Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 29400" data-attributes="member: 2011">Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Another reference not citedIt 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.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.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.</blockquote>

Verification