D&D 5E Is 5E Special

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
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.
It does no such thing. You have an action. You can, if an ability or specific rule allows it, use a Bonus Action. There’s no dancing, no obfuscation.
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.
So, if you accepted that you don’t “have” bonus actions, you just may be able to take one due to a specific ability, this wouldn’t be confusing. I’m not sure why it is anyway, because it’s not especially weird to not be allowed to trade one type of action for another in a game.
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.)
Wait, how is it confusing that Quicken Action lets you use the Cast a Spell Action as a Bonus Action? Especially, how on earth does a sorcerer ability that explicitly changes the general rule when used confuse you about how the general rule works? Fire Bolt is a spell that requires an action to cast. That is a self contained rule. If you use Quicken Spell, then you are casting a spell with the Quicken Spell bonus action ability, using its specific rules that change how general Spellcasting rules work for a single specific instance.

I genuinely cannot fathom how that could ever confuse anyone.
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.
You’re never forced to do that, because a given thing either requires an Action, Reaction, Bonus Action, or no action, and the specific rules being referenced will tell you which. I can almost see where you’re coming from with some of this but number 3 is just…I’m sorry but it seems like you were confused because you insisted on reading the rules through the lense of past editions, rather than just reading it straight and playing the game.
But now I have, because a bonus action is not an action.
Yes, it is.
It's literally identical to 4e's Standard, Move, Minor, except that your movement is your whole turn until you run out.* Like that is literally what it is. They just go out of their way to obfuscate that and make it seem like Minor Bonus Actions are this totally weird thing unlocked by something rather than a resource you always have but which may not always be useful to you. Like healing word is literally a Bonus Action because that power was a Minor Action in 4e.

And people tell me I'm being ridiculous when I say 5e goes out of its way to obscure anything it actually learned from 4e...

*And that is a big part of why it confused me so. I couldn't understand what they were saying because they kept inconsistently circumlocuting it and pretending like it was this whole new and different thing when it was literally just the same system as before with "you can move whenever you like during your turn."
But it’s just…you have an Action, and you have movement, which you can spend however you want during your turn. If a feature or specific rule says so, you can take a special kind of action called a Bonus Action.

That…is very simple. They didn’t go out of their way to obscure anything. BA and MinorA are different enough they changed the name, movement isn’t a move action (like seriously the whole dynamic of movement is different) it’s just an amount you can move while doing other things, and the Action could be called a Standard Action I guess but why? What is gained?

You’re taking the Cast a Spell Action, Attack Action, Dash Action, etc. it’s not obscure. At all.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Funny thing is that if I understand it correctly, the reason we had such a slow release was because there were such low expectations. They explicitly stated that there would never be a PHB/DMG/MM II because it confused people new to the hobby.

I agree that it was the right call no matter the reason.

Interesting, I did not know that. Hopefully the massive success of 5E will not make The Powers That Be so overconfident/self-indulgent that they return to the diarrhea splatbook stream of editions past. The online Unearthed Arcanas have been a good vehicle for testing half-baked ideas and separating wheat from chaff. In the old days a lot of that chaff would have wound up in (physical) print.
 
Last edited:

EzekielRaiden

Follower of the Way
It does no such thing. You have an action. You can, if an ability or specific rule allows it, use a Bonus Action. There’s no dancing, no obfuscation.

So, if you accepted that you don’t “have” bonus actions, you just may be able to take one due to a specific ability, this wouldn’t be confusing. I’m not sure why it is anyway, because it’s not especially weird to not be allowed to trade one type of action for another in a game.

Wait, how is it confusing that Quicken Action lets you use the Cast a Spell Action as a Bonus Action? Especially, how on earth does a sorcerer ability that explicitly changes the general rule when used confuse you about how the general rule works? Fire Bolt is a spell that requires an action to cast. That is a self contained rule. If you use Quicken Spell, then you are casting a spell with the Quicken Spell bonus action ability, using its specific rules that change how general Spellcasting rules work for a single specific instance.

I genuinely cannot fathom how that could ever confuse anyone.

You’re never forced to do that, because a given thing either requires an Action, Reaction, Bonus Action, or no action, and the specific rules being referenced will tell you which. I can almost see where you’re coming from with some of this but number 3 is just…I’m sorry but it seems like you were confused because you insisted on reading the rules through the lense of past editions, rather than just reading it straight and playing the game.

Yes, it is.

But it’s just…you have an Action, and you have movement, which you can spend however you want during your turn. If a feature or specific rule says so, you can take a special kind of action called a Bonus Action.

That…is very simple. They didn’t go out of their way to obscure anything. BA and MinorA are different enough they changed the name, movement isn’t a move action (like seriously the whole dynamic of movement is different) it’s just an amount you can move while doing other things, and the Action could be called a Standard Action I guess but why? What is gained?

You’re taking the Cast a Spell Action, Attack Action, Dash Action, etc. it’s not obscure. At all.
All I can say is: your efforts to explain it are exactly what confused me, until I eventually figured it out on my own.

Not joking. This is exactly the thought process that confused me until I realized what was actually going on.
 

glass

(he, him)
Cool story.
Not a story. It factually happened in this very thread, for everyone to see.

It was not stupendously successful compared to 5e.
5e did not exist at the time. It's unprecedented success was not foreseen even by WotC.

So later in the life cycle. Thanks for the deets, I haven't played 4e since 5e was released.
So long after both PHB3 and Essentials came out? Anyway, the claim was that 4e did not have things that it had. That it arguably did not have them for the first two years is irrelevant goalpost moving.

(Arguably because class feature mean even the PHB1 classes have slightly different power schedules in practice.)

I agree that it [not releasing PHB2 and 3] was the right call no matter the reason.
It was. PHB2 and 3 under that name were massive mistakes, regardless of the quality of what was contained therein. On that subject, are we considering marketting an internal or external factor? I must admit, I have not been entirely consistant in my thinking about it thus far.

I should note it also reduces the chance of succeeding. A curve does that.
Specifically, it makes you more likely to succeed on things that you were already above-average at, less likely on things you were below-average at.

_
glass.
 
Last edited:

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
Funny thing is that if I understand it correctly, the reason we had such a slow release was because there were such low expectations. They explicitly stated that there would never be a PHB/DMG/MM II because it confused people new to the hobby.

I agree that it was the right call no matter the reason.

Eh. I think it's a kinda wash.

The error 4e made was to not pool powers of the same source together in order to save page space for missing classes. Had they another year, they could have got avenger, barbarian, bard, druid, monk, and the rest in the PHB.

5e's "No New Classes Unless a setting demands it" and no "No new PHB/DMG" policies left a whole lot of potential money off the table. WOTC missed out on a whole bunch of money not making new classes and DM options. Oh they calculated.. Nah buddy.

A 5e book with a summoner class, a pet class, the artificer reprinted with 5+ subclasses, and 2-3other classes and more races would have sold like hotcakes,

A 5e book with a bunch of optional variants to change 5einto different genres and styles and match the fantasies of media after 1995 would have been a money printer.

5e missed out on a lot of sales.
 

clearstream

(He, Him)
Regards the action economy, I felt the designers learned and refined with each edition. For example:
  • 3.5 Free -> 4.0 Free -> 5.0 free (includes flourishes, communication, interact with object)
  • 3.5 Standard -> Standard (can be substituted for Move or Minor) -> 5.0 take one action (can be substituted via Dash for a Move)
  • 3.5 Move (can't be split, includes interacting with objects) -> 4.0 Move (can be substituted for Minor) -> 5.0 Move (can be split)
  • 3.5 Swift -> 4.0 Minor -> 5.0 Bonus
  • 4.0 Extra Action -> in a way this feeds into the 5.0 Bonus action
  • 3.5 Immediate (1/rnd) -> 4.0 Immediate (1/rnd) -> 5.0 Reaction (1/rnd)
  • 3.5 Opportunity Attack (1/rnd) -> Opportunity Action (1/turn) -> Reaction (specialised use thereof)
4e had an extremely well-designed action-economy from a tactics point of view. For example, through substituting actions there were five combinations of actions one could achieve in a turn. 5e has the most streamlined action-economy, handling all responsive or interrupting actions through reaction, and all swift and extra actions through bonus actions. I think bonus action as a mechanical resource is an extremely efficient way to support beneficial combat abilities (if they all route through an action, then they compete with the basic attack, and at the same time it caps them at one per rnd no matter how many you have, which makes the game balance more resilient to future design). Decisions like adding an overt Dash action rather than writing in an underlying action-substitution rule make 5e easier for new players to understand.

5e wasn't designed in ignorance of what went before. It was able to succeed as well as it has because it stands on the shoulders of giants.
 
Last edited:

clearstream

(He, Him)
Eh. I think it's a kinda wash.

The error 4e made was to not pool powers of the same source together in order to save page space for missing classes. Had they another year, they could have got avenger, barbarian, bard, druid, monk, and the rest in the PHB.

5e's "No New Classes Unless a setting demands it" and no "No new PHB/DMG" policies left a whole lot of potential money off the table. WOTC missed out on a whole bunch of money not making new classes and DM options. Oh they calculated.. Nah buddy.

A 5e book with a summoner class, a pet class, the artificer reprinted with 5+ subclasses, and 2-3other classes and more races would have sold like hotcakes,

A 5e book with a bunch of optional variants to change 5einto different genres and styles and match the fantasies of media after 1995 would have been a money printer.

5e missed out on a lot of sales.
There may have been cannabilistic effects that they decided to avoid (where a publisher is effectively competing with themselves.) In any case, it seems hard to square those arguments up with WotC growing its revenue for nine consecutive years. Per my last post, there is to my observation evidence that WotC strives to learn from their past.
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
There may have been cannabilistic effects that they decided to avoid (where a publisher is effectively competing with themselves.) In any case, it seems hard to square those arguments up with WotC growing its revenue for nine consecutive years. Per my last post, there is to my observation evidence that WotC strives to learn from their past.
There's nothing to cannibalize.

That's my point. WOTC didn't create a bunch of content many 5e fans wanted. This allowed 3rd parties to fill that whole with WOTC only getting a fraction if the 3rd party used specific services and publishing.

The product is out there made by 3rd parties.
WOTC is just not making money on it or pennies if they are.

Some of my money went to Morris and not WOTC because WOTC refused to make some desired content 5e.
 

Imaro

Legend
There's nothing to cannibalize.

That's my point. WOTC didn't create a bunch of content many 5e fans wanted. This allowed 3rd parties to fill that whole with WOTC only getting a fraction if the 3rd party used specific services and publishing.

The product is out there made by 3rd parties. WOTC is just not making money on it or pennies if they are.

Some of my money went to Morris and not WOTC because WOTC refused to make some desired content 5e.
I think the question is... did any of these 3rd party products sell in the magnitudes that the WotC books did (IMO this is what constitutes whether "many" fans wanted it or not)? If a particular product did then it may have been worth it for WotC to publish a similar book for 5e. But if not, that product type probably wasn't published because they didn't believe there was enough of a demand to make it worthwhile.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
All I can say is: your efforts to explain it are exactly what confused me, until I eventually figured it out on my own.

Not joking. This is exactly the thought process that confused me until I realized what was actually going on.
Okay but how? I genuinely do not understand how these things could be confusing.
There's nothing to cannibalize.

That's my point. WOTC didn't create a bunch of content many 5e fans wanted. This allowed 3rd parties to fill that whole with WOTC only getting a fraction if the 3rd party used specific services and publishing.

The product is out there made by 3rd parties. WOTC is just not making money on it or pennies if they are.

Some of my money went to Morris and not WOTC because WOTC refused to make some desired content 5e.
You know the success of 3pp sells more PHBs, right?

Like part of why 5e is bigger than any iteration of D&D ever is that they aren’t trying to compete with Kobold Press, they’re supporting them and giving them room to grow.
 

Remove ads

Top