Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GMMichael" data-source="post: 6147495" data-attributes="member: 6685730">3E architecture, but why can't it be universal?Three attacks at full attack bonus.  No other attacks.  (Well...if you have a second weapon...)Sure.  The others were just examples.Enemy range: same as 3E.  In realizing this point, I figure that a PC could use his actions early in the first round, and the actions used would count against the standard 3 gained at the start of a PCs turn.As long as you stay in formation, and aren't surprised, you'll begin combat in your choice of offensive or defensive posture.One balance, specifically for the rogue, is that he can take a feat that allows extra damage if his enemy doesn't try to defend the attack.  Further, the heavily armored guy would need to use a defense action to utilize the benefits of his shield (but not his suit of armor).See above.The #1 reason to dislike AoOs is that they require another table.  I suspect that if AoOs become just another combat option, along with attacking, defending, moving behind cover, reloading, and everything else, then 1) you won't need a table for it, and 2) combat maneuvers (like Fight Aggressively) will flow organically from the same system that allows you to make an AoO anytime you want (as long as you have an action available).</blockquote>