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

[77IM]

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.

Yeah, that's a really good point. I guess when 5e tried to move towards more "natural language" they wound up with a few terms that are in this gray area. Like, it's easy to explain what a "turn" and "action" are, but "bonus-action" requires a next-level rules-comprehension that many players just aren't very interested in attaining.

I think people who discuss rules on-line (e.g., us) are more likely to read them and digest them ahead of time and notice the interactions and limitations. But I think most people who sit down to player D&D just want to play and don't want to put much effort into understanding something like the action economy or bonus actions or how the "Ready" action actually works.

 

[77IM]

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.

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." (Not trying to call Gnashtooth's players especially stupid; we all have stupidity inside of us.)

I think it's a question of incentives. There's little incentive for a player to penalize themselves, so many players don't put much effort into remembering or focussing on rules that restrict, limit, or penalize their PCs. That means this style of screw-up isn't purely accidental -- it could be a form of "game play negligence" -- but I wouldn't assume that it's consciously done on purpose, either.

 

[Tony Vargas]

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?

First, ask yourself if it's a problem. Is it making that TWFing Rogue wildly overpowered? Is he ruining the game for everyone else? Maybe it'd be an OK ruling to let it slide most of the time?
Or maybe not.

If it is a problem, you could talk to the player away from the table. You could also just remind him in game, you could even do so subtly by asking for the specific ability or action he's using when he does something.

Experienced players will sometimes just /do/ a series of things without going through the laundry list of class abilities, feats, required nor accounting for the actions to use them in detail. In a small way, 5e encourages that since it doesn't silo your Action - the way you can break up attacks w/in an action along a move (in stark contrast to 3.5's Spring Attack), being the most dramatic example.

 

[steeldragons]

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." (Not trying to call Gnashtooth's players especially stupid; we all have stupidity inside of us.)

I think it's a question of incentives. There's little incentive for a player to penalize themselves, so many players don't put much effort into remembering or focussing on rules that restrict, limit, or penalize their PCs. That means this style of screw-up isn't purely accidental -- it could be a form of "game play negligence" -- but I wouldn't assume that it's consciously done on purpose, either.

Fair enough. Neither does/would Gnashtooth, apparently. And that's fine.

I always will. "The glass is half empty." "Trust no one." "Always assume the worst of people and they will never disappoint you." and so on and so forth.

The idea that anyone with any degree of system mastery from 3.5 would be incapable of keeping track/remembering that, in the 5e game they are/have been playing, they get TWO actions is a bit too far/thin a stretch for my suspension of disbelief.

I HOPE [for the OP] they are, actually, accidently doing so and will acclimate to the new system and have a great time. But, from where I'm sitting...glass half empty.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Bonus actions can get tricky, especially with TWF. I had a barbarian that was raging (bonus action) and dual-wielding (bonus action) in the same round. Not that big of a deal, certainly, but it can be tough to keep the game running and make sure everyone keeps in line with the rules. It’s easy to forget the little things, and I don’t fault the player. We all slip up now and then.

What I find helps, is having a rules back-up – a player that also really knows the rules well. Heck, at conventions, with Shadowrun I’ve seen tables with two GMs – one to run the game and the other to check on the rules.

 

[bedir than]

Isn't Rage a bonus action to turn on? rather than a bonus action to maintain?

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Correct, but he was activating rage and dual wielding in the same round. Not a huge deal, really, but that sort of thing adds up.

Isn't Rage a bonus action to turn on? rather than a bonus action to maintain?

 

[Sunseeker]

There's really nothing you can do except know what they can do and keep holding them accountable.

I hate the term "accidental cheating". Cheating is purposeful, with malicious intent to willfully gain something you should not have. EX: Last session I rolled d10's for my monk's damage, as I thought that changed at level 15, it changes at level 16. When I reread my damage die section a few moments later, I corrected and told the DM he could subtract the maximum additional damage I could have done (2 points per die x 4 dice) from the damage I had done. Either a person is cheating or a person is making a mistake.

Mistakes are not cheating, but don't let them pull the wool over your eyes. If someone is constantly going "oops!" and it is always in their favor, then then are likely cheating.

In any case, the only way you can stop it is to hold them accountable. People who are purposefully cheating will usually stop once they know they're being watched, if they're brazen enough to keep it up and get called on it, just kick them out. But the only way to do that is to hold them accountable and keep track of their actions yourself.

 

[Rhenny]

In the playtest, the monk really messed up our table until I enforced the 1 bonus action rule. Since then it hasn't been a problem although some of that is because I do keep it in mind as the DM.

Also, if we forget once in a while it doesn't wreck our games. It did become a problem when we were playtesting because other players were waiting longer for the monk to finish his turn. That was the killer.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

I favour physical reminders.

Small cards or counters with "Action" on one side and "Action taken" on the other side; same for "Bonus Action" and "Reaction". At the start of a player's turn, they flip all of them face up. As they declare each type of action, they turn the card over.

In my experience, it takes two or three sessions for everyone to get to grips with the system, then you can stop usng the physical memory joggers.