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
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
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
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
Domination and optional add-on effects -- who decides?
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="Aulirophile" data-source="post: 5431010" data-attributes="member: 86312"><p>They aren't part of the attacks made. And, in game terms, No Action is an action type (I don't claim this makes sense, but under "action types" No Action is listed as a type of action). The dominator gets to pick <em>one </em>action. Only one, if he has picked that action (He has, MBA) then anything else that requires a decision or any kind of action (including No Actions because they are an action type by RAW) he <em>cannot </em>activate those, because he has used up his action. If a character has extra things that can be added onto an at-will power but they involve a <em>decision </em>then the dominator cannot make them, because that is another action.</p><p></p><p>That is the RAW answer, at least. I imagine table variation is.... large.</p><p></p><p>Edit: Checked the RC out of curiosity, they have removed the section explaining No Actions, and it is just a blurb now in "Triggered Actions." Some Triggered actions do not require an action to use, but you cannot "use" them unless their trigger is met. To me that brings it back to the land of being relatively unclear, which is a shame since the RC cleared up so many other issues, but since the most recently published rule is the correct one... so long as whatever it you're adding onto the At-Will is Not an Action and is doable at-will the dominator can make the decision to use it. That is a pretty big bump for dominators and I wonder if the Enchanter Mage build had anything to do with it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Aulirophile, post: 5431010, member: 86312"] They aren't part of the attacks made. And, in game terms, No Action is an action type (I don't claim this makes sense, but under "action types" No Action is listed as a type of action). The dominator gets to pick [I]one [/I]action. Only one, if he has picked that action (He has, MBA) then anything else that requires a decision or any kind of action (including No Actions because they are an action type by RAW) he [I]cannot [/I]activate those, because he has used up his action. If a character has extra things that can be added onto an at-will power but they involve a [I]decision [/I]then the dominator cannot make them, because that is another action. That is the RAW answer, at least. I imagine table variation is.... large. Edit: Checked the RC out of curiosity, they have removed the section explaining No Actions, and it is just a blurb now in "Triggered Actions." Some Triggered actions do not require an action to use, but you cannot "use" them unless their trigger is met. To me that brings it back to the land of being relatively unclear, which is a shame since the RC cleared up so many other issues, but since the most recently published rule is the correct one... so long as whatever it you're adding onto the At-Will is Not an Action and is doable at-will the dominator can make the decision to use it. That is a pretty big bump for dominators and I wonder if the Enchanter Mage build had anything to do with it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Domination and optional add-on effects -- who decides?
Top