D&D 5E Removing the bonus action - analysis

[JValeur]

Bonus actions are still needed. The reason yall can't see the issue is because 5e also has almost no bloat. You add bloat and more and newer interesting "bonus actions" and you make them all free and can use as many on your turn as you want as long as they have a different effect and you have a high probability of eventually having problems after enough bloat.

You don't need to worry about bonus action restrictions when there is no bloat though. A lot of problems kind of fix themselves when you eliminate the bloat But don't think for a second that such "unnecessary features" in a bloatless system wouldn't be the greatest thing ever in a bloat filled system.

Also a fair point. The more options included and the more 'min-maxy' players you have, the bigger issue stacking will be at your table. And if you have to make complex exceptions to curtail it, you will surely end up missing the simple bonus action. But, reading through the PHB, there's actually less bonus action features than I thought, which makes stacking them something you would actually have to work hard to do - and I'm not sure it would be worth the effort.

 

[JValeur]

Bonus actions are still needed. The reason yall can't see the issue is because 5e also has almost no bloat. You add bloat and more and newer interesting "bonus actions" and you make them all free and can use as many on your turn as you want as long as they have a different effect and you have a high probability of eventually having problems after enough bloat.

You don't need to worry about bonus action restrictions when there is no bloat though. A lot of problems kind of fix themselves when you eliminate the bloat But don't think for a second that such "unnecessary features" in a bloatless system wouldn't be the greatest thing ever in a bloat filled system.

Also a fair point. The more options included and the more 'min-maxy' players you have, the bigger issue stacking will be at your table. And if you have to make complex exceptions to curtail it, you will surely end up missing the simple bonus action. But, reading through the PHB, there's actually less bonus action features than I thought, which makes stacking them something you would actually have to work hard to do - and I'm not sure it would be worth the effort.

 

[Li Shenron]

So, what do you think? I am sure I have missed something, but I don't think Mearls' rule change is actually as gamebreaking as it might have sounded initially.

I haven't read yet what exactly Mearls has been using or considering in exchange for bonus actions, but IMHO he has in mind that anything which costs a bonus action could instead be described as a special action that replaces the regular "action" on your turn, but provides a combination of effects.

So for example, these would be added to the list of possible regular "Actions" in combat:

Two-Weapon Fighting: You make one attack (or more if you have the Extra Attacks ability) with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, and an additional attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand.

Casting a "swift" spell: You cast one spell that has the "swift" property, and cast one cantrip or make one attack (or more if you have the Extra Attacks ability) at the same time.

Cunning Action: You either hide, disengage or dash, while also casting a spell or making one attack (or more if you have the Extra Attacks ability) at the same time.

Basically I think he wants to get rid of the general rule for bonus actions, and replace it with several specific ad-hoc rules.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

As long as you aren't stacking a ton of free actions where before there was a 1 bonus action limitation, then I'm fine with it. Anything that boosts player action economy can be unbalancing with regard to encounters and monster design.

 

[Li Shenron]

If you dislike bonus actions, you know what would be even simpler? To just get rid of everything that uses them.

- Instead of having a bunch of spells that use a bonus action, have all of those spells use an action. The game was fine without Healing Word.

- Do you want to fight with two weapons? Just use one weapon on your first attack, and the other weapon on your second attack. If you have only one attack per round, use a different hand/weapon each round. It's not written in the Bible that 2WF must grant more than the usual number of attacks per round.

- Bard Inspiration doesn't even need to take an action at all.

 

[CydKnight]

It seems to me the main issues seem to be in the word Bonus. Remove the word then perhaps a lot of the issues people take with the rule seem to fall away? Sure a few of the minute details could be altered but ultimately they still seem to accomplish the same outcome?

 

[hejtmane]

Just do TWF like colossus slayer were you can only do one off hand attack per turn that fixes the issue not trickey at all way over complicated by people then you are using already established rules nothing new to learn.

 

[Cyrinishad]

Bonus actions are still needed. The reason yall can't see the issue is because 5e also has almost no bloat. You add bloat and more and newer interesting "bonus actions" and you make them all free and can use as many on your turn as you want as long as they have a different effect and you have a high probability of eventually having problems after enough bloat.

You don't need to worry about bonus action restrictions when there is no bloat though. A lot of problems kind of fix themselves when you eliminate the bloat But don't think for a second that such "unnecessary features" in a bloatless system wouldn't be the greatest thing ever in a bloat filled system.

I'm going to throw a +1 on this...

Bonus Actions as a mechanic will help insulate 5e against the splat-bloat effect...

 

[Shadowdweller00]

Ugh. No.

The entire point of having the bonus action is to provide a simple, universal action limitation. Doing away with it in favor of a vast number of fiddly, ability-specific limitations with questionable capacity for stacking is the exact polar-opposite of simplifying or streamlining anything. Let alone "smarter" design.

 

[TwoSix]

Hot take: The bonus action concept itself is fine; it provides a single keyword to allow the grant of new action possibilities without the fear of stacking combinations providing imbalance.

The issue with bonus actions is that some of their current implementations, such as two-weapon fighting and bonus action spells, feel rough and unintuitive, and provide confusing issues of timing and permissions. The easy fix would simply be to make bonus actions more forgiving.

1) If a spell is a bonus action, you cast it with your bonus action. Full stop. No "only one spell a round" restriction.

2) If you are wielding a light weapon, you can attack with it as a bonus action. Full stop. You can cast a spell with your action, make another attack, grapple, dash, whatever.