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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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
Million Dollar TTRPG Crowdfunders
Most Anticipated Tabletop RPGs Of The Year
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
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
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Ditching OA's, replace with....?
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="mudlock" data-source="post: 5664850" data-attributes="member: 95211"><p>In my defense, I didn't say they were too stupid to understand the rules, I said they were too lazy to learn them.</p><p></p><p>As you reiterated, the example provided had zero to do with OAs; so I'm still not sure how getting rid of OAs will help. The basic OA is a very simple thing; they're walking away? Make an MBA. If a character is taking powers and feats to enhance them, they should learn how their powers and feats work. If they can't be bothered, they shouldn't take them.</p><p></p><p>Now, what if you want to expand this to ALL types of out-of-turn actions? (Which would actually help alleviate the problems in the example?) Similarly, if characters are taking powers and feats that grant other characters out-of-turn actions, they should learn how they work. If they can't be bothered, they shouldn't take them. If you expand on that theory though, it's gets pretty ridiculous pretty fast. Is it just powers that grant attacks to multiple allies that are a problem? Or is it any power that grants an attack? What about shifts and moves? Or the ability to spend a healing surge (yes, those are all, technically, an action taken by the target character)? If you want to disallow all out-of-turn actions at the table, you basically can't have anyone playing a defender or a leader (or a halfling or a gnome), and the DM can probably never use a dragon (most have immediate actions now). OAs are just a drop in the bucket, and so, no, I still don't understand why anyone can get so worked up over them.</p><p></p><p>And most of the suggestions here don't seem any better, from a complexity or time standpoint, than the default rules. For most of them, you still need to figure out threatened areas, you still need to go look up something on each threatening character's sheet, and you still might have to apply damage (and maybe other effects) to the creature who provokes!</p><p></p><p>If you're really serious about this, an "engaged" status seems like the best of the lot, particularly the "-5 to attacks" suggestion. Seems similar to the effects of the "run action"; until the start of your next turn, you're penalized, but you don't need to worry at all about what anyone else is doing. (Except for all those other out-of-turn actions that are still going to be in the game...)</p><p></p><p>So that's my constructive suggestion: replace "provoking" with "take a -5 to hit this turn".</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mudlock, post: 5664850, member: 95211"] In my defense, I didn't say they were too stupid to understand the rules, I said they were too lazy to learn them. As you reiterated, the example provided had zero to do with OAs; so I'm still not sure how getting rid of OAs will help. The basic OA is a very simple thing; they're walking away? Make an MBA. If a character is taking powers and feats to enhance them, they should learn how their powers and feats work. If they can't be bothered, they shouldn't take them. Now, what if you want to expand this to ALL types of out-of-turn actions? (Which would actually help alleviate the problems in the example?) Similarly, if characters are taking powers and feats that grant other characters out-of-turn actions, they should learn how they work. If they can't be bothered, they shouldn't take them. If you expand on that theory though, it's gets pretty ridiculous pretty fast. Is it just powers that grant attacks to multiple allies that are a problem? Or is it any power that grants an attack? What about shifts and moves? Or the ability to spend a healing surge (yes, those are all, technically, an action taken by the target character)? If you want to disallow all out-of-turn actions at the table, you basically can't have anyone playing a defender or a leader (or a halfling or a gnome), and the DM can probably never use a dragon (most have immediate actions now). OAs are just a drop in the bucket, and so, no, I still don't understand why anyone can get so worked up over them. And most of the suggestions here don't seem any better, from a complexity or time standpoint, than the default rules. For most of them, you still need to figure out threatened areas, you still need to go look up something on each threatening character's sheet, and you still might have to apply damage (and maybe other effects) to the creature who provokes! If you're really serious about this, an "engaged" status seems like the best of the lot, particularly the "-5 to attacks" suggestion. Seems similar to the effects of the "run action"; until the start of your next turn, you're penalized, but you don't need to worry at all about what anyone else is doing. (Except for all those other out-of-turn actions that are still going to be in the game...) So that's my constructive suggestion: replace "provoking" with "take a -5 to hit this turn". [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Ditching OA's, replace with....?
Top