honestly they should have a normal withdrawl action.
as for the other thing.
I still prefer this solution over vanilla because that way you at least do soemthing else each round and not just attack.
i think the sweet spot is give it a risk of doing something bad.
basically, any option you take in combat should be a consideration.
Do you use option A or B?
This ocnsideration in DnD is typically done with ressource management.
"Do i waste my spell slot for this?" "Do i waste my daylie rages for this?" "do i waste my suepriority dice for this?"
The problem is that DnD is terrible at options.
The only realy class that has them is Battlemaster since all his maneuvers draw from the same pool (superiority dice)
The wizard has something simmilar but the descision doesnt get made in combat, in combat you only decide wether or not to waste this ressource.
Larian is used to divinity where the balance is achieved by having multiple abilities per class that do different things but all require action points to do.
so you decide is crippling my opponent better or is hitting him once but also buffing myself better?
in DnD this doesnt work because it doesnt have active abilities and it doesnt have AP, it uses actions, so each action is equivalent to one another in "Time" investment, so it al comes down to either
1. ressources or 2. risks.
Maneuvers typically have been balanced with Risk, as in, they were more likeley to fail than a Full Attack and usually didnt do any damage, that resulted in them beeing shit.
So now youve got two options.
Either you buff stuff like Shove or jump to the point where they are as potent as a Full Attack, OR you make them less of an investment (minor action)
personally i think what Larian did is the only way to do it within the framework of 5e.
if shove teleports an enemy aroudn the battlefield it would be even more ridiculous.
Of course the obvious solution would be to give every class superiority dice, but i can arleady hear Mike Mearls screeching about his school bullies
