Combat Actions

[TeeSeeJay]

I'm trying to wrap my head around the combat actions, and currently have only the SRD at my disposal. I'm trying to figure out the difference between the Partial and Move-Equivalent actions.

Basically, is this a correct understanding?:

Standard Action = 1 Partial Action + 1 Move-Equivalent Action OR 2 Move-Equivalent Actions

So I can open a door and drink a potion (both ME actions), but can only make a single attack (a partial action portion of a standard action) with or without a move-equivalent action.

What confuses me is that actions are listed as "standard" actions when really they are "partial" actions, because a Standard Action is actually comprised of two distinct actions. Unless I'm mistaken, any "Standard" action may be taken as a "Partial Action"

Full-round actions, of course, are pretty clear to me.

Full-Attack - to take advantage of a multiple-attack, you must devote a full-round action to the attack. Yet, you can decide to not pursue your additional attacks based on the outcome of the first attack. So could "Additional Melee Attacks" be considered a Move-Equilavent Action with the requirement that it can only follow a "Melee Attack" partial action?

Or maybe I'm way off base with this whole thing.

 

[DanMcS]

Good luck with this, it's all unclear enough that they're revising it for the 3.5 update. Partial actions are going away, for instance. There are/will be regualar actions, move actions, and full-round actions, though I'm unsure on the exact terminology. In a round, you can do an action and a move, two moves, or a full-round. You can also take a free 5' step any round you don't move, so if you do a full attack which takes the whole round, you can still 5' step.

 

[Ranger REG]

Don't worry. 3.5e will straighten out the action types.

Just remember that Standard Actions in 3e is basically one activity or one attack plus one move action or MEA. Try not to compare the one activity to Partial Action, even though it is an easy to conclude that.

So, anything listed in the Standard Action category you can perform with a move or MEA.

 

[Dimwhit]

It's a confusing mess.

Standard Action = 1 Partial Action + 1 Move-Equivalent Action OR 2 Move-Equivalent Actions

That part is wrong. 2 Move-Equivalent Actions is not a Standard actions. 2 MEA would be equivalent to a full-round action. We've always held that a Partial action is a Standard action without he move. But that doesn't entirely make sense, either. Here's how I'd break it down in terms of combat:

Partion Action: one attack action OR a move. One swing of the sword, casting a one-action spell, one movements or MEA.

Standard Action: one attack action AND a 5-ft step, for example.

Full-Round Action: one attack action AND one move equivelant action, or a Full Attack action AND a 5-ft step.

Probably doesn't clear much up, but hopefully it does.

 

[Dimwhit]

Actually, ignore that post. I reread it, and it makes no sense. And it's wrong, I believe. I know all the differences, I just can't explain them. Sorry.

 

[TeeSeeJay]

Actually, ignore that post. I reread it, and it makes no sense. And it's wrong, I believe. I know all the differences, I just can't explain them. Sorry.

Whew. You were starting to worry me.

You CAN take 2 MEAs in a round, right? Such as drink two potions (assuming they're handy).

If you define "Move your normal rate" as a MEA, then yes, taking two "Move your normal rate" actions in the same round is the same as the "Double Move" full-round action.

I'm glad to hear that this will be sorted out in the 3.5 revision. Seems to me the whole action system can be distilled into two actions types: partial and move-equivalent. You can just say that actions currently labeled as "full-round" simply are equivalent to 2 MEAs, making it the only task you can undertake that round.

Any good threads in house rules you know of that have streamlined the system?

 

[Dimwhit]

Yes, I think that's the only thing I got right. You can take 2 MEAs in one round, but that is basically a full-round (double move) action. You are correct.

 

[Li Shenron]

The rule is pretty simple, it's the original PHB explanation that it is redundant and possibly misleading. It was probably heritage of the way things were done in AD&D and in fact, as pointed out already, 3.5e will explain it better.

Everybody plays it correctly. You either:

have a FRA
have a SA (attack, spell, turn undead...) and a MEA
have 2 MEA

and in a surprise round, either:

have SA (attack, spell...)
have a MEA

That's how it is going to be explained in 3.5e, and as you can see there is no need at all to talk about "partial actions" if you call standard action a single attack or a spell.

3e explanation was based on the clumsy attempt to call "standard action" the attack/spell AND the MEA altogether (which could have still been called FRA, since it takes up all your turn), but then it required the further definition of "partial action" = SA(old) "minus a move". Matematicians throw up when hearing this

 

[hong]

Here's how I think of it.

Move-equivalent action = 45% of a full round
Partial action = 55%
Standard action = partial + MEA

There are some technicalities, but this should get you most of the way.

 

[dcollins]

It was probably heritage of the way things were done in AD&D

I guess I'll have to note that the 3rd Ed. action system bears no resemblance that I can tell to the AD&D flow of action. The terminology is certainly entirely new to 3rd Ed.

Matematicians throw up when hearing this

That I'll agree with wholeheartedly.
www.superdan.net/dndmisc/terminology_changes.html