D&D 5E Accidental cheating due to forgetting action economies?

[Gnashtooth]

So I've noticed a lot of this at my table:

Players that switch characters and classes often between games don't read and re-read the combat sections, and sneak in extra actions until someone catches them.

I don't think anyone's doing this on purpose. Most recently is the TWF bonus action not stacking with the rogue's dash/dodge/disengage.

Not a criticism, but I see this a LOT with the ex-3.5 players in my group.

How do I help move them away from this behavior?

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Just keep playing more, they should eventually get the hang of it - though a helpful reminder along the lines of "didn't you already use your bonus action for this round?" could speed that process along.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

It's not cheating if you're not doing it on purpose.

My player do mistakes all the time, because they are humans (in real life). No sweat, I correct their actions until they learn it.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

I had some problems with characters that were concentrating on spells and forgetting to save after taking damage. I told their players I have too many things to track and I won't be tracking minutia about their characters, so, if they take damage and forget about concentration, once I realize it happened, they immediately lose the spell they were concentrating on and take 1d6 damage per level of the spell (we call it mana burn ). They solved that by placing a token above their hit point total on the character sheet whenever they're concentrating on a spell.

In your case, I'd advice you to give players a token representing the bonus action. Once they use it, they'll know that they can't do anything else requiring the token. I believe it should help them.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

I had some problems with characters that were concentrating on spells and forgetting to save after taking damage. I told their players I have too many things to track and I won't be tracking minutia about their characters, so, if they take damage and forget about concentration, once I realize it happened, they immediately lose the spell they were concentrating on and take 1d6 damage per level of the spell (we call it mana burn ). They solved that by placing a token above their hit point total on the character sheet whenever they're concentrating on a spell.

I had my players forgetting to make concentration saves after taking damage too, and I also told them I have enough to track so they can track their concentration... except if they forget, when we realize later we just have them roll the saves they've forgotten to make and then proceed on.

Why did you feel the need to have the spell not just automatically fail, but also potentially seriously harm the character, as a result of an innocent slip of the mind?

 

[77IM]

Personally, I think this is a flaw in the 5e rules. In fact, the "bonus" action is so confusing that after a year of playing, I've concluded that it's my biggest gripe with 5e.

"Bonus" just sounds like, a free add-on with no strings attached. "One per turn" is a pretty significant string, so that's a failure of natural language. I think they could have done better by replacing the term "bonus action" with "second action," since it's clearer that it won't stack (because then it would be a third action). For example, rogue's Cunning Action could say, "You can take a second action on each of your turns, but at least one of your actions must be Dash, Disengage or Hide." A second-action spell could instead read, "On a turn when you cast this spell, you can take a second action, but you can't use it to cast another spell unless that other spell is a cantrip." This language would also allow second-action effects to substitute for your main action, which is something players expect (and I see no reason why a person shouldn't be allowed to, e.g., cast healing word and initiate barbarian rage in the same turn).

It's also not very intuitive which things are bonus actions and which are regular actions, and the way Extra Attack interacts with TWF is especially confusing. Players don't expect an off-hand attack to trade off with Dash/Disengage/Hide, especially when they see the warrior classes making multiple attacks every round without limit. The fact that TWF is one of the few bonus actions you can take without a special class feature makes it extra confusing; it would be easier to remember the bonus action if it were listed as a rogue feature right next to Cunning Action. (I'm not suggesting they should have buried TWF in a class feature -- that would be bad in other ways -- just saying that it would be less confusing if they did.)

None of this really helps you solve your immediate problem, but maybe it's something you could talk about with the players. Once they understand how the rule works and why it is confusing, they won't feel bad for having messed it up (or messing it up in the future) but they'll be more aware of it. Most people take some small amount of pride in being "smart" and doing things "right" so understanding the rule might prompt them to try to follow it.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

Why did you feel the need to have the spell not just automatically fail, but also potentially seriously harm the character, as a result of an innocent slip of the mind?

Because since it became a matter of serious harm, they took the time to envision and apply a method (the token on the hit point total) to make sure nobody ever failed to remember it again.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Personally, I think this is a flaw in the 5e rules. In fact, the "bonus" action is so confusing that after a year of playing, I've concluded that it's my biggest gripe with 5e.

"Bonus" just sounds like, a free add-on with no strings attached. "One per turn" is a pretty significant string, so that's a failure of natural language. I think they could have done better by replacing the term "bonus action" with "second action," since it's clearer that it won't stack (because then it would be a third action). For example, rogue's Cunning Action could say, "You can take a second action on each of your turns, but at least one of your actions must be Dash, Disengage or Hide." A second-action spell could instead read, "On a turn when you cast this spell, you can take a second action, but you can't use it to cast another spell unless that other spell is a cantrip." This language would also allow second-action effects to substitute for your main action, which is something players expect (and I see no reason why a person shouldn't be allowed to, e.g., cast healing word and initiate barbarian rage in the same turn).

It's also not very intuitive which things are bonus actions and which are regular actions, and the way Extra Attack interacts with TWF is especially confusing. Players don't expect an off-hand attack to trade off with Dash/Disengage/Hide, especially when they see the warrior classes making multiple attacks every round without limit. The fact that TWF is one of the few bonus actions you can take without a special class feature makes it extra confusing; it would be easier to remember the bonus action if it were listed as a rogue feature right next to Cunning Action. (I'm not suggesting they should have buried TWF in a class feature -- that would be bad in other ways -- just saying that it would be less confusing if they did.)

None of this really helps you solve your immediate problem, but maybe it's something you could talk about with the players. Once they understand how the rule works and why it is confusing, they won't feel bad for having messed it up (or messing it up in the future) but they'll be more aware of it. Most people take some small amount of pride in being "smart" and doing things "right" so understanding the rule might prompt them to try to follow it.

I think it is interesting that you find the name to be what is confusing when it having a name is what allows it to be clearly defined as a game term.

Maybe I am just more used to the idea of some things being game terms (their definition is determined by the game, not the usage of that word outside the game) and some things being just words, and have an easier time telling which is which because of it.

 

[El Mahdi]

How do I help move them away from this behavior?

With well aimed D4's.

(*just kidding*)

I think Aaron has it right, but the token idea isn't bad either.

 

[steeldragons]

What is it they're "unintentionally" losing track of?

You get AN/one/single action. A/one/single Bonus action...and potentially, in certain ["triggered"] situations, A/one/single Reaction.

You believe your players [or any player,for that matter] are having trouble "remembering" that they get, maximum, 3 types of actions in their turn...and 90% of the time it's only going to be 2 (your "main/first" action and your bonus action, if you have something that let's you take a bonus action).

That's two things they need to worry about. Two actions they [regularly] get on their turn that they need to figure out what they are doing. And they're "forgetting" there are/they have...two?

...but they're not doing it on purpose. Riiiight.

EDIT: Well aimed d4's would definitely be my preference. Throw...TWO. They can count along and maybe it will stick some day.