5' step, partial actions and haste

[Caliban]

When you Ready an action, you have to have a specific trigger action specified. (PHB, page 134, Readying an Action: "The partial action comes before the action that triggers it. For the rest of the fight, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action.")

You can't just have it trigger on nothing, and it has to be in response to an action of an opponent. (Remember, an individual attack is not an action.)

 

[Artoomis]

This is off our topic, but was so misleading that I had to chime in on it.

(Remember, an individual attack is not an action.)

WHAT?!? Where did THAT come from?

The ATTACK ACTION (from page 122) is an ACTION. How can you possibly say that an individual attack is NOT an action?


Page 122, right hand column, uner ATTACK ACTIONS, unser "Attack":

The attack action is a standard action...

How is that not clear??

I have to assume that you meant something else, for you are not usually that blatantly wrong about such a basic rule.

Unless you are trying to say that an individual attack from a Full Attack action is not an action, in which case, sure, that's true, but what difference does that make? One can certainly trigger a readied action on the opponent's attack (whether the full attack action or the attack action matters not).

When you Ready an action, you have to have a specific trigger action specified.

Almost right, but not quite.

A readied action can have multiple triggers. From page 134:

...the partial action you will take and the []conditionts[/i] [emphasis added] under which youi will take it.

Note: "conditions," plural. So, while I agree you need to trigger off a specific action, it appears also that you do not have to be overly specific because you may choose more than one action as your trigger.

Now, of course, only one action actually triggers the partial action - one that meets the "conditions" you declared.

That quote you used is right after the bit about "choosing your conditions" and in no way implies you can specify only one "action" for the trigger, as you seeem to suggest.

To be perfectly clear so that no one is misled:

1. For a readied action you must declare the "conditions" under which you will execute your partial action.

2. These "conditions" must have at least one "action" that can be recognized as meeting those "conditions".

 

[Artoomis]

After reviewing opposing views, it seems that allowing a 5'-step with the additional partial action from Haste is simply a matter of re-defining the term "round."

You see, I thought something that refered to your actions within a round meant it refered to ALL you actions within a round. Silly me. Apparantly others feel this is an incorrect definition in that Haste actions don't "count" as part of a round.

At least that's the only way I can see ignoring the statement that clearly states that you only get one 5'-step if you make no other movement in a round. The argument that the statement is in the MEA section, and can thus be generally ignored, is specious and totally without merit. Let;s review the statment on page 121 to see if it has general applicability:

If you move no actual distance in a round (commonly because you have swapped your move for one or more move-equivalent actions), you can take one 5-foot step either before, during or after the action.

The parenthetical note can only be taken to mean that there are more reasons to NOT take any move in a round besides swapping movement for MEAs. This means that this statement has more applicabaility than just for MEAs.

I'm pretty sure KarinsDad won't buy this argument because his argument is based more on how he'd like the rules to be than how they are stated. Caliban, on the other hand, really should realize the rules are pretty clear on this.

This leaves only the obvious discrpency in the definition of a "round."

From the glossary:

Round: A 6-second unit of game time used to manage combat. Every combatant may take at least one action every round.

I'm confused. How does "move no actual distance in a round" not include the extra partial action from Haste?

 

[Uller]

Re: Re: Example of Abuse

How does this allow you to move more than your total speed?

You are hasted. Typically, a normal human in light armor can move 120 feet (for a run) in the normal action and another 30 feet in the partial action. That’s 150 feet. So, 120 feet run plus ready a partial which includes a 5’ step is 125 feet. Less than the 150 feet, not more.

No...you misunderstood what I said. With the ready example, the character is NOT hasted. If the restriction on 5' steps described under MEAs applies to MEAs ONLY, then a NON-HASTED character can move, ready an action AND take a 5' step. Sorry KD...it makes no sense that a character performing a standard action is restricted to an MEA + a single attack(for instance) while a character performing a ready action may do an MEA, Ready, attack and then take a 5' step on the trigger.

 

[KarinsDad]

Re: Re: Re: Another reference not cited

Table 8-3 : Miscellaneous Partial Actions. Includes all actions listed as Standard or MEA on Table 8-4. Allow a 5' step, unless a variant charge action.

Table 8-4 : Ready (triggers a partial action).

So I can Run 120 feet as my "normal" round, and then for my Hasted partial action, I can take a 5' step and Ready a partial action.

Which action? 5' step and Ready a partial action.

Which action? 5' step and Ready a partial action.

Which action? 5' step and Ready a partial action.

And keep 5' stepping all the way through the Kraken's 100' Reach, provoking no AoOs with my auto-trigger Readies, until I'm close enough to cast Harm defensively.

-Hyp.

Yes, you can do this according to the PHB rules. However, the readied rules break the laws of physics all over the place. For example, you can partial charge 30 feet before someone else says a one word quickened spell, even though you could not know he was doing that until he starts. Or, you can counter a Haste spell by casting a Slow spell, even though you did not know which spell you would be countering. Hence, you cast the same level Slow spell faster than he casts his Haste, or vice versa. Hmmm.

So, do not be surprised if yet again, there is a way to break the laws of physics with a readied action. There are a boatload of holes in them.

Let’s look at the DMG rules though.

DMG page 63 “The ready action is particularly open-ended and requires that you make the players using it be as specific as possible about what their characters are doing. ” and later on “and, you are justified in making the player identify a specific foe, either one that the character is currently aware of or one that might come from a certain direction”.

The DMG quite explicitly states that the character cannot do just anything he wishes to do with a readied action. He must be very specific.

I’ll give you an example. In our game a few weeks back, I had an invisible teleporting Demon bouncing back and forth between a series of tunnels leading to a large underground cavern that the PCs where fighting other NPCs. So, one of the characters had a Wand of Dispel Magic, thought the Demon was going to show up from one tunnel, and said that he would use it if he heard the Demon casting. The Demon showed up in a different tunnel, the character heard it, and the player grabbed is D20 and said “Ok, I do an area Dispel Magic”.

I said, “Sorry, but you were concentrating on that tunnel, not this tunnel behind you”.

The players all argued that this did not matter since there is no facing in DND (quite a long time since they were on their last legs and the Demon was going to finish some of them off). So, finally, I relented, grumbled how I hated readied actions in the first place since logically they do not make sense, and continued the game. Later on, I showed the players this section of the DMG and said “You got one freebie guys, you won’t get a second one”.

The same applies here.

Readied actions are open-ended and the DMG allows the DM a lot of latitude on what condition cannot be readied on and what actions cannot be done.

So, the question comes down to whether specifying that your readied action will be to move 5 feet and state another readied action IS specific enough.

I would say no. Why? Because you are not specifying what your next readied action will be. You are leaving it open-ended. You are saying in a GENERAL way that you will ready to ready to ready, ad nauseum, but you are not specifically indicating what you will be doing. Specific actions would be things that the character would do such as swinging a sword, or casting this specific spell. Declaring a readied action is not declaring a specific thing.

Hence, my interpretation of the “must declare a specific action” portion of the DMG is that you cannot ready an action to ready an action. A readied action is not a specific action, rather it is an unknown open-ended action which may or may not occur.

Feel free to think differently.


Now, how does this apply to your question? You are using this example to illustrate that the multiple 5 foot per round interpretation must be broken if you can do this. Well, first off, the readied rules are already broken. Secondly, the DMG has an out clause for the DM, explicitly to be used when he feels that the readied rules are too open-ended. The designers realized that the ready rules can be abused, hence, they explicitly gave the DM a way to put a stop to it.

Hence, just because you found a way to break the ready rules with more than a single 5 foot step really does not support your position that more than one 5 foot step is not allowed. All it did was illustrate a hole in the ready rules for which I could give a bunch of other examples (like the ones above).

 

[Artoomis]

Let's deal with the OTHER quote on 5-foot steps.

Chapter 8 (Combat), Combat Basics, movement, page 117:

If your entire move for the round [emphaisis added] is 5 feet (a 5-foot step), enemies do not get attacks of opportunity for you moving.

Now lets recall that the primary feature of a 5-foot step is that it doesn't really "count" as movement, so that AoOs from movement don't apply.

Those on the opposite side of this argument from me would like to say that this quote can be ignored because it is refering to AoOs. That argument has no merit.

IF

An AoO can be avoided if you take ONLY a 5-foot step in a ROUND, and other movement would draw movement-caused AoOs

THEN

Only one 5-foot move is allowed per round. Somebody actually suggested that you could get two, but the second one would not avoid an AoO. But a move that does not avoid an AoO is NOT a 5-foot move, by definition.

To restate:

Normally, any movement may draw an AoO.

The 5-foot step is an exception to this rule.

You avoid an AoO from movement only if all your movement in the round is 5 feet (a 5-foot step).

Those three statements seem indisputable to me because they come straight from the rules with no interpretation whatsoever.

Taking those statement together, it seems clear that only 1 5-foot step is allowed per round. This precludes the extra partial attack from Haste allowing another 5-foot step. unless, of course, you redefine "round."

 

[Uller]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Another reference not cited

Now, how does this apply to your question? You are using this example to illustrate that the multiple 5 foot per round interpretation must be broken if you can do this. Well, first off, the readied rules are already broken.

No one is saying that your interpritation is "broken". We are saying it is wrong. We believe it is wrong because the 5' step is defined under MEAs because that is where they are most applicable during the normal course of the game but that doesn't mean that that definition doesn't applie to all other 5' steps. We give examples not to show your interpretation as broken, but illogical.

Here's another. According to your interpretation, a hasted character may take standard action that includes an MEA and a 5' step(maybe draw a sword, 5' step and attack) and then an extra partial action that also includes a 5' step(single attack and 5' step back). But then you cannot do the reverse(because your MEA is not allowed to include a 5' step if it is AFTER a partial action that also included a 5' step since you have moved during the round). It is total nonsense.

Here is another: A partial action can be an MEA. So what if you moved during your normal action, then used an MEA as your partial action(say...draw a new weapon). Can you take a 5' step or not? According to KD and co, you can since it is your extra partial action due to haste, but this breaks the "one-per-round" rule on p121 of the PHB since you are doing an MEA and have already moved during your round...which is it? It can't be both.

If readied actions bother you so much, then just house rule it that a free action cannot trigger a readied action. Problem solved.

 

[KarinsDad]

Re: Re: Re: Example of Abuse

No...you misunderstood what I said. With the ready example, the character is NOT hasted. If the restriction on 5' steps described under MEAs applies to MEAs ONLY, then a NON-HASTED character can move, ready an action AND take a 5' step. Sorry KD...it makes no sense that a character performing a standard action is restricted to an MEA + a single attack(for instance) while a character performing a ready action may do an MEA, Ready, attack and then take a 5' step on the trigger.

Fair enough.

This is a good example (assuming you meant move and not MEA at the end of it) of what should be allowed and not allowed WITHIN AN ACTION (by action here, I mean a full round action or a standard action, not the sub-action move, MEA or partials within them).

It does not really address the issue of what should be allowed and not allowed within multiple actions.

So, absolutely. I agree with you that within his standard or normal action, he SHOULD be allowed to move 5 feet only if he has not already moved.

Unfortunately, this is not the rule. Let’s take two examples:

25 PC 1
20 NPC 1
15 PC 2
10 NPC 2

If PC 1 readies an action on NPC 1 and it resolves just before NPC 1’s action, then the stack becomes:

20+ PC 1
20 NPC 1
15 PC 2
10 NPC 2

If PC 1 readies an action on NPC 2 and it resolves just before NPC 2’s action, then the stack becomes:

20 NPC 1
15 PC 2
10+ PC 1
10 NPC 2

So, you can (justifiably) be annoyed that in the first case, PC 1 gave up nothing and gained an extra 5 feet.

In the second case, it is not as annoying since although PC 1 gained 5 feet, he lost time within the initiative sequence. If he does it again on the next round, but this time on NPC 1, then it becomes:

20 NPC 1
15 PC 2
10+ PC 1
10 NPC 2

20 NPC 1
15 PC 2
10 NPC 2 (PC 1 readies into the next round)

20+ PC 1
20 NPC 1
15 PC 2
10 NPC 2

Then, he did 2 "normal" actions in 3 rounds plus two 5 foot steps. Everyone else got 3 normal actions. So, although he gained 10 extra feet, he lost a normal action doing that. And that, of course, assumes that his readied actions actually occur and that he does not lose his actions completely.


Your entire argument here is that the INTENT of the rule should be to not allow an extra 5 foot step in the case of a readied action. I agree with this. However, there is no rule that states that. I will address intent in more detail with my next post.

 

[KarinsDad]

Effectively, my entire argument within this entire thread has basically been to only allow a 5 foot move as either part of normal movement, or as a single 5 foot step if no movement has been done within the “overall action”. We really do not have a good terminology for the concept of either a full round action, or a standard action, or a partial action. I use the phrase “overall action”. The PHB uses the term round which then causes confusion for things like Haste where you get more than one “overall action” in a round.

So, for your example, the “overall action” in a normal non-hasted round is a standard action which consists of move + readied attack vs. move + attack. There should be no 5 foot adjustment within the readied attack since the character has already moved WITHIN THE ACTION.


And actually, this brings up a point for Hypersmurf’s infinite readied action example.

If the DM allows you to ready to ready to ready, it is still all one action, just being extended back in time. Hence, the first readied action should allow a 5 foot move (if no movement has not been made yet), but subsequent ones should not.

Granted the MEA section on page 121 uses the word round instead of “overall action”, but using that terminology and using it for all types of actions really does clean this stuff up.



The real problem here is one of the word round. A round is six seconds. As writers of a book, the designers could not put caveats on the word round every time they talked about it.

When hasted, your “round” is really four second long, not six. But, for simplicity sake with initiatives, the designers have everyone doing all of their actions within that same singleton of time, you just effectively get 1.5 times as many actions when Hasted (basically).

The spell Haste states that you get an extra partial action in addition to your normal action. This is practically the only place in the entire book that it is even talked about. I think that Haste is a major oversight on the part of the designers and that their generic use of the term round is being literally used to include Hasted rounds when it should only be used to include “overall action”.


But, example after example illustrates that the intent of the designers appears to be the following:

1) You can only move 5 foot within an “overall action” if you have not yet moved (regardless of this only being in the MEA section).
2) You do not get AoOed within an “overall action” if you have only moved 5 foot or have only double moved, but you can move later within the round if you have another action and the AoO is not retroactive (the double move rules on page 126 illustrate this).
3) The beginning of your next action resets conditions (expertise, power attack, fighting defensively).

But, that is the problem with intent. In all three of these cases (including Uller’s and Hypersmurf’s examples which falls into #1), the rules do not STATE this. They merely imply this intent.

But, you cannot have your cake and eat it too. You cannot say that the intent implied by #1 of a single 5 foot move per “overall action” for ALL action types (full, standard, or partial), not just MEAs, without also conceding the intent implied by #3 which is that the end of the action resets the clock.

And, that’s what the people on the other side of the fence are trying to do. They are trying (and Uller’s and Hypersmurf’s examples illustrate it) to show that the intent of #1 is applicable to all action types, even though it is only specifically called out within the MEA section. But, they are denying the intent of examples like #3.


The problem is that the rules do not really take into account the concept of multiple “overall actions” within a round and use the two concepts interchangeably with the use of the word round. Hence, we are basically left with trying to interpret the intent of the designers.

 

[KarinsDad]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Another reference not cited

No one is saying that your interpritation is "broken". We are saying it is wrong. We believe it is wrong because the 5' step is defined under MEAs because that is where they are most applicable during the normal course of the game but that doesn't mean that that definition doesn't applie to all other 5' steps. We give examples not to show your interpretation as broken, but illogical.

Here's another. According to your interpretation, a hasted character may take standard action that includes an MEA and a 5' step(maybe draw a sword, 5' step and attack) and then an extra partial action that also includes a 5' step(single attack and 5' step back). But then you cannot do the reverse(because your MEA is not allowed to include a 5' step if it is AFTER a partial action that also included a 5' step since you have moved during the round). It is total nonsense.

It is not really nonsense, it is an inconsistency caused by the fact that the designers did not take into account multiple actions within a round.

You show me an example of an inconsistency and claim it is nonsense. Ok, I will show you an example of an inconsistency and claim it is nonsense.

A slowed character gets one partial action per round. He moves 5 feet and attacks.
A normal character gets one normal action per round. He moves 30 feet and attacks.
A hasted character gets one normal action per round and one partial action. He should be able to do the same actions as anyone else, so he moves 5 feet and attacks, then he moves 30 feet and attacks. According to your “literal” interpretation of the MEA rule, he cannot due this.

Just like your example, this is not really nonsense. It is just an inconsistency within the rules because the designers did not take multi-action rounds into account.


This entire discussion is solely due to the fact that the designers did not take into account multiple actions within a round and did not give us explicit rules for it.

If you use the concept of “elements of the game” resetting at the beginning of a character’s next action (like with Expertise and Power Attack), then this nonsense totally disappears. You could move 5 foot within any action where you do not move.

What is nonsense is that people (on both sides of the fence) are looking at this entire issue with a rules lawyer mentality and not with a what makes sense with regard to the other rules when it is patently obvious that the designers did NOT take multiple action rounds into account at all.

There are no rules for multi-action rounds. We are using rules for single action rounds to claim what must be applicable for multi-action rounds.

The heated discussions are almost always ones where the designers did not take something into account. Opps. Even the Sage has flip flopped with his answers on questions in this area.

Here is another: A partial action can be an MEA. So what if you moved during your normal action, then used an MEA as your partial action(say...draw a new weapon). Can you take a 5' step or not? According to KD and co, you can since it is your extra partial action due to haste, but this breaks the "one-per-round" rule on p121 of the PHB since you are doing an MEA and have already moved during your round...which is it? It can't be both.

Again, this is an inconsistency brought about by the fact that the MEA rule does not take into account multi-action rounds.

DMG page 62. “While the combat actions defined in the PHB are numerous and fairly comprehensive, they cannot begin to cover every possible action that a character might want to take. Your job is to make up rules on the spot to handle such things.”

The designers KNEW that they could not take everything into account.

What can and cannot be done while Hasted just happens to be one of them. We are teetering on the middle of the fence here. If either side could prove their case conclusively, we would not be having this long drawn out discussion. Someone would point to the rules and the other side would not be able to say anything about it. But, that is not the case.


Actually, your examples are fine. I like them. But, you are using them to illustrate that you should be able to correct one inconsistency within the rules by creating another. As you would say, nonsense.

I, on the other hand, am using it to illustrate that the rules do not take multi-action rounds into account and are incomplete.

According to the RULES, both interpretations are valid.

If readied actions bother you so much, then just house rule it that a free action cannot trigger a readied action. Problem solved.

This does not solve the problem, it just solves one example of the problem.

Readied actions do bother me. But, this house rule would still allow a character to move 30 feet and attack before another character can draw a sword. It still would allow a character to cast Slow before another could cast Haste, even though the second guy pulls out his components and starts before the first guy does.

The problem really is with the open-ended nature of readied actions to do long duration actions before others can do the same or shorter duration actions, even thought the second character starts first.