We won't agree about the charge. I really think a fighter with a shield should always be able to charge. So is another class with a two handed weapon and so on...
If a "topple" or "pommel strike" action is definitely not something you should do with every weapons, a charge is in my opinion.
But whatever, if you agree I'd like a bit more details about your and varangian's disagreement with my exemples.
I forgot to mention something very important, but of course topple and pomel strike would not be guaranteed.
It should require an attack roll, maybe a skill check VS opponent skill check, maybe attack roll with disadvantage or something... you both are better than I do to balance homebrew rules but topple = shove prone while flourish = DnD help action is definitely what I had in mind even if I have not been exhaustive enough to explain it properly.
That said, why shouldn't we able to stun the ennemy with an action if the trade off is well balanced ?
Charge- that's fair actually. I retract my disagreement, conditional on it being a fair tradeoff and not just a free Dash (no free disengage, requires all your movement, moving in a straight line, some other penalty)
I have no problem with Topple (no damage), but it should just be the Shove Prone action available to every class. No need to make it a weapon ability.
I wouldn't be opposed to a weapon ability that deals damage AND has a chance to knock prone (enemy makes ST), but is made at disadvantage to compensate. Though I think this is not needed if Larian properly implements shove prone.
Stun:
The problem with stun is that it's just so incredibly powerful. Let's consider the "common" D&D 5e abilities that stun (or paralyze, which is essentially the same condition):
- Monk's Stunning Strike: it costs a ki point (very valuable), requires a successful hit, does damage, and the enemy has to fail a ST. Oh and you don't get it before 5th level.
- 5th level spell Hold Monster. Somewhat the 2nd level spell Hold Person, but that only affects humanoids.
That's basically it, at least for spells below 6th level. As far as I know, only Monk gets it as a class ability.
The only implementation of a Stunning Weapon Ability that approaches a level of "balance" for a normal weapon ability (i.e., equivalent to an attack roll for 1d8+3 damage) is:
- No damage, requires a successful attack made at disadvantage, AND the enemy has to fail a ST.
Even with all these penalties, this will still succeed about ~25% of the time (assuming 70% chance to hit normally and 50% chance to fail ST), and basically guarantees the enemy dies before they get to act again (they skip their next turn, attacks are made at advantage against them, and they auto-fail Dex STs). In a party-based game, OHKOs are not great design (*cough cough Shoving into pits*)
Perhaps by "Stun", you meant "lose their standard action." This is better, but incredibly powerful. Maaaaaaaybe balanced by having the attack made at disadvantage AND the enemy has to fail a ST. Is a 20-25% chance of making the enemy lose their action more, less, or equally powerful as a ~65-70% chance of dealing 1d8+3 points of damage? I'd argue more powerful, especially at higher levels where enemies have much more HP.
tl;dr: Stun is too powerful to give out, so will almost certainly be OP. Even the chance to make the enemy lose their action is often going to be more powerful than a normal weapon attack. I don't believe that Larian can (or really if it's even possible) to balance Stun as a weapon ability available to all characters (at level 1).
