four different enemies that will probably end up doing more damage...acquiring additional attacks is quickly going to become the name of the game at the expense of all else.



The more we talk about it though, the more I find myself thinking that simply allowing the move action to be broken up is the safest change to attempt.

Full attacks would still eat up movement, but at least melee based characters (martials in particular) would have the chance to position themselves more effectively while dealing out some damage via standard attacks if they wanted. It's not a 1-for-1 analogue to 5e, but I still see some promise in it.