Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 2472716" data-attributes="member: 172">1>For those that have played using Action Points, do you use the Eberron and Unearthed Arcana  method of 5 + 1/2 level = AP for the entire level?  If not, what other methods have you used? I was using the 5+1/2 per level, accumulating, but players were banking too many points for my comfort. Evenutally, I decided to go with the Eberron model, but gave characters a number of "per session, use or lose" points. The players get one more of these points than dice they can roll to add to a d20 roll. These points are subtracted from the per level numer.So at 12th level (where most of my PCs are right now), they get 9 points for the whole level, plus 2 per session use or lose. 2>Is using this method, but adding a "no more than 1/3 of your max AP can be used in a single session" rule too complex? I wouldn't use it. But I've used more complex rules. You might argue that my rule is. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> 3> As written, do you think either the Eberron or UA rules allow adding an AP die to an initiative check or a caster level check? I don't want to comment on what the rules say as I don't have it sitting right in front of me, but I allow it. Level checks come up too much and are often very important rolls. (Last night, the party was getting thrashed by a demon with an unholy aura up, and the druid was wasting a scad of 4th level spell slots trying to bring it down.Neither mention initiative, they do include level checks. But if UA meant to include them, then the AP usage of improved feat: improved initiative and imrpoved feat: spell penetration seem silly. I'm leaning towards NOT allowing it toward caster level checks. 4>Is granting a +2, +3 or +4 to AC for one round too much for one or two APs? (Besides making the improve dodge feat use useless) Probably not. I don't see it as any more potent than an additional attack in a full attack. 5> Is emulate feat a good idea? Are my changes making it too powerful? To me, this is the "wild card" use of the mechanic, and has inspired me to create "implicit feats". I don't bother to look things up; if a player thinks up something they want to do, I think if I know of a feat that allows it or if there should be. 6> Is allowing two uses of AP per round, one as a special action, and one as a die improvement too powerful? How about if I specifically make it one die improvement and one feat emulation? IMO, yes. Not too powerful (as I only allow players to slowly accumulate AP), but too flexible. I prefer that if players find they want to do something that requires them to use AP twice in one round, they consider taking the feat that would put them along the path and only require one feat.I took the suggestion of having an "Action Hero" feat that allows you to spend one additional AP in a round, but nobody has taken it yet. 7> Am I wrong in thinking that spell recall is too powerful? If so, why? I don't see a problem with it. It's one of the uses of the action point, AFAIAC. The fact that they have to immediately declare the use of it limits it somewhat. They can't decide 10 rounds later that they want to use a spell already case.</blockquote>

Verification