D&D 5E Reactions and Multi Attacks

[Shadai]

Really, the entire "Ready" system is a symptom of the greater problem - Initiative or how D&D determines Initiative.

More specifically, the way it punishes characters for rolling better than their opponents.

Regardless of how you determine initiative, either group or "classic" D&D, the end result is oftentimes the same. There are some situations that exist where it is more advantageous to roll worse then their opponents. This was what the "Delay" system was implemented to correct. In 5th we don't have the delay system. Instead we have a tweaked ready system that for the most part does the job but for a few very specific situations. If one is okay with that compromise those situations may not come up at all during a game session.

So an example would be the party setting up an ambush for some Orcs about to enter a room. The Wizard and the Fighter both roll better than the Orcs. The wizard using is action to ready a web spell as soon as he sees the first one enter the room. Perfectly fine. He retains his ability to cast a good spell in a surprise factor. The Fighter readies his action to attack the first one through the threshold. Again, excellent tactics.

This one plays out where the first Orc through the door gets webbed and the fighter gets... 1 attack.

Now compare that to the scenario where the wizard rolls better, the orcs roll next, and the fighter rolls third. Now the wizard gets the web off as the Orcs come in, and the Fighter gets his full attack action of 2 or more attacks. Basically the fighter is punished for a better roll which doesn't really make a lot of tactical sense.

Granted, the wizard has to pay for that advantage cause if a fly lands on him prior to the casting of the spell he'll have to pass a concentration check.... but if the players set the ambush right that should not be a problem. I'm sure someone will bring up "well if the fighter rolled to go after the enemies, he's about to be a piñata for the incoming bad guys. At least under the current system he gets an attack!".

And they'd be right, except the fact the one attack the fighter gets isn't going to drop any of them, and he's still going to be a piñata as its not like the Orcs are moving far into the room....

I agree that 'dems da rulz, but just sayin...

 

[S'mon]

As [MENTION=6777696]redrick[/MENTION] pointed out upthread, Multiattack has similar wording that limits its use to the monster's turn only.



This would seem to imply that Multiattack does not give a creature the ability to make multiple attacks when it's not its turn.

I don't actually think they considered Readied actions at all, so there is no RAI-at-the-time. Strictly literally there is nothing in the wording preventing Multi-Attack with Readied. But like I said it seems a good approach to rule that it works like PC Extra Attack.

 

[S'mon]

Really, the entire "Ready" system is a symptom of the greater problem - Initiative or how D&D determines Initiative.

More specifically, the way it punishes characters for rolling better than their opponents.

Regardless of how you determine initiative, either group or "classic" D&D, the end result is oftentimes the same. There are some situations that exist where it is more advantageous to roll worse then their opponents. This was what the "Delay" system was implemented to correct. In 5th we don't have the delay system. Instead we have a tweaked ready system that for the most part does the job but for a few very specific situations. If one is okay with that compromise those situations may not come up at all during a game session.

So an example would be the party setting up an ambush for some Orcs about to enter a room. The Wizard and the Fighter both roll better than the Orcs. The wizard using is action to ready a web spell as soon as he sees the first one enter the room. Perfectly fine. He retains his ability to cast a good spell in a surprise factor. The Fighter readies his action to attack the first one through the threshold. Again, excellent tactics.

This one plays out where the first Orc through the door gets webbed and the fighter gets... 1 attack.

Now compare that to the scenario where the wizard rolls better, the orcs roll next, and the fighter rolls third. Now the wizard gets the web off as the Orcs come in, and the Fighter gets his full attack action of 2 or more attacks. Basically the fighter is punished for a better roll which doesn't really make a lot of tactical sense.

Granted, the wizard has to pay for that advantage cause if a fly lands on him prior to the casting of the spell he'll have to pass a concentration check.... but if the players set the ambush right that should not be a problem. I'm sure someone will bring up "well if the fighter rolled to go after the enemies, he's about to be a piñata for the incoming bad guys. At least under the current system he gets an attack!".

And they'd be right, except the fact the one attack the fighter gets isn't going to drop any of them, and he's still going to be a piñata as its not like the Orcs are moving far into the room....

I agree that 'dems da rulz, but just sayin...

If the Fighter lost init, wouldn't the orcs be through the door & attacking him before he could do anything?

 

[redrick]

As [MENTION=6777696]redrick[/MENTION] pointed out upthread, Multiattack has similar wording that limits its use to the monster's turn only.



This would seem to imply that Multiattack does not give a creature the ability to make multiple attacks when it's not its turn.

The wording of that sentence alone really makes you tease the intent out of it, which is unfortunate, but looking at the rules on readied actions as whole, I am absolutely certain that that is the intent. I mean, a creature that can make multiple attacks on its turn could make multiple attacks at other points as well... But so it goes. Fortunately, as a DM, you don't need to face a concerted legal challenge when you decide to limit monster abilities.

(Regardless of the wording in this case, I think it is always good for DM's to err on the side of avoiding action-economy cheese on the part of monsters and NPCs. It's one thing for a monster to be able to do more than a PC, but it's frustrating, as a player, to watch an opponent that feels like it's out-and-out breaking the rules of the action economy. For instance, I played with a DM the other day who had an assassin NPC that, on each turn, attacked with a regular weapon and an off-hand weapon (sneak attack), disengaged, and then took the hide action to disappear behind some ill-defined greenery. It wasn't the end of the world, but it definitely took me out of the game a bit.)

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I have a player arguing that they can do a charging attack on a ready.

"If an Orc comes through the door I'm going to move my 30' and take an attack". I tell him he can't, he could move next to the door and ready an attack as a reaction but they find that annoying.

 

[redrick]

Really, the entire "Ready" system is a symptom of the greater problem - Initiative or how D&D determines Initiative.

More specifically, the way it punishes characters for rolling better than their opponents.

Regardless of how you determine initiative, either group or "classic" D&D, the end result is oftentimes the same. There are some situations that exist where it is more advantageous to roll worse then their opponents. This was what the "Delay" system was implemented to correct. In 5th we don't have the delay system. Instead we have a tweaked ready system that for the most part does the job but for a few very specific situations. If one is okay with that compromise those situations may not come up at all during a game session.

So an example would be the party setting up an ambush for some Orcs about to enter a room. The Wizard and the Fighter both roll better than the Orcs. The wizard using is action to ready a web spell as soon as he sees the first one enter the room. Perfectly fine. He retains his ability to cast a good spell in a surprise factor. The Fighter readies his action to attack the first one through the threshold. Again, excellent tactics.

This one plays out where the first Orc through the door gets webbed and the fighter gets... 1 attack.

Now compare that to the scenario where the wizard rolls better, the orcs roll next, and the fighter rolls third. Now the wizard gets the web off as the Orcs come in, and the Fighter gets his full attack action of 2 or more attacks. Basically the fighter is punished for a better roll which doesn't really make a lot of tactical sense.

Granted, the wizard has to pay for that advantage cause if a fly lands on him prior to the casting of the spell he'll have to pass a concentration check.... but if the players set the ambush right that should not be a problem. I'm sure someone will bring up "well if the fighter rolled to go after the enemies, he's about to be a piñata for the incoming bad guys. At least under the current system he gets an attack!".

And they'd be right, except the fact the one attack the fighter gets isn't going to drop any of them, and he's still going to be a piñata as its not like the Orcs are moving far into the room....

I agree that 'dems da rulz, but just sayin...

I wouldn't call it a symptom, I would say it's a (likely intended) consequence of a deliberate design decision. D&D had the delay initiative action, and you could reintroduce it into 5e without a whole lot of problems. The designers chose to get rid of it, because it added an additional layer of tactical determination to combat that they didn't want to have.

As a result, combats are just a little less deterministic, and it becomes just a little harder for players to work out a string of complex tactical moves. It's your turn? Do something. Don't want to do something? You can ready an action, but it won't be as effective as if you'd just gone on your damn turn. Your fighter isn't being punished for rolling well. The team is losing some tactical coordination because the wizard didn't roll better.

It is one way that the designers tried to simplify 5e combats.

 

[Shadai]

If the Fighter lost init, wouldn't the orcs be through the door & attacking him before he could do anything?

I already mentioned that and the counter point in the very post you quoted good sir!

 

[Shadai]

I wouldn't call it a symptom, I would say it's a (likely intended) consequence of a deliberate design decision. D&D had the delay initiative action, and you could reintroduce it into 5e without a whole lot of problems. The designers chose to get rid of it, because it added an additional layer of tactical determination to combat that they didn't want to have.

As a result, combats are just a little less deterministic, and it becomes just a little harder for players to work out a string of complex tactical moves. It's your turn? Do something. Don't want to do something? You can ready an action, but it won't be as effective as if you'd just gone on your damn turn. Your fighter isn't being punished for rolling well. The team is losing some tactical coordination because the wizard didn't roll better.

It is one way that the designers tried to simplify 5e combats.

I agree with you for the most part with this. I think the KISS principle is what everyone should aspire to in pretty much every occasion. No need for 7 complicated rules with 1 simple one will do.

However I don't track your point about the fighter not being punished.

The wizard on his turn can take an action to cast a spell. Whether this is a cantrip or a 9th level spell it take the same basic action all wizards pretty much default to. The fighters default action is attack. As he gets better he gets more attacks. This makes sense on some level. The fighter is considered the "master of weaponry"-ish and thus you would assuming said martial prowess would translate to him being better with a Mace than average Joe.

The wizard gets the full use of his default action to cast a spell (cantrip through 9th) as a reaction with the Ready. The fighter gets.... one attack. Granted, the wizard has concentration, blah blah blah. This is on a ready. I just don't see where the fighter isn't being punished for rolling well.

Again, not a big deal for me. I detailed how I do initiative in a different thread that I feel is a superior method anyway. I just see the slight imbalance here and I think it is interesting

 

[Scorpio616]

If one lets readies include extra attacks, I'd strongly recommend bumping any spell that paralyzes or stuns a spell level / 1 Ki point along with banning the -5/+10 feats.

 

[redrick]

I agree with you for the most part with this. I think the KISS principle is what everyone should aspire to in pretty much every occasion. No need for 7 complicated rules with 1 simple one will do.

However I don't track your point about the fighter not being punished.

The wizard on his turn can take an action to cast a spell. Whether this is a cantrip or a 9th level spell it take the same basic action all wizards pretty much default to. The fighters default action is attack. As he gets better he gets more attacks. This makes sense on some level. The fighter is considered the "master of weaponry"-ish and thus you would assuming said martial prowess would translate to him being better with a Mace than average Joe.

The wizard gets the full use of his default action to cast a spell (cantrip through 9th) as a reaction with the Ready. The fighter gets.... one attack. Granted, the wizard has concentration, blah blah blah. This is on a ready. I just don't see where the fighter isn't being punished for rolling well.

Again, not a big deal for me. I detailed how I do initiative in a different thread that I feel is a superior method anyway. I just see the slight imbalance here and I think it is interesting

Yeah, I hear you. The fighter gets 1/2 to 1/3 of his action when readied (I guess 1/4 at super high levels), while the Wizard gets all his action when readied. On the other hand, if the Wizard readies a spell and it doesn't trigger, he loses that spell slot entirely. And if somebody attacks the wizard between when he readies the spell and when his action triggers, he has to make a concentration save or lose that spell. And since a readied spell requires concentration, whatever spell the Wizard might have been concentrating on before-hand is lost. It's a much more situational cost, because the Wizard runs a risk of losing the action and a spell slot altogether in the case of a failed concentration save, but will have other times where he's not concentrating on anything else and doesn't run a risk at getting an arrow in the face before his trigger goes off.

And, finally, my experience with spells and delayed actions is that people usually want the spell to go off first, because area of effect spells can go off before melee types charge in, or attacks can be made after Hold Person goes into effect, or similar. While I'm sure there are times when it makes sense for the Wizard to ready a spell attack, most of my experience has been, "if the caster wins initiative, this fight will be over in one round." (And if the caster doesn't win initiative, he might not make it into the second round...)

Anyway, I hear your complaint. It's definitely asymmetric, but I think it sort of balances itself out in the way that anything in 5e balances out. In the big picture, the fighter gets to "do something awesome" on most combat turns.