Do You Want Multiple Actions Per Turn or Not?

[ren1999]

I'm in two threads arguing for the same thing but getting resistance. I don't know why since more than 1 standard action is already in the 5th edition play-test.

The Hook Horror gets 2 standard attacks per turn.

The Fighter gets Fighter's Surge which allows 2 standard actions twice a day at 2nd level.

The Fighter gets Cleave which allows 2 attacks per turn every turn as long as the first target is killed.

I don't foresee off-hand weapon attacks going away in 5th edition.

Some spells should be reactions such as Feather Fall and need to be cast outside the caster's turn.

An Opportunity Attack is a standard action outside someone's turn. Not in 5th Edition but it should be.

Are you going to allow this or not? Is it just one standard action per turn for characters but not for monsters with no exceptions or not?

All I'm asking for is that characters don't immediately get a lot of standard actions per level-up. I'm saying that they are o.k. as long as both monsters and characters get 1 additional standard action every 5 levels.

To repeat, that would be 2 main weapon attacks and 3 off-hand weapon attacks per turn for the 20th level fighter max.

Or 2 claws, 2 bites and 1 tail slap for a 20th level dragon per turn.

If damage dice stayed at 1[w] then character nor dragon would do more than 5[w] damage in a single turn.

 

[Blood & Bones]

I'm in two threads arguing for the same thing but getting resistance. I don't know why since more than 1 standard action is already in the 5th edition play-test.
The Hook Horror gets 2 standard attacks per turn.
The Fighter gets Fighter's Surge which allows 2 standard actions twice a day at 2nd level.
The Fighter gets Cleave which allows 2 attacks per turn every turn as long as the first target is killed.
I don't foresee off-hand weapon attacks going away in 5th edition.
Some spells should be reactions such as Feather Fall and need to be cast outside the caster's turn.
An Opportunity Attack is a standard action outside someone's turn. Not in 5th Edition but it should be.
Are you going to allow this or not? Is it just one standard action per turn for characters but not for monsters with no exceptions or not?

Yeah - I'll allow it. I don't think it should be more than 3 attacks per turn (4 actions if you include movement), but I think it's okay.

Fighters need some way to keep up with a Wizard's damage, and to be honest, this is one way in which they can. Multiple attacks go back to 1st edition (don't know if they were in OD&D), so they are apart of the game like crackers are to spreadable cheese. I hope that it isn't done in the same way that 3rd edition allowed multiple attacks, but I do feel that it should be apart of basic game-play.

 

[Croesus]

Personally, I'd prefer that one action per turn be standard, with additional actions as rare events or part of a tactical combat model. That said, I think having multiple actions is so ingrained at this point that I expect it to be in DDN.

 

[Gold Roger]

There's multiple actions and then there's multiple actions.

Conditional specific extra action (after casting this spell, you can make an attack as part of your action) are completely fine.

Nonconditional unspecific extra action (characters gain an aditional action at level x) end up bogging down the game, as people figure how to perfectly allocate their actions and then go through, what is basically multiple turns.

 

[Raith5]

Multiple attacks. For monsters: yes if they have different forms of attack. For PCs: yes, especially at high level. I still quite like the idea of move/minor/standard as a way of differentiating different types of actions per turn, rather than certain spells also allowing another action for example. It is just more streamlined and intuitive for me.

 

[BobTheNob]

Now THIS is a good question!!

Too many action, combat slows to a grind, too few, its bland.

My preference, 2 standards per round. Yes 2! You can use them to
* Make an attack (So yes, you could attack twice)
* Move
* Do a reaction outside of your turn

That last one was weird. It only actually works if you re-roll init every round (Dont say you dislike re-rolling init, there is another thread about this, go dispute it there) and you allocate everone 2 standards at the start of the round. Before your turn, you can spend an action in a reactionary way (to dodge, or parry, or some such) but on your turn you must spend whatever points remain to you.

But thats just my preference.

As a side note, I dont think you can look at action economy in isolation from initiative resolution.

 

[tlantl]

One of the biggest things that I had to get used to when I switched from AD&D to 3e was the multiple attacks and movement. I hated that I couldn't move a monster and have them make their pounce, bite, and rake attacks without a half dozen feats.

I think that a character or monster should be able to use all of it's attacks when ever it can. there should never be a restriction on how many attacks you can use if an ability or class feature (theme) gives you the capability to take more than one. I don't like to see a ton of penalties or reduced chances either.

If I can grab a character and fling them I'd like to be able to do it in a fluid motion.

If I'm big enough to grab something and strong enough to lift it easily I'd like to know I can toss the creature a few feet or yards. I'd like to think it would cause some damage too.



As for the number of additional attacks or "actions" a character should get I'm all for keeping things to a minimum. I can see no need for five or six attacks in a round, (especially if half or more are going to be nearly sure misses.)

I'd also be tickled pink if the auto hit on 20 gets on the wrong buss and misses out on a place in the finished game.

I don't think a character should need more than three attacks a round. I really think the number of theme based extra attacks should be kept to a minimum. Especially if the player's class is going to give them more than one attack as they level.

 

[keterys]

There's a pretty big difference between "Hook Horror makes two claw attacks" and "Hook Horror has two standard actions" - given that a standard action is something like a charge, or whatever.

Similarly, we might see a cleric make a melee attack and heal someone, while a fighter slashes two enemies, or a wizard adds a magic missile onto a fireball, or whatever.

But that's _very_ different from two standard actions.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

I want Fighters and other warrior-types to get multiple viable attacks without sacrificing their mobility. Most monsters could do without the claw/claw/bite routine, but heavy hitters like dragons should be able to take multiple actions in a round like a 4e Solo.

Of course, what I really want is for warrior-types to have multiple combat maneuvers, some of which grant multiple attacks-- like Power Attack being a single big attack, Cleave being a STR-based attack that hits multiple enemies in a row, Flurry being a DEX-based multiple attack that scales with level, Whirlwind Attack and etc. No encounters or dailies, just multiple at-will combat options that get better as you gain more levels in Fighter-type classes.

 

[Bobbum Man]

I say two actions per round.

One Big Thing (attacking, casting a spell, etc.) and one Small Thing (moving, quaffing a potion, etc.)

Anything else is a rare, resource draining occurrence.