For Discussion: Reactions.

[Water Bob]

I was explaining the Ready Action the other day to one of my players (since we're all learning 3.5), and I told him how he can basically use the Ready Action to move and then save his standard action for later in the round. He could ready a charge or ready an attack if a foe approached him.

And he said, "Why can't I do that anyway? Why do I have to specify what I'm going to do with the rest of my turn when things are happening simultaneously. I should be able to react. If someone starts to charge me from 50' away, I should be able to set my spear during that time he's running. If someone approaches me, and I still have an action, I should be able to attack---and attack first since I have initiative. So, why do I need to be hemmed in in what I do by specifically stating what I will do with the rest of my action when the battlefiled is changing every fraction of a second?"

When he finished, I looked at him, nonplussed. Then I looked at the board on which we were moving the figures. Then, I looked at him again and said, "Um. I dunno."

And, that got me to thinking....

(OH! NO! )







Consider a new concept for 3.5 d20 games....

Let's call it the, REACTION.

It works exactly like a Ready Action except that a character cannot use it for an overt action. He can only use it to react to a foe or circumstance that affects him. And, the character does not have to declare what his Reaction is.

With the Reaction, the character will always use a Move action and then wait to use his Reaction later in the round.

The Reaction is always a Standard action. Basically, it's saving the character's standard action for later in the round--saving it to react to some threat that comes at the character after the character has moved.





Here's an example of a Reaction: A character moves then stops his turn. One of his foes, later in the round, charges the character, so the character uses his Reaction set his spear for the charge.



Here's another example of a Reaction: The same character moves, then stops his turn. One of his foes approaches him to engage in melee. The character gets an attack at that character as the foes approaches him.



Here's a third example of a Reaction: The character moves, then stops his turn. Some foes roll logs down a hill toward him. The character moves, up to his Speed rating, to get out of the way (basically, trading his Standard Action for another Move action).



The key to Reactions is that they are always reactive. The character is always reacting to some threat.



This is not an example of a Reaction. This is an exampe of how the Ready Action will still be used: The character moves, then draws his bow, stating that he will fire his bow and any foe that passes a nearby tree.

The character is being overt here, so he needs to use a Ready action.





Alright, let's open the floor to discussion on this. What do you guys think about this?

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I was explaining the Ready Action the other day to one of my players (since we're all learning 3.5), and I told him how he can basically use the Ready Action to move and then save his standard action for later in the round. He could ready a charge or ready an attack if a foe approached him.

You can't ready a charge unless you're limited to a standard action only for the round, as per the partial charge rules. And your wording is confusing. I think you said it correctly, that you could move and then ready a standard action to occur later in the round. But if you meant that you could ready a move action and get your standard action later in the round as well, that is incorrect.

 

[Water Bob]

You can't ready a charge unless you're limited to a standard action only for the round, as per the partial charge rules. And your wording is confusing.

Yeah, I screwed up there. What I was thinking wasn't what I was typing.

I meant to say that I was telling my player how he can ready his spear if he thinks he will be charged.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

So, instead of a plethora of "I ready an action to [do X] when [Y] happens" with nigh-infinite variations on X and Y, the ready action is instead "do something at some point after my turn"?

Is that about right?

 

[Water Bob]

So, instead of a plethora of "I ready an action to [do X] when [Y] happens" with nigh-infinite variations on X and Y, the ready action is instead "do something at some point after my turn"?

Is that about right?

Yes, with the except that the character cannot make an overt action. His action has to be a reaction to something. For example, a character couldn't fire his bow at a target. He'd have to use the Ready Action for that (the Ready Action still has its uses, even with the Reaction). The character can only "react".

The idea behind the Reaction is that things are happening simultaneously, and a person can usually react to his environment pretty quickly.

Take this example...




Fred has nish. He moves to a point in the field and ends his turn. He performed a Move action, but did not perform a Standard action.

Now, it's Ric's turn. Down field, he sees where Fred moved and decides to charge him.

Given the turn system of combat, Fred can do nothing until his next turn, and by that time, Ric will have charged him.

In real life, characters are moving simultaneously. As Fred is moving to the point in the field, Ric is charging him at the same time. Therefore, Fred could see and react to the charge.

But, the way the turn system plays, Fred has no idea that Ric charging and can't react to it.




Now, the game addresses this, a bit, with the Ready Action. But, it's not a perfect fix for the situation because Fred has to play psychic and guess that Ric will charge when, in real life, he would see Ric coming his way as Fred was moving to his desired point in the field.



Complicate it up a bit. John is on the field, too. He's Ric's ally. He's going to approach Fred and engage him in melee. He's closer than Ric, so he'll get to Fred first.

So, simultaneously, we've got Fred moving to a point in the field. John moving to engage Fred. And, Ric charging Fred.

As Fred moves, he's aware of both attackers. He might decide to throw up his shield and block John's attack, then swing at Ric as he comes screaming into him.

Or, Fred might attack John, then try to block both John's and Ric's attacks.

With the Reaction in use in the game, it's possible for Fred to pull off more life-like maneuvers.




Considering this entire scenario, in the game, with the Reaction, it would play out like this:

1 - Fred has nish. He moves, saving his Standard action as a Reaction.

2 - John moves to engage Fred.

3 - Fred can now decide to use his Reaction to attack John first, as John approaches, or Fred can simply try to parry or dodge John's attack. Fred would then be saving his Reaction for Ric's charging attack.

4 - Ric's turn. He charges Fred.

5 - Depending on what Fred when John attacked, Fred may or may not get an attack at Ric before Ric's charge attack is resolved.



See, the idea here is that Fred gets more life-like choices in combat. He can react to the ever changing battlefield conditions that better simulates simultaneous movement.

And, there is still a place for the normal Ready Action because there will be times when a character will want to cover a doorway or fire a bow at the first foe that passes a tree (or whatever).

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Yes, with the except that the character cannot make an overt action.

This distinction does not make sense to me.

Can you define an overt action more clearly?

 

[Water Bob]

This distinction does not make sense to me.

Can you define an overt action more clearly?

The character can only react to attack. In order to melee attack, a foe has to approach him.

By "overt" action, I mean an action that the character instigates.

Thus, if a character wanted to cover a doorway with a bow and fire at the first enemy to come through it, the character would have to use a Ready Action, since this is an overt action.

But, if a character just wanted to move and then "see what happens", he can still act later in the round, but only in reaction to threats against him. If someone is charging him, he can set a spear to receive the charge. If someone approaches to attack him, he can attack that foe that apparoaches him as if he had used a Ready action.




Now, is this idea completely thought out? Nope.

Again, we're just discussing the possibility here.

Does this idea merit discussion? I think so.

Does the idea merit inclusion as a House Rule. Not at this point...let's see what happens during discussion. It may be more hassle than its worth.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

Double post

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

But, if a character just wanted to move and then "see what happens", he can still act later in the round, but only in reaction to threats against him. If someone is charging him, he can set a spear to receive the charge. If someone approaches to attack him, he can attack that foe that apparoaches him as if he had used a Ready action.

So why couldn't a guy with a bow shoot a badguy who came through the door and sorta moved in his direction?

What about a spellcaster - could he cast a Shocking Grasp spell if someone started coming towards him? What about a Fireball? Confusion?

Again, we're just discussing the possibility here.

Certainly. That's why I'm asking questions.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

This concept works for me. I imagine Reaction to be a player saying, "Ok, I've moved on my turn, and as my Ready Action, I'm going to be paying attention to anything coming at me so I can do something about it."

"That monster is attacking my Ally over there. Doesn't affect me, so doesn't apply."
"That Bandit just jumped out from behind that tree over there. He's looking at me and shouting, but otherwise not approaching. I can't shoot him with my bow in my hand."
~Limits of 'Reaction'. Am I getting this right?


I'd allow this in any of my games.