D&D 5E Does anyone else feel like the action economy and the way actions work in general in 5e both just suck?

[Eubani]

Does the action economy suck? Overall no. Does it need cleaning up? Bonus actions could use a bit of a clean up and polish.

 

[Gladius Legis]

If I have any issue with bonus actions at all, it's that I believe a couple things that are bonus actions shouldn't be, and a couple other things that could or should be bonus actions aren't.

As a case of the former, dual-wielding's off-hand attack should be folded in as part of the Attack action, IMO.

As a case of the latter, making the second object interaction in a round a bonus action is a good idea I saw earlier in this thread. I'm also warming up to the idea of shoving being a bonus action after seeing BG3 in action.

 

[Don Durito]

In what way? If you mean like Mike Mearls' idea of specific abilities to encapsulate the effects of a bonus action and action together, it can work but you lose generality. Example: bonus action spells become normal actions which include also an attack. But then, you don't have options to combine them with something else.

If you mean to turn everything that is currently a bonus action into a regular action, then it will indeed be a lot simpler. As long as players accept that they'll have to pick one single action per turn and nothing more.

I think that would be a lot better. One of the things that has really killed 5E for me is how long it takes for one round to get by. Not as long as 4E (which was too long), but in many cases, like playing a board, game I was at least invested because what other players would do on their turns could substantially change what I did.

I find that if I play a simple class in 5E, such as a Fighter or Rogue, I'm waiting too long for my turn and what I'm going to do is usually obvious enough that I don't really need to pay much attention. It often seems that spellcasters are doing more things, Clerics with Spiritual Weapons, Sorcerers with quickened spells etc, and it takes long enough to resolve one spell. The wait there's more...aspect of things makes my teeth grate.

Do one thing on your turn. Get turns more often. Less bored people checking their phones. More fun for everyone.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Yeah, how dare someone, new to 5e, post their concerns. I mean it is not like a message board is meant for discussion, right?

What I find ‘old’, is people pooping on a thread topic that does not appeal to them, instead of making their Wisdom save and walking away.

I’m not, trying to single you out atanakar, I fail those type of saves all the time as well, (like now).

Yeah, you’re just wrong. I’ve been frustrated with many rules across many editions, and I’ve never found it necessary to personally attack the designers.

 

[dave2008]

no

 

[Garthanos]

I get my D&D fix mainly through 13th Age and O/TSR games, but I'd rather play Dungeon World than any of those.

I have heard great things about DW why does the title make me cringe...
13th Age seemed to have some wonky things in it - I do not like the tactical choice loss of randomized effects on a maneuver depending on odd and even values and I remember reading something like the designers couldn't decide between themselves how the timing/resource used by the Barbarian worked in game so they wrote it ambiguous like its one thing in one place and another in another I mean blink blink? Used one way the class seems so locked down it might not be fun and the other way it might be one of the most potent.

 

[dave2008]

Do you have any actions-related houserules? I'd be interested in hearing them.

Use the pathfinder P2e 3 action system (or my preferred 6 action system), that seems right up your ally.

You could allow trading of actions like 4e did.

You could reorganize ones that don't fit where you want them too.

 

[Eric V]

I have heard great things about DW why does the title make me cringe...
13th Age seemed to have some wonky things in it - I do not like the tactical choice loss of randomized effects on a maneuver depending on odd and even values and I remember reading something like the designers couldn't decide between themselves how the timing/resource used by the Barbarian worked in game so they wrote it ambiguous like its one thing in one place and another in another I mean blink blink? Used one way the class seems so locked down it might not be fun and the other way it might be one of the most potent.

Playing 13th Age currently and our group really likes it.

Using the d20 rolls addresses the "Why can't always crack his armor?" argument. The opening isn't always there, and when it is (say a natural 16+ on the d20) then you can use that maneuver. Lets fighters and rogues have special maneuvers without being on an AEDU system. I especially like conditions like "Natural d20 roll above the target's Cons score" and the like. We have a fighter now who, no matter what gets rolled on the d20, can do something special.

I confess, I don't know what you're talking about re: the barbarian... What's the issue, exactly?

 

[FrozenNorth]

It works ok, but as some people pointed out on page 2 it trips itself up trying to pretend it's more flexible that it is. Changing established names for change sake didn't help either. I don't think anyone is in doubt that PF2's 3 action economy is superior & more elegant but at least for 5e it would probably be too difficult to make such a change & maintain balance

All games systems seek to simplify a messy reality. Just like 5e, PF2 has its own incoherencies.

I’ve heard some people complaining that regripping your sword taking an action didn’t make sense. Personally, I don’t like that you can’t split your movement without using multiple actions.

I recognize that both of these are minor complaints.

 

[JeffB]

I have heard great things about DW why does the title make me cringe...
13th Age seemed to have some wonky things in it - I do not like the tactical choice loss of randomized effects on a maneuver depending on odd and even values

If you mean the Fighters, I understand. Some players relish it, others do not like it in the least. As a player I like it, but not all my players have. An easy reskinning of the Barbarian ( or the multiple fan created versions ) makes a more "classic fighter" class.

I'm not sure what the issue is with the Barbarian you speak of, but 13Th Age is full of sidebars describing how the designers feel about each section. They often don't agree, or do things in different ways than the book, or even have adopted each other's opinions after a couple years. That's encouraged in 13th Age. More than any RPG I know of, 13Th Age is a living game where individual designers all put their own stamp and interpretation on the way many 13th AGE exclusive mechanics and ideas are implemented. There are entire books that are options on how to alter/modify the Core book's interpretations of game mechanics like ICONS. and the system handles it beautifully. From the very first paragraphs of the ore rulebook, the game is designed to be, encourage to be, and assumed to be tweaked/changed by each group and GM- this also applies to the default setting. My Dragon Empire can be vastly different from yours. Jonathan's is different than Rob's. And they don't run it the same way twice. It is very much not a set of hard and fast rules like D&D proper.