Fixing a few bugs / "limbo state" rules

[Clovenhoof]

Hey guys,

we've brushed this topic before in one or two other threads, but now I'd like to "officially" discuss how to resolve some rules in the Conan game that simply don't work.

Two Conan-specific rules that I'm not happy with are:

5' step and AoOs:
SRD: when you take a 5' step you don't draw an AoO. Period.

Conan: when you take a 5' step, you don't draw an AoO only if you do nothing afterwards that would draw an AoO. For example, you can't take a 5' step and then fire an arrow.
This is stupid. What do the involved characters do, time travel? After the character takes his 5' step, he's out of Reach, not in the Threatened Square anyore, byebye darling. How does the enemy suddenly become able to retroactively deal an AoO if the character decides to use his bow after taking the step? Does his arm grow longer? Does the scene magically rewind to the moment that the character is taking his step?

Solution: only one possible solution - skip this junk and go back to the SRD rule, and there is no good reason for the Conan rule anyway.

Improved Mobility
SRD: the closest thing is Spring Attack: you don't draw AoOs from moving.

Conan: Whatever you do, you don't draw an AoO as long as you move at least 10' per round. This one is more complicated.
The problem is that the rule says nothing about _when_ you have to move, so things start to get ugly when you do AoO-provoking actions before actually moving. Especially if the resolution of this action _defines_ whether the character will be able to move at all.
For example, say you are cornered and want to break free by Overrunning an enemy. Normally draws plenty of AoOs, which may easily kill you. If they kill you, you don't move ten feet. But if you live, you move 10 feet and they never receive any AoOs against you in the entire round! Again, time warp, or a weird limbo state where your character is neither alive or dead, sort of Schrödinger's Barbarian.

Possible solutions that I see:
1.) nerf this ability to the level of Spring Attack, i.e. you simply don't draw AoOs from moving, but normally from all other actions.
2.) specify this ability to kick in _after_ moving 10 feet, but have it apply to all actions after that. This is also a slight nerf (as for example our cornered hero would be screwed). For example, you can take a 10' run-up and then Overrun with impunity.
3.) combine 1 and 2, so you never draw AoOs from moving, and no other AoOs after covering 10ft. A bit complicated.
4.) simply do away with that 10' requirement and grant complete AoO immunity. This is a powerup and doesn't really fit into the concept of _mobility_.
5.) Grant AoO immunity whenever the player announces he _plans_ to move his character 10+ feet (and of course he can't change his mind in mid-turn. This is how I handled it up to now, but I'm not quite happy with it.

What do you think? Which option do you prefer, or how do you handle it in your games, or do you have any other suggestions?

P.S.: Oh, and to the D20 bashers: save it. Thank you.

 

[flatscan]

Hmm, yeah this line is confusing, "so long as no other action that would provoke an attack of opportunity is taken." Of course, it just may be poor writing on Mongoose's part and they're trying to say that you can avoid an AoO if you five foot step, but the five foot step does not prevent AoO's from opponents who threaten the new position. You're already giving up any further movement and taking 5 foot step to launch a ranged attack without provoking is used all the time in my game. But if a PC is making the ranged attack from the new square and it is a threatened square they'll still provoke for that action.

I haven't read through Improved Mobility in a while, but I thought it was referring to not provoking AoO from the movement itself not from actions taking before or after the movement. In other words, you get a 10 foot step as it were with it. Dunno will have to look at how that one's worded again.

 

[kintire]

Solution: only one possible solution - skip this junk and go back to the SRD rule, and there is no good reason for the Conan rule anyway.

There IS a good reason for the Conan rule. Both spellcasting and missile weapons have a number of advantages over melee... either directly (spells are cool, missiles have range) or through feats. For example, ranged users get multiple attacks more easily. One of the factors that balance this is the attack of opportunity rules, which are supposed to mean that missile weapons and spells are fine at rnage, but once the melee specialist closes with the subject, they are in trouble. They then either have to Concentrate for spells users, which means they have to develop the skill, or switch to a melee weapon for missiles.

Except it fails utterly in this area, because both missile users and spell users can take a costless 5' step away, removing any ability for the melee wielder to close with them.

The SRD situation is the worst. You should either a) stick with the Conan rule, or b) abolish the whole idea of AoOs for shooting or spells, as they are then pointless. If you are worried about visualising it, consider that neither spell casting are instant: one requires concentration, the other aiming. Regardless of when they are resolved in the round, they are actually going on while the subject is in reach.

Mostly, however, I would just not use this style of argument at all. The whole concept of turn based combat means that oddities will crop up. If you are worried by a piddley little problem like this, for the lord's sake don't check out the movement situation!

 

[flatscan]

Except it fails utterly in this area, because both missile users and spell users can take a costless 5' step away, removing any ability for the melee wielder to close with them.

That's ridiculous. Taking a 5' step away does not remove any ability for the melee wielder to close with a ranged attacker (spellcaster or not). All the melee fighter has to do is 5' step closer on his turn and take his full round action. As PCs are generally fighting multiple opponents, unless the ranged guy stays to the back of the party he's gonna provoke by firing, and even then a melee fighter may close with him. Taking a 5' step back to continue with ranged attacks seems like smart tactics by keeping out range of the melee fighters for the ranged fighters turn only.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Ranged Attack, Spellcasters and 5'-Steps: what flatscan said. The Melee fighter need only make a 5' step and hack away. Ranged attacks also usually deal less damage than Melee attacks (due to Str mod restrictions), you never get AoOs with a Ranged weapon, and you can't parry either. Spellcasters are usually screwed as soon as a Melee fighter closes in.

Moreover, how do Ranged combatants get multiple attacks more easily than Melees? The maximum number of regular attacks for a Melee fighter is 8 per round, at no penalty. Maximum for Ranged fighters is 5, at -2 penalty.

While I understand that by genre conventions, good honest melee whacking should be superior to ranged attacks or spellcasting in the end, I also think that nerfing these two niches has to stop somewhere.

Besides, I find that this rule peculiarity breaks suspension of disbelief.


Concerning Improved Mobility: the exact wording is
[...] the [character] never provokes Attacks of Opportunity, no matter what he does, so long as he moves at least 10' during that combat round.

Just so you don't have to look it up. I think it's quite clear what the rule is _meant_ to do, it's just impossible to make sense out of it as it is written.

 

[kintire]

That's ridiculous. Taking a 5' step away does not remove any ability for the melee wielder to close with a ranged attacker (spellcaster or not).

You have misunderstood. As I explained, the way its supposed to work is that fighting begins at range and then people close to melee. But with the 5' step rule, "closing to melee" loses all meaning. The ranged fighter just has to 5' step away, and he can do his thing anyway, for the entire battle.

Ranged Attack, Spellcasters and 5'-Steps: what flatscan said. The Melee fighter need only make a 5' step and hack away.

And what I said back to him. That's not the point: the point is that he doesn't ever get the AoOs he's supposed to.

Ranged attacks also usually deal less damage than Melee attacks (due to Str mod restrictions)

You can get a mighty bow with any strength mod you care to.

you never get AoOs with a Ranged weapon

And no one gets AoOs on you either it seems.. especially as you don't have to move to people to attack them of course.

and you can't parry either.

And people can't parry you.

Moreover, how do Ranged combatants get multiple attacks more easily than Melees?

Using the various feats for that purpose. Which, unlike melee dual wielding, do not suck.

Besides, I find that this rule peculiarity breaks suspension of disbelief.

That's a personal thing, of course, but I find that it goes some way to redressing the abject shattering of suspension of disbelief caused by the turns system. After all, if you are a melee fighter, and the ranged person you are next to steps 5 feet away, would you stand there like a muppet because its "not your turn"? Or would you take that step as well and keep pounding him?, and if you were the ranged comabtant, would you watch with some interest while the melee person covered sixty feet towards you and hit you, then step 5' away and shoot? or would you move away while he was still approaching and thus stay out of his reach?

In my opinion, the serious unrealisms introduced by turning what would be a simultaneous move into a take it in turns system renders any complaints like this moot.

 

[flatscan]

That's ridiculous. Taking a 5' step away does not remove any ability for the melee wielder to close with a ranged attacker (spellcaster or not).

You have misunderstood. As I explained, the way its supposed to work is that fighting begins at range and then people close to melee. But with the 5' step rule, "closing to melee" loses all meaning. The ranged fighter just has to 5' step away, and he can do his thing anyway, for the entire battle.

Well, then your choice of words was poor. You said, "removing any ability for the melee wielder to close with them." But the 5' step is tactical movement to avoid an AoO. So, the melee fighter doesn't get bonus attacks. He still can close in on the ranged fighter and wail away and do much more damage if he's got a good strength mod (which is much more likely even for a mook bad guy). Plus, bows suck ass at getting through armor.

I guess I just don't see how tactical movement is a problem. Movement still causes AoOs, just not on 5' steps. This was how the SRD was written and it works. I still hold that it was poor writing on Mongoose's part and the intention was not to penalize the 5' step but to say if you did things after a 5' step that could provoke you could get an AoO from anyone who threatens your current square.

Also, as to the multiple attacks thing, you need the feat Rapid Shot which has a feat pre-requisite. You'd have to play 2 feat slots for it whereas melee fighters can wield two-weapons and get two attacks for a single feat slot. I made a Borderer/Thief build that kicked ass dual-wielding an Arming Sword and Poniard, so I don't share your opinion that dual-wielding sucks.

 

[Clovenhoof]

And what I said back to him. That's not the point: the point is that he doesn't ever get the AoOs he's supposed to.

Yeah, he doesn't, so what? It's not like AoOs were the only way to bring down an archer or spellcaster. You have at least one regular attack per round, and up to eight at high levels. And if you use that main regular attack for a Sunder attempt, the archer will most likely have no bow anymore.

You can get a mighty bow with any strength mod you care to.

But you occupy both hands without getting the 1,5x Str mod, and either way you have to specifically _get_ such a bow and must not lose it, whereas you get your Str mod on any gnarly club you happen to pick up, and can use Power Attack to boot (if you have it).

And no one gets AoOs on you either it seems.. especially as you don't have to move to people to attack them of course.

And the melee fighter can just leisurely stroll by the archer to get in his back, and even if he doesn't have a buddy to flank the archer, the latter will have to retreat in the "wrong" direction all the time.

Using the various feats for that purpose. Which, unlike melee dual wielding, do not suck.

Sorry, I don't quite understand. Please elaborate: which feats? I only know Rapid Shot, which I mentioned before to give just one extra attack and has -2 on all attacks. D&D Manyshot is not included in Conan (at least in 1E, I don't have 2E so I don't know about that).

After all, if you are a melee fighter, and the ranged person you are next to steps 5 feet away, would you stand there like a muppet because its "not your turn"? Or would you take that step as well and keep pounding him?

Alright, I feel we could get somewhere by looking at this more closely.
We'll have to stick to the turn-based combat, because anything else gets way too slow and convoluted to be any fun. But let's stick to your example:
By the Conan rules, an archer taking a 5' step and firing an arrow draws an AoO. The same archer taking a 5' step and nothing else does not. That doesn't fit into your example either. Again, what's to stop the Melee guy from following and continuing the attack just because now the archer decides to stand there like a muppet?

We may be on to something here. The key point is that normally, archers don't threaten any area, just like completely unarmed persons don't either. Unless they have IUS, of course, then either do threaten.
And when you think about it, there is indeed no reason not to pursue a non-threatening opponent. There is a reason to be more careful with opponents that do threaten, because they might whack you on the head if you brashly pursue them without watching your defense.

So _maybe_ the 5'-Step rule ought to be rewritten. Something like:

Taking a 5' step does not draw an AoO if you threaten within 5'.

That would have to be cross-checked with Reach weapons (i.e. 10'), but ad hoc I think this makes more sense than either the SRD or Conan rules.

 

[flatscan]

Ugh, the "you don't provoke an AoO when you take a 5' step" is for the movement only. The step doesn't provoke, anything you do before or after provokes as normal to those who threaten the square you're in.

Excerpt from SRD:Miscellaneous Actions

You can move 5 feet in any round when you don’t perform any other kind of movement. Taking this 5-foot step never provokes an attack of opportunity. You can’t take more than one 5-foot step in a round, and you can’t take a 5-foot step in the same round when you move any distance.

You can take a 5-foot step before, during, or after your other actions in the round.

You can only take a 5-foot-step if your movement isn’t hampered by difficult terrain or darkness. Any creature with a speed of 5 feet or less can’t take a 5-foot step, since moving even 5 feet requires a move action for such a slow creature.

You may not take a 5-foot step using a form of movement for which you do not have a listed speed.

 

[Diabolus]

I sort of like that rewrite/clarification, Clovenhoof, but it has holes as well.

I've liked the Conan rule because I don't like the "Archers and Casters can always freely do their thing as they can just step away from the big bad melee guy." that's part of 3.5/SRD.

Now, as long as you don't turn around and say "Aha! Alvin the Archer holds in his right hand an ARROW, which he threatens with - if you come close he will stab you for 1-3 points of piercing pain!!"

This also says "Stephron the Sorcerer holds in his left hand a sharpened butterknife, which he threatens with, so he is safe to stand back and begin casting Summon Panic-Inducing Face-eating Demon from 5 feet away while hapless Bram the Barbarian with the bardiche figures out what his Will save is.

 

[Diabolus]

I DO like the rule about Improved Mobility kicking in after 10 feet has been moved, but I'd rather just ammend it to "You never take AOs from moving" and drop the 10 feet requirement, which needlessly complicates it IMO.

 

[Ichabod]

We talked about using the simplified AoO rules as I find the constant confusion over how the rules work irritating. And, yes, we have had many questions as to what causes AoO.

But, as to why it works different in Conan than in the SRD, the assumption we had was to encourage melee combat brutality.

We have used the 5. for Improved Mobility. Yes, it's weird. Since I find AoO just a drag on combat, anything that decreases them is fine with me, so 4. would be as good an option as any to me, but if you want another option, then there's a variation of 5.:

6. The character must be able to move at least 10' during the round. The character does not have to move but has all of the benefits and drawbacks of having taken a move action to move 10'. So, no full attack or whatever.

 

[cbrunish]

Don't forget that the character to take his 5' step must be able to step somewhere. Meaning that if the archer or spellcaster is next to a enemy combatant he must step 5' away as long as there is somewhere for him to move. If there is another character or wall in the way he can not move.

I agree the wording in Conan is miffed. As long as the character is out of range of an attack then he can not have an AoO. And the enemy combatant would only be able to close when it is his initiative (unless he held the initiative).

 

[Clovenhoof]

I sort of like that rewrite/clarification, Clovenhoof, but it has holes as well.

Then please help to close them.
As I said, it's probably a bit tricky with Reach weapons. If you are 10ft away from a guy with Reach weapon, your broadsword will do jack for you when you leave his threatened space. However, would you be able to retaliate if you also had a Reach weapon, thus negating the AoO by this logic? If yes, the rule might be rephrased to:

Taking a 5' step does not provoke an AoO from any enemies that threaten at the same Reach as you do.
(this might get tricky if you have to deal with two enemies with different reach that both threaten you. And anyway, it gets more complicated again.)

Ugh, the "you don't provoke an AoO when you take a 5' step" is for the movement only. The step doesn't provoke, anything you do before or after provokes as normal to those who threaten the square you're in.

Yeah, I'd stick to that. However, I also think that Conan games have fewer non-movement AoOs because there are no potions to swallow or whatever else is the typical AoO-trigger in D&D.

 

[Da Boss]

To be honest the whole 5 ft step thing is one of the reasons I dislike D20

Yeah, you just stand there and watch whilst I step back, get an arrow out and shoot you with it (or cast a Spell) - no sorry you can't do anything about it.

:roll:

I'd prefer if you are in combat and you are not a melee combatant then you need to actively get out of it - dodging etc - whihc I presume the Conan rules are trying to simulate?

the D20 version is not my cup of tea but each to their own...............

 

[kintire]

Well, then your choice of words was poor. You said, "removing any ability for the melee wielder to close with them." But the 5' step is tactical movement to avoid an AoO. So, the melee fighter doesn't get bonus attacks. He still can close in on the ranged fighter and wail away and do much more damage if he's got a good strength mod (which is much more likely even for a mook bad guy). Plus, bows suck ass at getting through armor.

Well, it seems we both have the word choice problem, because I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. The melee fighter and the archer both get their full attacks because a 5' step doesn't take a move action. And he'll do about the same damage as the archer, depending on their strength mod, except he'll have taken some of that damage already during the approach.

Also, as to the multiple attacks thing, you need the feat Rapid Shot which has a feat pre-requisite. You'd have to play 2 feat slots for it whereas melee fighters can wield two-weapons and get two attacks for a single feat slot.

The prerequisite feat is also useful, especially in this very circumstance! So you can't really claim that Rapid Shot costs two feats. And dual wielding, while useful for sneak attackers, is strictly inferior to 2h weapon wielding, which costs no feats at all. Hence, it sucks.

Clovenhoof:

Yeah, he doesn't, so what?

So, your statement above:

there is no good reason for the Conan rule anyway.

Isn't the case. There IS a reason for it: its to prevent the archer (and the sorcerer) from dodging the AoOs that they are supposed to provoke once in melee combat by a costless 5' step: as da Boss points out.

But you occupy both hands without getting the 1,5x Str mod, and either way you have to specifically _get_ such a bow and must not lose it, whereas you get your Str mod on any gnarly club you happen to pick up, and can use Power Attack to boot (if you have it).

Dual wielding also occupies both hands without getting the 1.5x Strength mod, and so does sword and board. Mighty bows are easy to get: they're not magic, just craftsmanship. You can get them in any significant settlement. As for power attack, yes, its nice, but ranged users get their tricks too. I'm quite fond of ranged disarm...

Sorry, I don't quite understand. Please elaborate: which feats? I only know Rapid Shot, which I mentioned before to give just one extra attack and has -2 on all attacks. D&D Manyshot is not included in Conan (at least in 1E, I don't have 2E so I don't know about that).

Rapid shot also comes with free mitigation in the form of point blank shot, for a net -1 attack and +1 damage to both attacks. You were referring to both COnan and the SRD, so so was I: but even then Rapid shot is easier to get. Dual wielding involves giving up 2h weapon fighting, which is a wrench for people who have invested in levels in sneak attack class levels, and sheer folly for those who haven't.

By the Conan rules, an archer taking a 5' step and firing an arrow draws an AoO. The same archer taking a 5' step and nothing else does not. That doesn't fit into your example either. Again, what's to stop the Melee guy from following and continuing the attack just because now the archer decides to stand there like a muppet?

I'm afraid my objection is more fundamental than that. Your only objection to the Conan rule for 5' steps is that it doesn't fit with reality and you find it impossible to visualise what's going on. But that is true of the entire movement system. As soon as you have everyone standing dead still until one person has done all their move for the six seconds, and then they stand dead still while the next person does all their move for the six seconds you have lost any pretense of realism. Given that, complaining about an archer getting an AoO when he's five feet from the melee type is akin to complaining about the lack of deckchairs on the Titanic.

 

[kintire]

On the second note, you have a good point about improved Mobility. I would pick your option 1: restrict the immunity from AoOs to a ten foot move.

 

[rabindranath72]

My house-rules for AoO:

Attacks of Opportunity

An AoO is triggered only in the following cases:

1) Unarmed attacks vs. an armed opponent. Note that touch attacks to deliver spells are considered armed.

2) Attacks vs. an opponent with a reach weapon, or an opponent of larger size.

3) Retreating from a melee at larger than half speed.

 

[flatscan]

Well, it seems we both have the word choice problem, because I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. The melee fighter and the archer both get their full attacks because a 5' step doesn't take a move action. And he'll do about the same damage as the archer, depending on their strength mod, except he'll have taken some of that damage already during the approach.

Yeah, still don't see the problem here. The ranged fighter fights at range.

The prerequisite feat is also useful, especially in this very circumstance! So you can't really claim that Rapid Shot costs two feats. And dual wielding, while useful for sneak attackers, is strictly inferior to 2h weapon wielding, which costs no feats at all. Hence, it sucks.

Rapid Shot does cost two feats. Yes the feat before it is still useful but it takes 2 slots no matter what, Two-Weapon Combat takes one.

Isn't the case. There IS a reason for it: its to prevent the archer (and the sorcerer) from dodging the AoOs that they are supposed to provoke once in melee combat by a costless 5' step: as da Boss points out.

Yes, a 5' step allows any character to get out of a threatened square. Actions after that may provoke those who threaten the new square. I've read the rule over and over and still hold that it is just badly written and not intended to further complicate SRD 5' steps and AoO.

I'm afraid my objection is more fundamental than that. Your only objection to the Conan rule for 5' steps is that it doesn't fit with reality and you find it impossible to visualise what's going on. But that is true of the entire movement system. As soon as you have everyone standing dead still until one person has done all their move for the six seconds, and then they stand dead still while the next person does all their move for the six seconds you have lost any pretense of realism. Given that, complaining about an archer getting an AoO when he's five feet from the melee type is akin to complaining about the lack of deckchairs on the Titanic.

Each round represents 6 seconds in the game world. A round presents an opportunity for each character involved in a combat situation to take an action.

Each round’s activity begins with the character with the highest initiative result and then proceeds, in order, from there. Each round of a combat uses the same initiative order. When a character’s turn comes up in the initiative sequence, that character performs his entire round’s worth of actions. (For exceptions, see Attacks of Opportunity and Special Initiative Actions.)

Yes a round lasts 6 seconds and your opponents spend that 6 seconds when you attack them Dodging, or Parrying as do the PCs when the opponents attack. Your opponents also react to your movements and attack when you provoke as do the PCs. Some opponents may have Delayed or Readied actions as may the PCs. Some opponents can take Immediate Actions as can PCs. None of this is static as far as description is concerned as those 6 seconds where everybody acts in Initiative order are action packed. If you're imagining combat in Conan being the way you describe, you just may be having badwrongfun. :shock:

 

[kintire]

Yeah, still don't see the problem here. The ranged fighter fights at range.

And in melee. By taking a 5' step before each attack, the ranged fighter is just as effective in melee combat as he is at range.

Rapid Shot does cost two feats. Yes the feat before it is still useful but it takes 2 slots no matter what, Two-Weapon Combat takes one.

It doesn't "cost two feats". If you are an archer you will have taken PBS anyway, partly because it is good in itself and partly because it is the prerequisite to a whole load of other feats. Rapid Shot is then one extra feat. And two weapon combat is much more costly, because in archery you are spending a feat to become better, and in melee you are spending a feat to become worse: unless you also invest in some significant sneak attack, which means taking class levels that will give it to you.

None of this is static as far as description is concerned as those 6 seconds where everybody acts in Initiative order are action packed. If you're imagining combat in Conan being the way you describe, you just may be having badwrongfun

MOVEMENT. Not combat. The abstract combat does indeed assume that everybody is doing stuff for the whole six seconds, its the movement rules that throw reality to the winds. Consider this: an enemy wants to attack a wizard, but the wizard has a bodyguard in front of him. Enemy wins initiative, and moves 20 feet around the pair of them, avoiding all attacks of opportunity, and ends next to the wizard, who he can then attack. Is that realistic? The attacker can move 20 feet before the bodyguard can move 5' to block him, or the wizard move 5' behind his bodyguard? Heck, with a charge the attacker can move 60' and attack, before his target can move 5' back to be out of range.

In reality, people respond to others on a real time basis. The bodyguard would move around his master as the attacker circled them so he was interposed between them at all times. The unwilling charge target would move back or behind cover as soon as the attacker began his charge, and would have completed his 5 foot duck into cover long before even the fastest attacker had covered 20 yards. But any game system trying to model this would rapidly become fiendishly complicated, so we simplify it into the turns system, with the AoOs to provide some shadow of realism.

But given the (worthwhile) sacrifices we make for simplicity, there is little point in worrying about archers getting AoOs 5 feet away!