Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Action Types - Rules As Written
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 7295206" data-attributes="member: 1465"><p>Personally I think it helps me to keep in mind the <em>simultaneous</em> nature of everything you do on your turn.</p><p></p><p>On my turn, I think my PC is taking her action at the same time she's moving, and a bonus action is also taken together with both, and with talking or doing other minor things. If you don't play in ToTM mode, it may become necessary to specify the <em>order</em> of them, but it's more like an artifact to help the description and the adjudicating.</p><p></p><p>The game needed "bonus actions" to be defined rather because of the "not more than 1 at a time" rule, than because of a true need for an addition to the action economy. I agree with Mearls that they aren't strictly needed, but I don't think he could easily pull off the design of a whole game with lots of abilities meant to be usable <em>on top</em> of your main action, without the design trick which is a bonus action. The verbosity of the game would probably get out of hands.</p><p></p><p>Reactions are also there for specific gaming reasons: they definitely wanted opportunity attacks, readying, and counterspell being in the game, as well as a few specific spells (<em>Feather Fall</em> being the one most needing a special rule). So the designers were looking for a unified rule to cover different things for simplicity.</p><p></p><p>The "free" object interaction rule is perhaps the most fuzzy. In some parts of the text it even sounds like you should already count attacking with a weapon as interacting with it, while in general it seems the RAI was to allow you to interact with <em>another</em> object beyond the weapon used to attack. But then, is an <strong>arrow</strong> a separate object from a <strong>bow</strong> or not? I don't think the game says you to treat them as a single object, but it does explicitly allow you to draw ammunitions as part of attacking, thus removing the practical issue. But perhaps technically this doesn't remove the fact that you are in fact <em>interacting</em> with many objects at once, so you may not necessarily be allowed to interact with yet one more object.</p><p></p><p>In addition, the object interaction rule seems concerned with the <em>number of objects</em> rather than with the <em>number of interactions</em>. You are free to draw <em>and</em> sheath <em>and</em> and draw the same weapon as many times you want, and maybe end up handing it to another character too, but you are forbidden to switch between weapons.</p><p></p><p>A practical example:</p><p></p><p>[video=youtube;zX2NZS-EqJ4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zX2NZS-EqJ4[/video]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 7295206, member: 1465"] Personally I think it helps me to keep in mind the [I]simultaneous[/I] nature of everything you do on your turn. On my turn, I think my PC is taking her action at the same time she's moving, and a bonus action is also taken together with both, and with talking or doing other minor things. If you don't play in ToTM mode, it may become necessary to specify the [I]order[/I] of them, but it's more like an artifact to help the description and the adjudicating. The game needed "bonus actions" to be defined rather because of the "not more than 1 at a time" rule, than because of a true need for an addition to the action economy. I agree with Mearls that they aren't strictly needed, but I don't think he could easily pull off the design of a whole game with lots of abilities meant to be usable [I]on top[/I] of your main action, without the design trick which is a bonus action. The verbosity of the game would probably get out of hands. Reactions are also there for specific gaming reasons: they definitely wanted opportunity attacks, readying, and counterspell being in the game, as well as a few specific spells ([I]Feather Fall[/I] being the one most needing a special rule). So the designers were looking for a unified rule to cover different things for simplicity. The "free" object interaction rule is perhaps the most fuzzy. In some parts of the text it even sounds like you should already count attacking with a weapon as interacting with it, while in general it seems the RAI was to allow you to interact with [I]another[/I] object beyond the weapon used to attack. But then, is an [B]arrow[/B] a separate object from a [B]bow[/B] or not? I don't think the game says you to treat them as a single object, but it does explicitly allow you to draw ammunitions as part of attacking, thus removing the practical issue. But perhaps technically this doesn't remove the fact that you are in fact [I]interacting[/I] with many objects at once, so you may not necessarily be allowed to interact with yet one more object. In addition, the object interaction rule seems concerned with the [I]number of objects[/I] rather than with the [I]number of interactions[/I]. You are free to draw [I]and[/I] sheath [I]and[/I] and draw the same weapon as many times you want, and maybe end up handing it to another character too, but you are forbidden to switch between weapons. A practical example: [video=youtube;zX2NZS-EqJ4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zX2NZS-EqJ4[/video] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Action Types - Rules As Written
Top