Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Blog: Reacting to the Reaction
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 5952985" data-attributes="member: 22424"><p>Personally, I never had any issue with the 4e action economy. In fact, I felt that 4e's bringing Minor (formerly Swift) actions into the core, and formalising the five action/reaction types was a really good thing. My gut feeling is that 5e is taking a step back in that regard.</p><p></p><p>I found the 3e formalisation of Swift actions (later, 4e's Minor actions) to be a really useful thing - it cleared up all those instances of "as a free action, once per round". The problem was that the 4e designers then saw that as a design space to be filled up, and proceeded to give every class and every character a bunch of these actions, when they were originally very rare. They should have remained rare.</p><p></p><p>Eliminating Minor actions sounds like a good thing at this point. But I give it three months before a supplement brings back such actions that can be done only "once per round". Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if the core included them!</p><p></p><p>I also don't think eliminating Interrupts is actually feasible - the game will presumably still include Readied Actions, and some of those will only make sense if they act as an interrupt. So, again, we lose the formalisation of the language, but probably not the action type, or the complexities that actually go with it.</p><p></p><p>That business of limiting characters to once one reaction in the round is a good thing, though. To be honest, I'm a little shocked that 4e didn't do that already.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="delericho, post: 5952985, member: 22424"] Personally, I never had any issue with the 4e action economy. In fact, I felt that 4e's bringing Minor (formerly Swift) actions into the core, and formalising the five action/reaction types was a really good thing. My gut feeling is that 5e is taking a step back in that regard. I found the 3e formalisation of Swift actions (later, 4e's Minor actions) to be a really useful thing - it cleared up all those instances of "as a free action, once per round". The problem was that the 4e designers then saw that as a design space to be filled up, and proceeded to give every class and every character a bunch of these actions, when they were originally very rare. They should have remained rare. Eliminating Minor actions sounds like a good thing at this point. But I give it three months before a supplement brings back such actions that can be done only "once per round". Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if the core included them! I also don't think eliminating Interrupts is actually feasible - the game will presumably still include Readied Actions, and some of those will only make sense if they act as an interrupt. So, again, we lose the formalisation of the language, but probably not the action type, or the complexities that actually go with it. That business of limiting characters to once one reaction in the round is a good thing, though. To be honest, I'm a little shocked that 4e didn't do that already. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Blog: Reacting to the Reaction
Top