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="Chris_Nightwing" data-source="post: 5952993" data-attributes="member: 882"><p>I wouldn't say it's in opposition to the 4e action economy, because it's clearly taking that economy as its basis, since it's the best one they've come up with so far. It's an evolution of the 4e action economy (I'm not saying it's better, but it is different).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ok so the correct comparison is 4e Standard/Move/Minor (Free, immediate and opportunity out of turn) against 5e Action/Move (free and interrupt out of turn). Further, I imagine the current undefined actions are 'incomplete' draft rules rather than deliberately left undefined.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes. I am glad of this. Interrupts should be renamed Disrupts (the game). It's really very clear whether a reaction can affect the action being taken or not (even in non-mechanical language this can be made clear by using 'when' or 'after' whilst describing the trigger).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I agree with his opinion that players tried to get the most out of their turns and took a long time to make decisions on that basis. I did it myself, deliberately selecting powers that would 'fill out' my potential minor actions in an encounter, so I'd never waste one. The design space was sadly used to encourage this. Putting things that used to be minor actions into movement, I suggest, will stop the design space being used for powers that could otherwise be free actions or reactions. You won't agonize, because you won't have choices to make about what to do with 5' spare movement, either it's useful to open a door or it isn't - powers won't exist in this design space.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That would be awful. Another random +1 to track. People would still agonize over whether to do that or use another power. Worse, they will forget, and bring it up after their turn is over.</p><p></p><p>I like the current action economy design. Actions will be actions. Movement will be movement and interaction with the environment, and not contain fiddly powers. A single reaction will reduce out of turn faff and still provide an interesting tactical choice (to shield someone or save your reaction for an OA).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chris_Nightwing, post: 5952993, member: 882"] I wouldn't say it's in opposition to the 4e action economy, because it's clearly taking that economy as its basis, since it's the best one they've come up with so far. It's an evolution of the 4e action economy (I'm not saying it's better, but it is different). Ok so the correct comparison is 4e Standard/Move/Minor (Free, immediate and opportunity out of turn) against 5e Action/Move (free and interrupt out of turn). Further, I imagine the current undefined actions are 'incomplete' draft rules rather than deliberately left undefined. Yes. I am glad of this. Interrupts should be renamed Disrupts (the game). It's really very clear whether a reaction can affect the action being taken or not (even in non-mechanical language this can be made clear by using 'when' or 'after' whilst describing the trigger). I agree with his opinion that players tried to get the most out of their turns and took a long time to make decisions on that basis. I did it myself, deliberately selecting powers that would 'fill out' my potential minor actions in an encounter, so I'd never waste one. The design space was sadly used to encourage this. Putting things that used to be minor actions into movement, I suggest, will stop the design space being used for powers that could otherwise be free actions or reactions. You won't agonize, because you won't have choices to make about what to do with 5' spare movement, either it's useful to open a door or it isn't - powers won't exist in this design space. That would be awful. Another random +1 to track. People would still agonize over whether to do that or use another power. Worse, they will forget, and bring it up after their turn is over. I like the current action economy design. Actions will be actions. Movement will be movement and interaction with the environment, and not contain fiddly powers. A single reaction will reduce out of turn faff and still provide an interesting tactical choice (to shield someone or save your reaction for an OA). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Blog: Reacting to the Reaction
Top