Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Twowolves" data-source="post: 2943812" data-attributes="member: 18093">Again, my point is, so what? You said static, constant initiative is bad because someone could always go first and get &quot;multiple actions in a row&quot; or &quot;extra actions&quot;. How? By teleporting away constantly? Or do you mean acting first then quickened teleportation, rest 5 minutes, start a &quot;new&quot; combat, then come back and do it again? I was being absurd intentionally by the way, but at least it was intentional! I personally don't use re-roll every round, but I see the merits of it, and might yet in some future campaign. I don't buy the arguement that two actions back to back is so bad, when at almost any level of play, ONE action can potentially be just as bad. I know, more randomness screws players, so my &quot;point&quot;, like RC's, was if that's so bad, then let's just get rid of ALL randomness, because &quot;it's no fun when my PC fails a save/gets criticaled/etc etc&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Twowolves, post: 2943812, member: 18093"] Again, my point is, so what? You said static, constant initiative is bad because someone could always go first and get "multiple actions in a row" or "extra actions". How? By teleporting away constantly? Or do you mean acting first then quickened teleportation, rest 5 minutes, start a "new" combat, then come back and do it again? I was being absurd intentionally by the way, but at least it was intentional! I personally don't use re-roll every round, but I see the merits of it, and might yet in some future campaign. I don't buy the arguement that two actions back to back is so bad, when at almost any level of play, ONE action can potentially be just as bad. I know, more randomness screws players, so my "point", like RC's, was if that's so bad, then let's just get rid of ALL randomness, because "it's no fun when my PC fails a save/gets criticaled/etc etc". [/QUOTE]

Verification