movement – How can heavy-armor melee characters practically close in on ranged enemies?

Install Jump Jets or a Jetpack

Assuming this is even a problem, say you are so slowed that your movement speed is under half of your opponent, allowing them to kite you in combat, you can always install mods on your armor to increase your mobility, most notably: Jump Jets and Jet Packs.

Jump Jets

Capacity 20; Usage 2/action

You can activate jump jets as part of a move action in order to fly during your movement. You can fly up to 30 feet (average maneuverability) with a maximum height of 10 feet, or you can fly up to 20 feet straight up. You must land at the end of your move action. Jump jets can’t lift you if you’re encumbered.

Jetpack

Capacity 40; Usage 2/round

You gain a fly speed of 30 feet (average maneuverability). You can use this for “cruising flight” at a usage of only 1 charge per minute, but you are flat-footed and off-target while doing so. Changing from normal flight to cruising flight or vice versa is a standard action. A jetpack can’t lift you if you’re encumbered.

Both consume a single armor mod slot, and are available early on, 3rd level item for Jump Jets, 5th level item for Jetpack. They are fairly cheap too, 1000 credits for Jump Jets and 3100 credits for a Jetpack.

A Jump Jet mod was literally the very first thing I bought when the GM said that 3rd level items were available for my vesk mechanic that had a sad 20-ft movement in heavy armor. I did not regret it at all, it helped my mobility in combat, it helped me to get through some obstacles (cliffs, pits, walls) and it looks cool in combat when I declare that I jump over my enemies and land on the other side of the battle.

dnd 5e – Are there any spells that improve ranged attacks, like "blade cannons" do for melee attacks?

While the booming blade and green flame leaf Cantrips are the most obvious melee attack options, that kind of upgrade isn't limited to melee attacks. The spells listed below revolve around distance only. There are other spells that apply to both, but I've focused on those that require rank.

The following are some examples, but there are others if you look at the descriptions of spells in the various source books.

Cantrips

Magic stone (EEPC, 160) is the most obvious choice here:

You touch one to three stones and you infuse them with magic. You or someone else can perform a ranged spell attack on one of the stones by throwing or slinging it. If launched, it has a range of 60 feet. If someone else attacks with the pebble, that attacker adds their spell casting ability modifier, not the attacker, to the attack roll. In one hit, the target takes blunt damage equal to 1d6 + your spell casting ability modifier. Hit or miss, the spell ends on the stone.

Level spells

If you use your spell spaces, you have other options. The Ranger Spell List contains many examples:

Lightning arrow (PHB, 255):

The next time you make a ranged weapon attack for the duration of the spell, the weapon's ammo, or the weapon itself, if it's a dropped weapon, transforms into lightning. Make the attack roll as usual. The target takes 4d8 lightning damage on a hit, or half damage on a fault, instead of the weapon's normal damage.

Flame arrows (EEPC, 156):

You touch a quiver that contains arrows or screws. When a target is hit by a ranged weapon attack using ammunition drawn from the quiver, the target takes an additional 1d6 fire damage. The spell's magic ends in the ammunition when it hits or misses, and the spell ends when twelve ammunitions have been removed from the quiver.

Two-hand melee arm against melee

After reading the basic rules of WFRP 4E, I can't find any information about the difference between the 2-handed melee spec weapon and all weapons listed in the Pole weapon category are 2h weapons. My question would be: is there a difference? And if not, why would someone choose the polearm specialization?

dnd 5e: is a melee spell attack also a melee attack?

The rules define melee attack to include both melee weapon and melee spell attacks:

Used in melee combat, a melee attack allows you to attack an enemy.
at your fingertips. A melee attack generally uses a handgun
like a sword, a war hammer, or an ax. A typical monster does a
melee attack when hitting with its claws, horns, teeth, tentacles,
or another part of the body. Some spells also involve making a melee attack. (PHB 195)

Also, I came across a relevant Twitter Q&A post from Jeremy Crawford (the lead designer and managing editor of DnD 5e) that sheds some light on this. According to the Compendium of Wise Advice, Jeremy can make official decisions on Twitter, making him an official source.

Question

Does a "melee attack" count as a "melee attack" for Touch of Death?

Reply

A melee spell attack is, in fact, a melee attack and may qualify for the Death Cleric's Touch of Death feature.

This would naturally extend to other effects that are altered or activated based on melee attacks.

dnd 5e: How can a DM make a low-level melee rogue feel useful in combat when the party doesn't have a tank to fire a sneak attack for her?

For Druid + Rogue at level 1; Combat is not necessarily necessary.

Focusing on the rogue's DPR is, IMO, you as a DM watching this party through a very narrow lens. I suggest that since (1) you only have two players, and (2) neither of them is of a warrior archetype, the adventures you run through them until they reach the second level should focus more on role play, exploration and evasion / mobility and slightly less in close combat. But when they opt for close combat, they need to try to compromise on their own terms. (Credit: Sun Tzu theory)

Why?

In the world, in a narrative sense, the odds of a rogue and a druid going and mingling in the dark hallways of an underground dungeon are not very high. And, crafting the adventures as suggested you make them work as a team From the beginning.
Beyond that, they may not need a tank to create advantage.

How can the druid help the rogue gain an advantage?

Occasionally, with the Help action, but does the Druid player accept that? Maybe and maybe not, but in any case that's between the two players to discover. They need to work as a team. because there are only two of them.

In some situations, it helps will be be a good use of an action, in others it will not. Let them solve that by playing and making decisions / choices.

Some druid spells can offer an advantage. Again, are your players those who need to work as a team to make the most of this.

  1. Tangle (SRD p. 140)
    Note that a creature that fails its salvation is

    restrained through the tangled plants until the spell ends.

    From Appendix A, conditions, restricted

    Attack rolls against the creature have an advantage, and the creature
    Attack rolls have a disadvantage.

    The rogue attack with advantage allows a sneak attack.

  2. Fairy fire (SRD p. 141)

    Any attack roll against an affected creature or object has an advantage if the attacker can see it, and the affected creature or object cannot benefit from being invisible.

    Rogue has the advantage, sneak attack.

From your comment:

My players have little overall experience and none with D&D 5e. It is your desire to start at level 1 to keep things simple.

It is okay to train your players if they are new; you are the DM, coaching is part of your role.

Change your DM paradigm to suit your two player group

Your first level of adventure needs empathizing using your wits, not physical strength, to achieve your goals. Between the druid's spells and the rogue's ability to succeed in skill tests, and stealth, and occasionally applying a sneak attack if someone gets on the druid's grill, you can have some exciting and challenging adventures without a tank.

At level 2 Rogue gets cunning actionDruid gets wild way; Your options expand significantly.

Experience:
Two of us played a two-rogue party for one session (urban setting) to help a DM get used to running a game. We use ranged attacks, movement and anything but melee combat to achieve our goals. It's doable, it's fun, and it's still dangerous for the PC.

dnd 5e: How can I as a DM make a low level melee rogue feel useful in combat when the party doesn't have a tank to trigger a sneak attack for her?

For Druid + Rogue at level 1; Combat is not necessarily necessary.

Focusing on the rogue's DPR is, IMO, you as a DM watching this party through a very narrow lens. I suggest that since (1) you only have two players, and (2) neither of them is of a warrior archetype, the adventures you run through them until they reach the second level should focus more on role play, exploration and evasion / mobility and slightly less in close combat. But when they opt for close combat, they need to try to compromise on their own terms. (Credit: Sun Tzu theory)

Why?

In the world, in a narrative sense, the odds of a rogue and a druid going and mingling in the dark hallways of an underground dungeon are not very high. And, crafting the adventures as suggested you make them work as a team From the beginning. Beyond that, they may not need a tank to create advantage.

How can the druid help the rogue gain an advantage?

Occasionally, with the Help action, but does the Druid player accept that? Maybe and maybe not, but in any case that's between the two players to discover. They need to work as a team. because there are only two of them.

In some situations, it helps will be be a good use of an action, in others it will not. Let them solve that by playing and making decisions / choices.

Some druid spells can offer an advantage. Again, are your players those who need to work as a team to make the most of this.

  1. Tangle (SRD p. 140)
    Note that a creature that fails its salvation is

    restrained through the tangled plants until the spell ends.

    From Appendix A, conditions, restricted

    Attack rolls against the creature have an advantage, and the creature
    Attack rolls have a disadvantage.

    The rogue attack with advantage allows a sneak attack.

  2. Fairy fire (SRD p. 141)

    Any attack roll against an affected creature or object has an advantage if the attacker can see it, and the affected creature or object cannot benefit from being invisible.

    Rogue has the advantage, sneak attack.

It is okay to train your players if they are new; you are the DM, coaching is part of your role.

Change your DM paradigm to suit your two player group

Your first level of adventure needs empathizing using your wits, not physical strength, to achieve your goals. Between the druid's spells and the rogue's ability to succeed in skill tests, and stealth, and occasionally applying a sneak attack if someone gets on the druid's grill, you can have some exciting and challenging adventures without a tank.

At level 2 Rogue gets cunning actionDruid gets wild way; Your options expand significantly.

Experience:
Two of us played a two-rogue party for one session (urban setting) to help a DM get used to running a game. We use ranged attacks, movement and anything but melee combat to achieve our goals. It's doable, it's fun, and it's still dangerous for the PC.

dnd 5e: How can I as a DM make a low-level melee rogue feel useful when the party doesn't have a tank to trigger a sneak attack for her?

I am going to DM a short adventure for two players who have little experience with role-playing games of paper and pencil. One will be a druid, one will be a double wielded rogue, and we will start at level 1. I am a little concerned that the rogue will feel weak in combat since without a tank next to her, she will certainly have a hard time getting attacks sneaky. Sure, I could add a tank as an NPC, but players should be focused and I don't want them to feel like someone else is doing the real work.

Are there good options for me as a DM to help her have a sneak attack?

I was also thinking of allowing Cunning Action: Target of unearthed arcana class feature variants, but this would only enter level 2. Also, it would no longer have its bonus action for a possible off-hand attack.

dnd 5e: Does the War Caster feat grant ranged spell attacks in melee range without debuff?

A opportunity attack It is described in this way (PHB, p. 195):

You can make an attack of opportunity when a hostile creature you can see moves out of range. To make the attack of opportunity, you use your reaction to make a melee attack against the creature it provokes.

The last benefit of War Launcher feat says (PHB, p. 170):

  • When a hostile creature's movement triggers an attack of opportunity, you can use your reaction to cast a spell on the creature, instead of making an attack of opportunity. The spell must have a cast time of 1 action and must target only that creature.

Without him Crossbow Expert feat, all ranged attacks (including ranged spell attacks) made when an enemy is adjacent suffer this penalty (PHB, p. 195):

You have a disadvantage on a ranged attack roll if you are within 5 feet of a hostile creature that can see you and is not incapacitated.

Since an attack of opportunity normally grants a melee attack, does it seem reasonable to assume that the target remains at melee range for the spell attack granted by War Caster? If so, does this require ranged spell attack rolls with disadvantage?

The trigger for an OA is a creature that moves "out of range". This suggests to me that the creature is outside the 5 & # 39; s debuff zone, but it seems like that would prevent melee attacks.

Do characters with the War Caster feat get the best of both worlds – are they allowed to perform a melee spell attack or ranged non-disadvantaged spell attack?

unit: I use a SendMessage function for my melee attack, but it doesn't work

I have a melee attack script that works as a spell for the other enemy. But for this enemy, it doesn't work. This is the script for the melee attack that uses the SendMessage function. You can see there is a Debug.Log statement every time my player hits something. For the enemy that is not working, when it is in the game, the message is sent, but the effect does not happen. Interestingly, the particles are instantiated, but the enemy's health doesn't work. This is the melee attack script (SendMessage function only)

    private void CheckAttackHitBox()
    {
        Collider2D() detectedObjects = Physics2D.OverlapCircleAll(attackHitBoxPos.position, attack1Radius, whatIsDamageable);

        attackDetails(0) = attack1Damage;
        attackDetails(1) = transform.position.x;

        foreach (Collider2D collider in detectedObjects)
        {
            collider.transform.parent.SendMessage("Damage", attackDetails);
            Debug.Log("MessageSent");
        }
    }

This is my enemy script that receives the message:

private void Damage(float() attackDetails)
    {
        currentHealth -= attackDetails(0);

        Instantiate(hitParticle, transform.position, Quaternion.Euler(0.0f, 0.0f, Random.Range(0.0f, 360.0f)));

        //the x position of the player is greater than the x position of the enemy
        if (attackDetails(1) > transform.position.x)
        {
            damageDirection = -1;
        }
        else
        {
            damageDirection = 1;
        }

        if (currentHealth <= 0.0f)
        {
            Die();
        }
    }
```

Melee combat: Why targeting an adjacent attacker with a 5-foot cube area attack is considered a ranged attack?

An opponent moved adjacent upward on a character's face and swung toward them. On his turn, in retaliation, the character would like to attack again with his favorite cube area attack, made in the size of a 5-foot cube for ergonomics. Interestingly, the rules as written (see below) seem to qualify this attack as a ranged attack even though the target is adjacent and any other area attack that also contains the attacker would not. Is this an oversight, an intentional design decision, or is there something I am overlooking that invalidates this decision?

The rules that lead me to this conclusion appear here:

Ranged melee attacks

Every time you make a ranged attack and there is an enemy at your melee range, you have disadvantage 1 on your attack roll. Area attacks are considered ranged attacks if the area does not include at least one space adjacent to the attacker.

The 5 foot cube placed in the attacker's square makes do not It includes at least one space adjacent to the attacker, but it does include the attacker's box, which intuitively looks like it shouldn't be a ranged attack, as well as other area attacks. However, RAW means that it is a ranged attack and imposes a disadvantage 1. For me, a more intuitive decision and writing would be:

Ranged melee attacks

Every time you make a ranged attack and there is an enemy at your melee range, you have disadvantage 1 on your attack roll. Area attacks are considered ranged attacks if the area does not include the attacker or at least one space adjacent to the attacker. (changes in italics)

Are there existing rules or other evidence that the designer intended this scenario to be a ranged attack? If so, why only the 5 foot cubes and not any other area effects (they also have to include a square adjacent to the opponent)? Is there perhaps another mechanical reason why I can't find this attack to be considered from a distance? Is attack supposed to simply impose a debuff 1 and to be considered at a distance is simply a by-product?

In the event that it should not be viewed remotely (or only remotely for the purpose of handicap 1), I would like to review this confusing wording. I have found the Open Legends repository and my intention is to submit a pull request if I understand the rules correctly and this decision is against RAI. However, I am asking my question here first to gain security as I know I am very new to the system and may miss something.