5-foot step too good? [Archive] - Wizards Community

5-foot step too good? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Sroblin
03-15-07, 06:58 PM Wanted to toss this thought out there and see what people think.

I didn't realize how powerful 5-foot steps were until recently, and in my experience, many players remain unfamiliar with the utility of this rule. (Then again, probably to everyone in the board it's well known and nothing worthy of note), but here goes:

By using five foot step, as RAW, you can move away from an opponent threatening you in melee without generating an attack of opportunity, and then still be able to perform any range of standard or full-round options that would normally allow the opponent to make an attack of opportunity (unless he/she has reach).

Now in the school of gaming I'd grown used to, when a fighter or monster gets in the face of some archer or wizard, or whenever you need to perform some 'risky action', you either had to accept that monster's getting an attack of opportunity or spend a round getting out of range, (or pass a concentration check for spell-casting.) But with the five foot rule, you actually rarely have to worry about attacks of opportunity- archers and wizards aren't inconvenienced overly by charging meleers, as all they need to do is take a free five-foot step and they can full-attack with their bow or zap a spell in their face. Now I acknowledge this how the rule is intended to work, but doesn't it make attacks of opportunity a lot more redundant, and seriously diminishes the ability of melee opponents to disrupt the activities of ranged combatants and casters.

Imagine the following situation: Krog the orc barbarian charges Darryl the bow-wielding ranger and whacks him with the axe. Darryl smiles- he doesn't need to pull out his sword, nor consider running away from the threat. Instead, he steps five feet back from Krog and unloads on Krog with three arrows. Now granted Krog can still full attack him by making a five foot step of his own next action, (which maybe a good reason to withdraw after all), but the point is Darryl has little incentive to actually draw a sword when charged if he basically 'full-melee' with ranged attacks without penalty.

Now, I can anticipate several objections to this:
-'Concentration checks also negate attacks of opportunity'. True, but that's what they are meant to do. Actually, the fact that a five foot step makes concentration checks unnecessary in so many cases means that this rule undermines the role of the skill.

-'There are situations where you can't back up, or you run out of ground'. Perfectly true, and in these cases attacks of opportunity remain effective (and concentration checks to oppose them). However, this limitation is mostly relevant if you're playing in highly constricted terrain, and carefully keeping track of it (probably with a battle mat). For those who don't play on grids (like me) the number of times you can clearly tell a player there isn't five feet of space in any direction is limited.

-'Hey, that's RAW; don't burden us with your misconceptions of the game'. Well, that's also true- however, I think (though I may be mistaken), that this a very common misperception, and I feel I raise some cogent issue over how it alters the flow and feel of combat.

Traditionally, getting into melee with casters and ranged fighters is supposed to be highly disruptive, requiring them either to A) shift to melee for self defense, B) accept an attack of opportunity to continue doing their thing, C) spend a full round or move action to redeploy away from the melee threat, or D)or use a feat or Concentration check to negate it, which is legitimate in my view. But with five feet steps, it is too easy to make a free move to rid oneself of these tactical considerations-(except the full attack, which remain a good incentive to get out of the way, it is true). I know 'realism' has little place in DnD, but this a matter of having the right 'tactical' feel to the game, and forcing players to make tougher decisions about attack and defense.

Now, I realize this mechanics is actually very useful for meleers using reach weapons- because they can use the five foot step to move back from enemies that are too close so they can still use their spear. However, they aren't likely to be getting so many attacks of opportunity because either the foe is within 5 feet, and thus ineligible for being attacked, or is 10 feet away and can simply five foot step outside the reach weapon's range.

In any case, I'm interested in what other people think about the five foot step, and my criticism of it. I don't know if I'm just a backwards player with his own assumptions about how DnD ought to work, or if others think this rule maybe excessively favorable or didn't realize how good it was. Maybe I'm also missing some tactical implications here, so feel free to clue me in.

If enough people feel the issue is worth debate, I might try making a more polished post to go on Regdar's repository. In any case, I invite readers to have your own say on the subject!
fatal error
03-15-07, 08:53 PM Yes, they're powerful. No, I don't find them too powerful.

Two situations you didn't mention are natural reach (a quality many large creatures have, starting from that little CR 3 ogre) and multiple enemies (all it takes is one flanking pair to make 5ft steps useless). Plus, in most of the situations the combats have been in my games, there is quite commonly a lack of maneuvering room, between enemies, allies, and terrain obstructions. Remember, 5ft steps also can't be used into difficult terrain, a feature that should be more commonplace on battlefields than many seem to make it.
Azezel
03-15-07, 09:11 PM As it stands, the RAW do indeed allow a character to back away 'for free' before performing an action - I don't think this is such a bad thing - it is certainly not a massive advantage to casters or ranged fighters.

However, if you don't like it there are at least three easy ways to deny these slippery sorts their safety.

1) Use a reach weapon: A five foot step is only five feet - a reach wepon means you can still hit 'em - some reach weapons, such as the Whip and Spiked Chain can be used at point blank, and at 10 or more feet. The Short Haft Feat allows a character to use any reach weapon at close range.

2) Press the Attack: The Press the Attack Feat allows a character to make a five foot step imidiately following the five foot step of an adjacent enemy, meaning the foe is still threatened.

4) Be a Knight: One of the Knight's many very groovy class features makes his threatened area count as difficult terrain - and one cannot make five foot steps in difficult terrain.

These are just three options - presented in order of ease of use, which came to me in a minute's thought - I'm sure there are aothers.

M'point is, the Five Foot Step rule, like a lot of others, rewards people who think about it, rewards cleverness. To some, the reward is avoiding an Attack of Oppertunity, for others, it is preventing that cowardly bastard from avoiding the Attack of Oppertunity he so richly deserves.

Groovy.
Seeker95
03-15-07, 09:14 PM 5ft steps also can't be used into difficult terrain, a feature that should be more commonplace on battlefields than many seem to make it.QFT!

When I design an adventure, I always list for each location-based encounter:
Terrain, temperature, and ceiling height.

It is amazing how often these affect the encounter.
Thomar_of_Uointer
03-15-07, 09:23 PM You've already got it, Sroblin. The reason the 5' step isn't too good of a maneuver is that everyone else can do it too.
Drodain
03-15-07, 09:29 PM Just wondering, where is the press the attack feat?
Sroblin
03-15-07, 09:34 PM Hmmm, I had not considered difficult terrain. As for the feats, these sound like interesting ways to engage with the tactical issues that come up regading 5 foot steps. However, the fact that you actually need the feats, and from non-Core at that, means that their usefulness is predicated on players and DMs who are fully aware of and taking full advantage of both the 5 foot step rule and the existence of feats to deal with it. I suppose, however, that reach-weapon armed fighters would certainly want the feat to use his/her weapon within five feet. The knight class option is interesting.

Mechanically speaking, I suppose it may come down to how tactical a level the game is; a very combat-oriented game using miniatures and grid maps, it is more likely to become an issue whether that wizard can move the extra five feet or not. However, in a more loose game wihout a grid map, it's a lot less likely that somebody's going to say 'you can't move back another five feet, the cleric is behind you, and a square of debris is blocking the square next to him'.

I suppose in the end, though, I'm less concerned with the game mechanics of it than the 'feel' of being able to make that short move to avoid all sorts of peril. I have been convinced, however, that this rule can be 'engaged' with counter tactics if that is the player's or DM's wish.
Nom
03-15-07, 11:08 PM Azazel started well, but then went off into very specialist opions (ie not 'easy'). Let's complete the list more mundanely:

(2) restrict them with flanking or terrain

(3) ready an action

And a bonus:

(4) Trip or grapple them

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Sroblin 03-15-07, 06:58 PM	Wanted to toss this thought out there and see what people think. I didn't realize how powerful 5-foot steps were until recently, and in my experience, many players remain unfamiliar with the utility of this rule. (Then again, probably to everyone in the board it's well known and nothing worthy of note), but here goes: By using five foot step, as RAW, you can move away from an opponent threatening you in melee without generating an attack of opportunity, and then still be able to perform any range of standard or full-round options that would normally allow the opponent to make an attack of opportunity (unless he/she has reach). Now in the school of gaming I'd grown used to, when a fighter or monster gets in the face of some archer or wizard, or whenever you need to perform some 'risky action', you either had to accept that monster's getting an attack of opportunity or spend a round getting out of range, (or pass a concentration check for spell-casting.) But with the five foot rule, you actually rarely have to worry about attacks of opportunity- archers and wizards aren't inconvenienced overly by charging meleers, as all they need to do is take a free five-foot step and they can full-attack with their bow or zap a spell in their face. Now I acknowledge this how the rule is intended to work, but doesn't it make attacks of opportunity a lot more redundant, and seriously diminishes the ability of melee opponents to disrupt the activities of ranged combatants and casters. Imagine the following situation: Krog the orc barbarian charges Darryl the bow-wielding ranger and whacks him with the axe. Darryl smiles- he doesn't need to pull out his sword, nor consider running away from the threat. Instead, he steps five feet back from Krog and unloads on Krog with three arrows. Now granted Krog can still full attack him by making a five foot step of his own next action, (which maybe a good reason to withdraw after all), but the point is Darryl has little incentive to actually draw a sword when charged if he basically 'full-melee' with ranged attacks without penalty. Now, I can anticipate several objections to this: -'Concentration checks also negate attacks of opportunity'. True, but that's what they are meant to do. Actually, the fact that a five foot step makes concentration checks unnecessary in so many cases means that this rule undermines the role of the skill. -'There are situations where you can't back up, or you run out of ground'. Perfectly true, and in these cases attacks of opportunity remain effective (and concentration checks to oppose them). However, this limitation is mostly relevant if you're playing in highly constricted terrain, and carefully keeping track of it (probably with a battle mat). For those who don't play on grids (like me) the number of times you can clearly tell a player there isn't five feet of space in any direction is limited. -'Hey, that's RAW; don't burden us with your misconceptions of the game'. Well, that's also true- however, I think (though I may be mistaken), that this a very common misperception, and I feel I raise some cogent issue over how it alters the flow and feel of combat. Traditionally, getting into melee with casters and ranged fighters is supposed to be highly disruptive, requiring them either to A) shift to melee for self defense, B) accept an attack of opportunity to continue doing their thing, C) spend a full round or move action to redeploy away from the melee threat, or D)or use a feat or Concentration check to negate it, which is legitimate in my view. But with five feet steps, it is too easy to make a free move to rid oneself of these tactical considerations-(except the full attack, which remain a good incentive to get out of the way, it is true). I know 'realism' has little place in DnD, but this a matter of having the right 'tactical' feel to the game, and forcing players to make tougher decisions about attack and defense. Now, I realize this mechanics is actually very useful for meleers using reach weapons- because they can use the five foot step to move back from enemies that are too close so they can still use their spear. However, they aren't likely to be getting so many attacks of opportunity because either the foe is within 5 feet, and thus ineligible for being attacked, or is 10 feet away and can simply five foot step outside the reach weapon's range. In any case, I'm interested in what other people think about the five foot step, and my criticism of it. I don't know if I'm just a backwards player with his own assumptions about how DnD ought to work, or if others think this rule maybe excessively favorable or didn't realize how good it was. Maybe I'm also missing some tactical implications here, so feel free to clue me in. If enough people feel the issue is worth debate, I might try making a more polished post to go on Regdar's repository. In any case, I invite readers to have your own say on the subject!
fatal error 03-15-07, 08:53 PM	Yes, they're powerful. No, I don't find them too powerful. Two situations you didn't mention are natural reach (a quality many large creatures have, starting from that little CR 3 ogre) and multiple enemies (all it takes is one flanking pair to make 5ft steps useless). Plus, in most of the situations the combats have been in my games, there is quite commonly a lack of maneuvering room, between enemies, allies, and terrain obstructions. Remember, 5ft steps also can't be used into difficult terrain, a feature that should be more commonplace on battlefields than many seem to make it.
Azezel 03-15-07, 09:11 PM	As it stands, the RAW do indeed allow a character to back away 'for free' before performing an action - I don't think this is such a bad thing - it is certainly not a massive advantage to casters or ranged fighters. However, if you don't like it there are at least three easy ways to deny these slippery sorts their safety. 1) Use a reach weapon: A five foot step is only five feet - a reach wepon means you can still hit 'em - some reach weapons, such as the Whip and Spiked Chain can be used at point blank, and at 10 or more feet. The Short Haft Feat allows a character to use any reach weapon at close range. 2) Press the Attack: The Press the Attack Feat allows a character to make a five foot step imidiately following the five foot step of an adjacent enemy, meaning the foe is still threatened. 4) Be a Knight: One of the Knight's many very groovy class features makes his threatened area count as difficult terrain - and one cannot make five foot steps in difficult terrain. These are just three options - presented in order of ease of use, which came to me in a minute's thought - I'm sure there are aothers. M'point is, the Five Foot Step rule, like a lot of others, rewards people who think about it, rewards cleverness. To some, the reward is avoiding an Attack of Oppertunity, for others, it is preventing that cowardly bastard from avoiding the Attack of Oppertunity he so richly deserves. Groovy.
Seeker95 03-15-07, 09:14 PM	5ft steps also can't be used into difficult terrain, a feature that should be more commonplace on battlefields than many seem to make it.QFT! When I design an adventure, I always list for each location-based encounter: Terrain, temperature, and ceiling height. It is amazing how often these affect the encounter.
Thomar_of_Uointer 03-15-07, 09:23 PM	You've already got it, Sroblin. The reason the 5' step isn't too good of a maneuver is that everyone else can do it too.
Drodain 03-15-07, 09:29 PM	Just wondering, where is the press the attack feat?
Sroblin 03-15-07, 09:34 PM	Hmmm, I had not considered difficult terrain. As for the feats, these sound like interesting ways to engage with the tactical issues that come up regading 5 foot steps. However, the fact that you actually need the feats, and from non-Core at that, means that their usefulness is predicated on players and DMs who are fully aware of and taking full advantage of both the 5 foot step rule and the existence of feats to deal with it. I suppose, however, that reach-weapon armed fighters would certainly want the feat to use his/her weapon within five feet. The knight class option is interesting. Mechanically speaking, I suppose it may come down to how tactical a level the game is; a very combat-oriented game using miniatures and grid maps, it is more likely to become an issue whether that wizard can move the extra five feet or not. However, in a more loose game wihout a grid map, it's a lot less likely that somebody's going to say 'you can't move back another five feet, the cleric is behind you, and a square of debris is blocking the square next to him'. I suppose in the end, though, I'm less concerned with the game mechanics of it than the 'feel' of being able to make that short move to avoid all sorts of peril. I have been convinced, however, that this rule can be 'engaged' with counter tactics if that is the player's or DM's wish.
Nom 03-15-07, 11:08 PM	Azazel started well, but then went off into very specialist opions (ie not 'easy'). Let's complete the list more mundanely: (2) restrict them with flanking or terrain (3) ready an action And a bonus: (4) Trip or grapple them