-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Let the Players Manage themselves Part 2
- Thread starter Gorrstagg
- Start date
The PHB uses numbered lists when they want you to do things in a specific order. See p11, p14 [which includes a 'you can do these out of order' modifier], p27, p266, p269 [Making Attacks]. Everywhere else it uses bulleted lists to show you all of the options at a given time in no particular order.
Otherwise when I take a Run action (p291) I don't provoke Opportunity Attacks for leaving squares until after I've finished moving my Speed +2.
Otherwise when I take a Run action (p291) I don't provoke Opportunity Attacks for leaving squares until after I've finished moving my Speed +2.
Mustrum_Ridcully
Legend
What I really like to know is if people found the column useful!
Just a quick note before I go get some sleep after work.
I think the posited counter, that this can be taken out of order is entirely plausible.
But it doesn't make sense in the slightest to have in the actions section which follows directly after, include a bullet. That specifically states, you can do your actions in any order, or skip them entirely.
That would seem to contradict the concept of the lack of such a caveat as then being an ordered structure.
Thus, they are bullet points, done in a certain order. Take damage first, then regenerate and so on.
Though what wepwawet said is really true. Whatever works best for the group.
But the rules as written didn't include a caveat, or exception to say you can go out of order, within that group. And while I realize that different people may of worked on those exceptions, right off the bat were told this is a game of specific rules, with tons of exceptions. There is no exception listed for the start of the turn which no one can skip. And it had bullet points listing specific things. If it said you can choose in what order the effects occur in the grouping, I could more easily support the perspective of in any order. But the rules they wrote don't include that.
That's why I took it as the author misquoted, or was going off of an internal version of the game they had been playing for a while that differed slightly from the final published materials. And was just going off of memory, and possibly a much older draft of the game.
I think the posited counter, that this can be taken out of order is entirely plausible.
But it doesn't make sense in the slightest to have in the actions section which follows directly after, include a bullet. That specifically states, you can do your actions in any order, or skip them entirely.
That would seem to contradict the concept of the lack of such a caveat as then being an ordered structure.
Thus, they are bullet points, done in a certain order. Take damage first, then regenerate and so on.
Though what wepwawet said is really true. Whatever works best for the group.
But the rules as written didn't include a caveat, or exception to say you can go out of order, within that group. And while I realize that different people may of worked on those exceptions, right off the bat were told this is a game of specific rules, with tons of exceptions. There is no exception listed for the start of the turn which no one can skip. And it had bullet points listing specific things. If it said you can choose in what order the effects occur in the grouping, I could more easily support the perspective of in any order. But the rules they wrote don't include that.
That's why I took it as the author misquoted, or was going off of an internal version of the game they had been playing for a while that differed slightly from the final published materials. And was just going off of memory, and possibly a much older draft of the game.
Nebulous
Legend
I never knew that. I thought it was the carefully laid out sequence of events. I don't have a problem either way, but it wasn't clear to me from the rules.
And i actually think that this can be a very problematic issue in a campaign when you have players and DMs with different opinions about what should happen. Taking damage and Regenerating can be the difference between life and death for a PC or a Monster.
Last edited:
Obryn
Hero
I don't see any indications that the bulleted list is supposed to be sequential.
Yes, the "you may do these in any order" clause is spelled out for the main part of your turn, but there's no reason to believe that this clause allows you to take your actions out of order. It's just as likely it's a reminder.
This customer service answer seems fine to me, and contradicts nothing in the rules.
-O
Yes, the "you may do these in any order" clause is spelled out for the main part of your turn, but there's no reason to believe that this clause allows you to take your actions out of order. It's just as likely it's a reminder.
This customer service answer seems fine to me, and contradicts nothing in the rules.
-O
Huh... I've also been running the 'beginning of a turn' sequence in the order presented in the book, though after reading this thread and consulting the book I don't believe that is necessarily the intention of the rules. I'm going to continue running it on that schedule though. Folks forget things less if they have a checklist to memorize or follow, and I have to deal less with folks calling me out for playing favorites or messing up the order and killing someone "unfairly."
GoodKingJayIII
First Post
That's the way I read it.
One might argue that by placing ongoing damage first, it downplays regeneration.
Hm. I'm a little torn over this. On one hand, I would rather not my players and I decide willy-nilly when start-of-turn actions take place. On the other, I feel pretty strongly about narrative democracy, and if this can somehow promote that in a positive way, I could be for it.
Saeviomagy
Adventurer
People must be just skipping right over gloombunnys answer, because it's proof that many of the arguments being posited are wrong.
Similar Threads
