I've just finished listening to the "RollPlay: One Shots - D&D 5.0" set of videos (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w11AqBqFI-A&list=PL-oTJHKXHicT-PdE9DiIb0xpduO1vUKmd&index=5). This is the fourth narrative that I've listened to involving the Starter Set module, and like many others on these forums have observed, I am struck by the swinginess of combat at low levels. The outbreak of dirt naps seems to be reaching almost epidemic proportions, which adds a lot of positive tension of the game, and forces players to think through their tactics a bit more carefully. I've been doing some thinking of my own, and it occurs to me that a lot of these battles might run a bit more smoothly if the party were to adopt a set of tactics whereby the character with the highest AC and durability would close with the enemy, getting into melee range with as many of them as possible, and then use the Dodge action from round to round, taunting his foes and imposing disadvantage on their attacks while his allies plug away at them from afar.
Since we're dealing with hypotheticals here, let's assume that the character in question is a fighter with the Defense fighting style wearing chainmail and carrying a shield. In this case, the character has an AC of 19. In a battle against goblins or bugbears, both of whom have a +4 modifier to their attack rolls, this character would normally be hit around 30% of the time. By imposing disadvantage, he will only be hit approximately 9% of the time. This seems to decrease the threat level by a significant margin, and I would further say that the reduction in the damage output for team monster should more than compensate for the loss of the fighter's attack action in many cases, depending on how many opponents the fighter is able to draw into melee. The threat of incurring an opportunity attack should keep the monsters focused on the fighter for at least a round or two, and this may be enough to tip the scales in the party's favor.
Of course, this is all theorycraft at this point, since I haven't actually had a chance to play the game yet. What do the rest of you think? Has anyone tried a tactic similar to this? How did it work out? Are there any other decent tactics or anti-patterns that have emerged from your own low-level gameplay experiences? Obviously, the most effective tactic is to avoid combat altogether, but when it can't be avoided, how can your party be more effective? I'm curious to hear from you.
I'll keep a record of any useful suggestions in the block below.
--Leugren
Useful Tactics:
- A durable, high-AC character might use the Dodge action to draw off enemy attacks (particularly useful if the character in question can occupy a chokepoint)**. (Leugren / iserith)
- A spellcaster might use the Dodge action to maintain Concentration in order to ensure that an important spell effect is not negated. (Ashrym)
- NPC's, particularly those who have been turned into friendlies, can use the Help action in order to grant advantage to player characters. (Iserith)
- Use more social interaction skills in order to bypass deadly encounters altogether. (Leugren / iserith)
- Use ranged attacks and hide behind cover using move-action-move. (Rhenny)
- Try to surprise foes. Sometimes a good offense is the best defense and one surprise round is deadly. (Rhenny)
- Make sure at least 1 PC in each party is actively trying to perceive when traveling or exploring. Getting surprised could be the kiss of death. (Rhenny)
- During a ranged fight, attack from range, move if needed, and then drop prone at the end of your turn (no movement cost). Ranged attacks against you will be at disadvantage, and as long as you are at sufficient range there isn't much chance of a melee attack against you. You can stand back up next turn for 1/2 your moves, make another ranged attack, and drop prone again. Repeat as needed. (Karnos)
- If an opponent is Dodging, have someone use the Shove action to knock the target prone, thereby negating disadvantage when your allies attack that foe. (Nerdrage88)
- If an opponent is Dodging, it is a good time to initiate a grapple on that foe, since the grapple attempt does not. (Nerdrage88)
**The mileage you get out of using the Dodge action will vary greatly depending on your Dungeon Master's style. With more gamist DM's, the tactic likely will not be very effective unless you can occupy a chokepoint. If you cannot occupy a chokepoint, Dodge may simply cause monsters to avoid you as opposed to wasting their attacks on you.
I've made mention of this tactic before. It came up when I was running an adventure of my own creation during the playtest ("Invasion" for those who remember my thread on that). The PCs were setting about completing particular objectives under the threat of orcs that would show up on a set countdown. In each set piece encounter orcs showed up - the PCs couldn't get done with what they needed to do in time to avoid it (plus really lucky rolls on my part).
Anyway, since completing their objectives and carrying on was their goal rather than killing orcs, these 1st-level PCs would send their fighter into a chokepoint and had her Dodge to hold off the orcs while the rest of the PCs completed the necessary tasks. It worked perfectly. The key is the terrain. If the monsters can get around the Dodging character to get at others, then it's a less viable tactic.
So the PC bases 4 enemies, and starts dodging. The enemies eat a single opportunity attack and gang up on the undefended ranged attackers in the back. A 27 HP bugbear could easily eat an opportunity attack and still have 20 HP left. A 18 AC hobgob could eat an OP attack and still survive 90% of the time.
Fighters in 5e are really quite poor at defending.
iserith wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Leugren wrote:
iserith wrote:
Leugren wrote:
Leugren wrote:
iserith wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Leugren wrote:
iserith wrote:
Dodging for the most part in not very effective for a frontline warrior to do, he doesn't use his action to attack and possibly remove one of the threats and all he does it make the other members of that party look like better easier to hit targets.
Leugren wrote:
One of the best uses of dodge might be to avoid losing concentration while maintaining some important spells.
Ashrym wrote:
Generally I feel Dodge is an underused tactic, especially when combats begin at range. Often you are better off moving your speed and Dodging, than using a mediocre ranged attack. If you can totally block a section, such as a doorway, then Dodge is fantastic until the enemy withdraws (letting you and your allies into the room).
iserith wrote:
Paraxis wrote:
Shiroiken wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
masterfat78 wrote:
Though it seems we'd be in the minority, I am going to side with the "Dodge is an okay or even encouragable action" team.
There's a few things I take into account as a DM that make me comfortable with that particular viewpoint.
1) Combat is quick, vision is often obscured, and chaos is more the norm than tactical planning. For me, this means that the orc that charges forth at the enemies that dared to invade their territory might very well just shoot at or take swings at the most easily perceived, clear target. Within the timeframe given (6 seconds or less), there's not a lot of time to consider all elements involved in the battlefield.
2) Did I mention vision? Just because I know that the at least half obscured character in the dimly lit background is the most vulnerable, doesn't mean that the enemies do. If I were to burst open the doors of a shadow-filled gymnasium where two teams (10 players) were actively playing a basketball game at full speed, then asked to, within the space of one second, determine which player is the more athletic and talented of the bunch, that'd be asking a lot of me.
3) Finally, and probably most controversial, I DM with the intent of narrating a good story. To accomplish this, I also need to consider the parts that my audience (and shared authors to the tale) hopes for in this shared entertainment experience. Circumventing the brave knight who created his character with thought and care in hopes of playing the heroic warrior would be (imo) an injustice to him. Seeking out the frail rogue or easily dispatched wizard every time because it offers the "enemy" creatures I control the best opportunity at victory would not be beneficial to the shared experience.
So, yes, if the Fighter wants to try to hold off the horde so that his allies and/or friends can escape or pull off some dramatic stratagem, why not? It's what he was made for. It's not like Dodge makes one impervious or that the enemy can't find ways to counteract the effort once they realize what they are up against. But I would personally feel uncomfortable simply having the enemy decide it can run by the harder to hit warrior because I know he'd only get 1 reaction and there's easier meat beyond.
But... and let me stress this... the above is only my take on what makes me a good DM for the players I enjoy the hobby with. It is certainly not for everyone, DM or Player.
Ashrym wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
iserith wrote:
ShadeRaven wrote:
Leugren wrote:
Shiroiken wrote:
Leugren wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
iserith wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
h347h50 wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
grendel111111 wrote:
grendel111111 wrote:
You people have all obviously never been in a sword fight. It is very easy to see when someone is fighting defensively. In a multi person sword fight, you never engage that person when their are other easier targets nearby. You don't need to be a tactical heinous to notice this either. I expect any creature with a 6+ Int to be capable of figuring this out.
Lawolf wrote:
Karnos wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Which is exactly why dodging as works in 5e doesn't make sense. One monster can dodge then move away provoking an OA which will now likely miss, and still not even kill the monster if it hits, then the rest are free to rush by it.
5e combat with one reaction per turn really doesn't work out like reality. And again, you just admitted that you can see when a creature is fighting defensively, proving my earlier point.
Lawolf wrote:
Actually, I have a brilliant strategy for Lawolf's world. You just need two fighters in a party, no other classes needed. The fighters stand at least 15' apart, and both use dodge actions. The monsters, upon attacking Fighter 1, realize he is dodging and run past him to Fioghter 2, provoking an OA. Of course, Fighter 2 is also dodging, so the monsters simply turn and run back to Fighter 1, provoking another OA. This continues, with the monsters running back and forth every round, never actually attacking, until all the monsters die from OA.
Lawolf wrote:
Rhenny wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Rhenny wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Defending like this in chokepoints are of course a great tactical choice, but assuming two tactically minded oponents can attack the defender, they are likely to go for a Shove attack from one whilst being aided by the other as this is better than both trying it - 30% chance in your example of the aided attacker vs. two 9% chances of a Shove if both try separately.
The difference between a couple of Orcs and a couple of Hobgoblins really. 
Karnos wrote:
Caliburn101. wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Rhenny! Nice to see you in here, giving it the ol' college try. ;)
Again, I while I certainly have my own style that I am comfortable with, the truth of the matter is that the only resolution to Dodge Actions use in combat is a simple one...
When the players (DM included) walked away from the table, was everyone satisfied with the excitement, energy, and camaraderie garnered through playing D&D (5E).
I know for a fact that amongst the groups I have the pleasure to oversee the game for, there's no complaints about how I tactically play the various creatures (both friend and foe) they encounter in their (hopefully) long lives as adventurers.
This DOES NOT, however, mean that I play it the right way. My style may very well be unsuitable for some players here who would constantly question, challenge, or walk away unsatisfied by how I employed tactics or combat mechanics in sessions they were involved with. While that hasn't happened in quite some time, I am sure it would based on some of the commentary here.
I love a good honest discussion on differing styles because I often do learn little tidbits that add to my personal repertoire.. and sometimes those tidbits aren't little at all! There's a lot of brilliant minds out here offering thoughts.
That said, it's starting to feel like this thread has gone off track and its usefulness is starting to wane fast.
Caliburn101. wrote:
ShadeRaven wrote:
Karnos wrote:
I'm guaging, from the direction this thread has taken, that people haven't really given much thought to the types of tactics that might help characters survive at lower levels in 5E. I have only heard a few real suggestions so far:
1. A durable, high-AC character might use the Dodge action to draw off enemy attacks.
2. A spellcaster might use the Dodge action to maintain Concentration in order to ensure that an important spell effect is not negated.
3. NPC's can use the Help action in order to grant advantage to player characters.
4. Use more social interaction skills in order to bypass deadly encounters altogether.
Setting aside the issues of DM style, are there any other effective tactics that have jumped out at you, either through your own gameplay experiences, or by perusing the rules?
Leugren wrote:
iserith wrote:
Rhenny wrote:
iserith wrote:
Leugren wrote:
Karnos wrote:
And to flip it around. Use your action to grapple if that nasty critter is dodging and you can't get hold of him. Better still. Have your ally (be it an npc or PC) shove the enemy-knocking it prone-then attack with advantage. I myself have had the -fire spell/cantrip, drop prone, rinse and repeat tactic used. Works well for the PCs. As does- total cover (behind a building) move 10ft-fire bow at target engaged with dodging fighter, sneak attack- move back behind building where no one can see you.
Good thread idea.
Peace
Rhenny wrote:
Exchange between Karnos and iserith regarding the use of the Dodge action with regard to whether or not the DM or player can be said to be "cheating." Condensed to a spoiler block because it is long.
Karnos wrote:
Nerdrage88 wrote:
ShadeRaven wrote:
iserith wrote:
Leugren wrote:
Karnos wrote:
Response to ShadeRaven, a discussion related to the topic but not strictly relevant to specific tactics, condensed into a spoiler block.
ShadeRaven wrote:
iserith wrote:
iserith wrote:
Karnos wrote:
Lawolf wrote: