D&D 5E Removing the bonus action - analysis

[Staffan]

I'm considering a house rule to the following effect:

* The extra attack from dual-wielding is part of the Attack action, and does not require a bonus action. (This is primarily a buff to rogues, who can now dual-wield and use Cunning Action in the same round, and to dual-wielding rangers who get to use hunter's mark while dual-wielding.)

I'm considering a similar thing with the monk's extra Martial Arts attack, but I'm not so sure that's a good idea. Unlike dual-wielding, you do get additional stat damage to that without extra investment, and the class has a built-in tension between using an extra attack as a bonus action, or using Flurry of Blows, Patient Defense, or Step of the Wind. If I do a similar thing with the monk, Flurry will of course have to change to one extra attack instead of two.

I'm also going to allow downgrading your regular action to a bonus action, because I agree it's kind of ridiculous that a bard can cast vicious mockery and inspire, or cast vicious mockery and healing word, but not inspire and cast healing word.

 

[Miladoon]

Get rid of Bonus Actions and add At Wills, Encounters, Dai................KAPOOOOOOOW!

Ouch, never mind.

 

[Aenorgreen]

So what I am seeing would allow our cleric to get his main polearm attack, butt-end attack, cast healing word, and use his spiritual weapon attack, all on the same turn? Mighty big buff.

 

[Xeviat]

So what I am seeing would allow our cleric to get his main polearm attack, butt-end attack, cast healing word, and use his spiritual weapon attack, all on the same turn? Mighty big buff.

What Mearls seems to have been saying was that each of those would be a separate action, so no, you couldn't stack them all. "Fight with two weapons" or in this case "polearm master" would be an attack action. Healing word would be an action that also allows you to use a cantrip or make a weapon attack. Spiritual Weapon would be harder ...

After all of these threads on the matter, I think my only issue with Bonus Actions is the name. I know I was confused initially a few times when reading the book. "You don't normally get a bonus action, but certain abilities grand the ability to use a bonus action and you're limited to one per turn" just seemed to be a complex way of doing minor actions from 3.5 and 4th. I know they wanted to avoid everyone rushing to get a minor action ability, but I've seen a lot of rushing to get bonus action abilities and spells as it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Brutaljack88]

So why not just word the rule like this:
A character may acquire some additional abilities to use on their turn in addition to their action. It is possible to use only one of these abilities per turn, but the player can choose at each turn which one to use.

So basically "Everything isn't an action or a movement you can doit only once per turn". (exept the free object interaction)

 

[Asisreo]

I think special action resolves a good amount of confusion with Bonus Actions.

 

[Stormonu]

The game survived without Bonus Actions for three editions, it could be made to work without them.

But I don't want it to. It's an advanced element in the game basically, something you start to pick up in play after a few adventures and use more and more as you get used to the game. But it also provides a nice brake pedal to advanced players. Yeah, you can combine a series of actions - but you only get one.

I say leave it alone. If you want a simpler game, just don't use them, or read everything that says "bonus" as "free" and deal with the consequences. Otherwise, you're just reinventing bonus actions under a different name with clunky mechanics.

 

[Don Durito]

The game survived without Bonus Actions for three editions, it could be made to work without them.

But I don't want it to. It's an advanced element in the game basically, something you start to pick up in play after a few adventures and use more and more as you get used to the game. But it also provides a nice brake pedal to advanced players. Yeah, you can combine a series of actions - but you only get one.

I say leave it alone. If you want a simpler game, just don't use them, or read everything that says "bonus" as "free" and deal with the consequences. Otherwise, you're just reinventing bonus actions under a different name with clunky mechanics.

No the answer is to fold bonus actions into regular actions.

You're missing the whole point of removing them. It's not to allow people to do more things.

Bonus actions slow the game down by having people do too many things on their turn. It pushes people to look for things to do with their bonus actions.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

From a technical writing point of view....replacing the bonus action structure with a series of long-winded "not-universal" action descriptions is a horrible idea.

If for no other reason, it would make future rules tweaks or additions render all that text obsolete versus being able to address the individual components separately.

I can have a homebrew item that lets you take 2 bonus actions a round 3X a day and that's as far as the design needs to go. In the everything is a special action model I would have to go through tons of entries to try to parse how that would work.

Just a tangent, not telling anyone this is a bad project or that you shouldn't give it a try.