D&D 5E Is 5E Special

[EzekielRaiden]

What confused you about action and bonus action?

Three things.
1. The fact that the game constantly danced around whether or not you "have" an action or bonus action, which can be spent on certain things, or whether you simply "can take" an action and a bonus action. The circumlocution genuinely confused me until I realized they were trying to have their cake and eat it too, particularly because they frequently fail to use that circumlocution consistently.
2. The fact that there is no relationship whatsoever between bonus actions and "regular" actions. Why is it I cannot do do two things that are both bonus actions in the same round, that is, using my "regular" action to take a bonus action in addition to using my bonus action for that purpose? This has never been adequately explained to me by anyone. Particularly egregious because there are in fact some actions which can also (in some contexts) be bonus actions, so there's no clear separation between them (e.g. a Quickened fire bolt is a bonus action, while fire bolt normally is a "regular" action, so you CAN sometimes do the same thing with both your "regular" action and bonus action. Or how Cunning Action lets Rogues Dash as a bonus action, while still being able to Dash as a "regular" action if they wish.)
3. The fact that there are Actions and there are actions, and some actions are Actions and others are Bonus Actions and others are something that rides along while you perform some other Action/Bonus Action without you specifically doing anything, and some are Free Actions or even Non-Actions. This bit was particularly confusing because it meant the game was using literally one single word to refer to "anything you can do in combat (and often many things outside it)" and, at the same time, the narrow category of "stuff that is a big deal to do and isn't a Bonus Action, Free Action, etc." I here have used the capitalization to distinguish the former (lowercase-a "action," which is anything you can attempt, more or less) from the latter (uppercase-A "Action," which is things like Cast A Spell or Attack), but nothing in the game helps cleanly differentiate the two, and as shown above one is often forced to insert a clarifying adjective like "regular" to indicate Actions as opposed to Bonus Actions etc.

 

[Parmandur]

Three things.
1. The fact that the game constantly danced around whether or not you "have" an action or bonus action, which can be spent on certain things, or whether you simply "can take" an action and a bonus action. The circumlocution genuinely confused me until I realized they were trying to have their cake and eat it too, particularly because they frequently fail to use that circumlocution consistently.
2. The fact that there is no relationship whatsoever between bonus actions and "regular" actions. Why is it I cannot do do two things that are both bonus actions in the same round, that is, using my "regular" action to take a bonus action in addition to using my bonus action for that purpose? This has never been adequately explained to me by anyone. Particularly egregious because there are in fact some actions which can also (in some contexts) be bonus actions, so there's no clear separation between them (e.g. a Quickened fire bolt is a bonus action, while fire bolt normally is a "regular" action, so you CAN sometimes do the same thing with both your "regular" action and bonus action. Or how Cunning Action lets Rogues Dash as a bonus action, while still being able to Dash as a "regular" action if they wish.)
3. The fact that there are Actions and there are actions, and some actions are Actions and others are Bonus Actions and others are something that rides along while you perform some other Action/Bonus Action without you specifically doing anything, and some are Free Actions or even Non-Actions. This bit was particularly confusing because it meant the game was using literally one single word to refer to "anything you can do in combat (and often many things outside it)" and, at the same time, the narrow category of "stuff that is a big deal to do and isn't a Bonus Action, Free Action, etc." I here have used the capitalization to distinguish the former (lowercase-a "action," which is anything you can attempt, more or less) from the latter (uppercase-A "Action," which is things like Cast A Spell or Attack), but nothing in the game helps cleanly differentiate the two, and as shown above one is often forced to insert a clarifying adjective like "regular" to indicate Actions as opposed to Bonus Actions etc.

It really is quite simple when you remember that specific beats general.

 

[Vaalingrade]

You have an action every turn except when sometimes you have a bonus action, but not always.

Simple.

Way more simple than PF2's 3 actions, 4e's Standard, Move, Minor, or even 3e's Standard, Move, Swift, Immediate, Free, Kittens, I Like Ike, Electric Boogaloo.

Just tell me what turn currency I need to spend to do what, Bahamuht H Io, people. Bonus actions seem to exist because they got rid of movement as a discreet action but forgot that literally everything else in the game but casting ISO standard spells and the martial's class 'swing a hard thing' five minutes before going to print. Action economy has been a thing for decades and there's really no excuse for skimping on the design there.

 

[glass]

Argh. You made me actually fish out my 4e PH to make sure I wasn't misremembering things. I wasn't. I'm looking at the book right now: fighters have At-Will, Encounter, Daily, and Utility Exploits. Wizards have At-Will, Encounter, Daily, and Utility Spells. Yep, that's the same! I'm aware that Essentials gave variant rules years later to optionally break out of that structure, but still, my fundamental point is valid.

So you admit that you knew there were non-AEDU classes in 4e (although you are mistaken about their only being in Essentials), but are doubling down on there not being? Interesting approach. Also, despite quoting it, you ignore the point that even for EADU classes with exactly the same number of powers known of each type, the power do different things. Thus, the mechanics are not identical. QED.

I'm just saying that it achieved that amazing balance through a mechanism that most of the community, rightly or not, finds unacceptable.

"Most of the community" did nothing of the sort. I know it is an article of faith for edition warriors that 4e was a masive commercial failure, but it was actually stupendously successful by any metric other than "Hasbro core brand".

Interesting... you don't think things like the length of combats or the structure of including everyone in a skill challenge would have impacted things like the CR stream, especially since one of the reasons they moved to 5e was to streamline and speed up their play?

I don't think the length of combats would be meaningfully different. I don't know how SCs would work, but if they were an issue, they could always use whatever method they use now, which would of course work fine with 4e.

It's an action that is a bonus

Thank you. I earlier had to admit that I had never seen anyone confused by 5e's obscurantist action economy. But now I have, because a bonus action is not an action.

_
glass.

 

[Parmandur]

Thank you. I earlier had to admit that I had never seen anyone confused by 5e's obscurantist action economy. But now I have, because a bonus action is not an action.

Tell me, what is the nature of "act"?

 

[billd91]

Thank you. I earlier had to admit that I had never seen anyone confused by 5e's obscurantist action economy. But now I have, because a bonus action is not an action.

Is it a duck? It's a duck, isn't it?

 

[glass]

Tell me, what is the nature of "act"?

I cannot tell you that, because I have no idea what you are talking about (unless you are talking about the variant action economy from Pathfinder Unchained for PF1 that was the precursor for PF2's, but that seems unlikely).

Is it a duck? It's a duck, isn't it?

I do not get this one either.

_
glass.

 

[Parmandur]

Thank you. I earlier had to admit that I had never seen anyone confused by 5e's obscurantist action economy. But now I have, because a bonus action is not an action.

Honestly, this isn't hard unless one insists on trying to force it to be.

 

[glass]

Honestly, this isn't hard unless one insists on trying to force it to be.

You said that a bonus action is an action, when I believe it is not. Either you were confused when you wrote that post (if only momentarily) or I have been confused for years. Either way, confusion has been witnessed.

_
glass.

 

[Parmandur]

You said that a bonus action is an action, when I believe it is not. Either you were confused when you wrote that post (if only momentarily) or I have been confused for years. Either way, confusion has been witnessed.

_
glass.

Cool story.