D&D 5E Action Types - Rules As Written

[redrick]

I’m personally a fan of Bonus Actions, but if one was of a mind to remove them, spells like this could be handled by including the ability to do something else as part of the effect of the spell. Kind of like green flame blade and the other gish spells from SCAG, Healing Word could allow you to make an Attack or cast a Cantrip as part of the action used to cast it, for example.

Removing Bonus Actions ultimately just means anything that would allow multiple actions in one turn needs to be modeled using exceptions-based design. Like how every spell or ability that forces a Saving Throw has to tell you that as part of its effect, in a single-action system, any ability that allowed you to do more than a single action would normally allow would just have to tell you so as part of its effect.

Removing bonus actions could have a big knock-on for the current Cleric design. Healing Word becomes very different in flavor if it is tied to making an attack. As it exists now, it is a spell that can be cast verbally while the Cleric is doing anything else. Turning a crank on a drawbridge. Disengaging to try and flee from combat, shouting a prayer back to raise a fallen comrade. There other spells that function similarly — spiritual weapon, for instance.

All the other suggestions seem pretty elegant.

 

[Yaarel]

Any ability that allowed you to do more than a single action would normally allow would just have to tell you so as part of its effect.

Some bonus actions are a complex effect of an action. Also, some bonus actions seem like a reaction, that occurs when a specific type of action happens.



In the action economy - probably the most salient types are:

• Action (simple or complex, depending on feature, such as wielding a bow is a complex Action)
• Move
• Reaction (if a Trigger)
• Flourish (as a minor reaction if part of an Action or or Move, such as an object interaction)
• Free (dont sweat it: speech, senses, looking around, dodging an attack)

 

[Charlaquin]

Removing bonus actions could have a big knock-on for the current Cleric design. Healing Word becomes very different in flavor if it is tied to making an attack. As it exists now, it is a spell that can be cast verbally while the Cleric is doing anything else. Turning a crank on a drawbridge. Disengaging to try and flee from combat, shouting a prayer back to raise a fallen comrade. There other spells that function similarly — spiritual weapon, for instance.

All the other suggestions seem pretty elegant.

Ok, so model it less like Green Flame Blade and more like Haste. “When you use your Action to cast this spell, you can take another Action on the same turn. This action cannot be used to cast a spell, other than a cantrip.” Alternatively, you could prescribe specific actions it allows you to take. Point is, you could theoretically accomplish anything Bonus Actions allow you do with exceptions-based design. It just means that you have to spell out in the spell or ability that using it also allows you to do other stuff, and what specifically it allows you to do.

 

[Yaarel]

Probably, the Flourish (opening a door, drawing a weapon) and the Free Action (speech, dodging attack as part of AC) can be considered the same type of action, a Flourish. This seems to be the original intent of Players Handbook, where both speech and object interaction are lumped together under ‘flourishes’. The only difficulty is, the assertion that speech can only occur during ones turn. This is probably an accident of wording. By extension, other kinds of Flourish also occur during someone elses turn.

In other words, only an Action and a Move(ment) must happen during ones turn. Therefore, a Flourish to draw a bow as part of an attack must also happen during a turn, and a Flourish to open a door as part of a Move must also happen during a turn.

However, a Flourish might also be part of something that happens during someone elses turn, such as Speech to shout out a warning as part of your own observation of events taking place, or perhaps some minor object interaction as part of an interruptive Reaction.

In other words, a Flourish might happen at any time: whether it is your turn as part of your Action or Move, or when it isnt your turn as part of something else that you are doing when it isnt your turn, including Senses and any Reaction.



A DM adjudicates all Flourishes, according to the context of how plausible it sounds during the 6-second narrative of simultaneous events. Some flourishes are free, and some use up the 1 Flourish available. Different DMs will have different adjudications. For example, some DMs allow both a sheathing of one weapon and a drawing of an other weapon as part of the same Flourish. Other DMs, only allow one of these. Yet other DMs might allow both if fulfilling some requirement, such as high Dexterity, special equipment or location of sheath, some special affinity with weapons, or so on. A DM is supposed to adjudicate flourishes, and such decisions palpably affect the feel of the campaign.

 

[Yaarel]

In sum:

• Action
• Move
• Reaction
• Flourish

 

[redrick]

“When you use your Action to cast this spell, you can take another Action on the same turn. This action cannot be used to cast a spell, other than a cantrip.” Alternatively, you could prescribe specific actions it allows you to take. Point is, you could theoretically accomplish anything Bonus Actions allow you do with exceptions-based design. It just means that you have to spell out in the spell or ability that using it also allows you to do other stuff, and what specifically it allows you to do.

This works, but now you are just creating an un-named category of spells that allow you to cast them while taking another action. A sort of, "bonus spell." At which point, just having a thing called a bonus action seems way more attractive.

 

[Yaarel]

• Action (sometimes complex, such as an Action using a Bonus Action)
• Move
• Reaction
• Flourish (sometimes free, such as a Flourish to speak)

 

[Charlaquin]

This works, but now you are just creating an un-named category of spells that allow you to cast them while taking another action. A sort of, "bonus spell." At which point, just having a thing called a bonus action seems way more attractive.

Well yeah, that’s why I prefer Bonus Actions to be a thing that exist (even if I would call them something less misleading.) That’s just a feature of exceptions-based design.

 

[Hriston]

The only difficulty is, the assertion that speech can only occur during ones turn.

Here's the thing: there really isn't any time during the round when it isn't your turn. The round is a roughly six-second period of overlapping turns of about six seconds each. Higher initiative means your movement and action is completed first. It also lets you be the first to speak.

 

[Hussar]

Of course, there's the other question of what do you mean by speaking. If it's a couple of words, fair enough, but if you're reciting the entire text of the Iliad that's something else.

I think the ruling about talking comes from the idea of allowing the DM to cut short endless planning in the middle of combat. Nothing drags the game out worse than watching a group get analysis paralysis every single round as everyone tries to weigh in on the absolute optimal tactical plan for every single action.

So, this cuts through that and says, "Look, if you want to shout a warning, fair enough, that's a non-action, but, stopping the action to have an extensive conversation about the merits of magic missile vs burning hands for the next fifteen minutes is off the bloody table. OK?!?!?"