Controversial, appauling, I don't know, I"m just looking for feedback, and possible worst case scenarios.
Ok, so having seen changes with melee training, the still plagued problems with paladin, battleminds, and just in general having to tell my players - no your character is just not good with opportunity attacks....I'm thinking of instituting this change in my game. It's pretty simple....any at-will that has the melee keyword (wether is melee 1, melee weapon, or melee touch) can be used as an opportunity attack.
Controversial, appauling, I don't know, I"m just looking for feedback, and possible worst case scenarios.
First of all, the Melee Training nerf is inconsequential. The biggest difference between pre- and post-errata will be at levels 28-30, where the difference in damage is, at most, 5. This is a very small amount of damage at that point.
Second, there is a paragon feat that does almost what you're suggesting: Heavy Blade Opportunity. It is considered one of the best weapon feats in paragon, and even that only allows you to use At-Wills with the Weapon keyword, not any melee at-will.
This house-rule would substantially increase the power of some classes, moderately increase the power of others, and leave still others unaffected. Imagine the Ranger using Twin-Strike every opportunity attack. There is no reason for this house-rule, and I believe it will add nothing to the game, while upsetting the balance of the system in a meaningful way.
It is actually the existance of Heavy Blade Opportunity that makes me think this is ok - the example you gave (twin-striking ranger) is ALREADY doable ala HBO, so they aren't gaining anything new. Honestly, I play with a bunch of newer players, and I can see for most of them this just makes them feel less cheated for classes that don't use strength in their builds, they can all make decent opportunity attacks.
At worst, I just have to think of a new benefit for HBO.....
Explain the houserule to your players, and then keep an eye on the combats. If someone finds a way to significantly exploit it you might have to step in and work around it, maybe even eventually repealing the houserule, but it will be an interesting experiment at least.
Now this all might be invalidated by someone who knows what they are talking about and shows exactly how the game balance will be ruined forever, but there is my quick at-a-glance opinion.
While I haven't given this a lot of thought, at first glance the houserule is perfectly fine for a group of new players. It will make them feel more powerful and less "cheated", while having only a moderate effect on combat. I could see a more serious problems developing with an experienced crew, especially one that included a few optimizers in the mix. Not so much because it is exploitable itself (though I'm sure it could be in the risght hands) but because those types of players would complain about a core mechanic of the game being "broken".
Explain the houserule to your players, and then keep an eye on the combats. If someone finds a way to significantly exploit it you might have to step in and work around it, maybe even eventually repealing the houserule, but it will be an interesting experiment at least.
Now this all might be invalidated by someone who knows what they are talking about and shows exactly how the game balance will be ruined forever, but there is my quick at-a-glance opinion.
I agree. Try it and see how it goes. It's the only way to know if it works. If you're players are reasonable then they will agree that playtesting involves trial and error and a rule that is here today maybe gone tomorrow.
Oh, here's the feat: www.wizards.com/dndinsider/compendium/fe...
One of my players did find an 'exploit' -- he plays a rogue and took that paragon feat that allows him to target Ref with basic attacks -- but it hasn't been game breaking or anything.
Just echoing the above, It seems fine for a houserule where you can watch it, but not as a core rule.
Tried this, works so long as no one uses warlord, Commanders Strike Breaks This.
Wouldn't it be easier to just give the melee training feat for free to anyone who wants it? I've done that before and it worked great.
One thing that irritates me about this (about Melee Training in general, actually) is that you end up with some rather strange effects, at least IMHO - such as Wizards being better with their melee attacks than some fighters!
Of course that might not be a problem for many people, but I think implementing the Essentials change (only half attribute bonus to damage) makes it more resonable. That way the big, buff Fighter will at least cause more damage when swinging his weapon!
What Wizards do you play with that carry a Greataxe to go with their 20 Int? Because mine usually strike unarmed, or with a staff ( +2 / 1d8 ) and neither of those would give them a better MBA than the Fighter
I don't - I've got a friend who's packing an execution axe, thought...
Anyway, Wizards was just an example. It's just that IME defenders don't max out their primary stat to the same degree other classes do since their defenses (and thus at least 3 high stats) is so much more important to their role. But MBAs are usually very important to them... So it seems strange when pretty much every other melee weapon user, no matter the role, is likely to end up with a better MBA.
All IMHO, of course.
