Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doghead" data-source="post: 6168432" data-attributes="member: 8243">An interesting thread. I do like some of the possibilities this would create.To me, this seems like a plus. Historically (generally) the heavily armoured fighter was  the king of the battlefield until the event of firearms. Depending on how sneak attack is incorporated, I think that the rogue can keep his mojo. But it will be a dangerous for them. Which seems right.Surely this is going to be an issue in any round if the defender chooses to use all their actions to defend, then they will not be able to follow up with attacks come their turn in the initiative sequence. Its like executing the full defence manoeuvre.However, unless a character is surprised, then can they not choose to respond to the first attack first by defending, then with a counter attack? Or as mentioned below, by a disengaging manoeuvre, forcing the opponent to follow up, using two actions to the defenders one. From what I can see, the characters with the initiative are always going to be controlling the encounter to some degree, which gives real value to having the initiative.In surprises rounds I think I would allow surprised characters to use Attribute or feat actions only. Intuitively, I like the idea of increasing action cost for higher level spells. Depending on the implementation, it could go some way towards slowing down the use of higher level spells. But the flip side is that it may end up allowing barrages of lower level spells in one round. I don't play at the higher levels enough to be able to say what the net effect would be on the relative balance of the classes. thotd</blockquote>

Verification