Haste and Refocus

[IceBear]

Then, as I said, Rule 0 it back to a single action spell. If something bothers you to the point of rage on these forums (which is how your posts come out) then frigging change the rules for your campaign to something you can stomach rather than belittle the rest of us that don't have an issue.

I have an issue with the amount of gain from a Summon Monster I spell vs it being a full round spell, that I've Rule 0ed it in my game.

IceBear

 

[mkletch]

Then, as I said, Rule 0 it back to a single action spell. If something bothers you...

The player in question merely changed his tactics; not bothered at all. Maybe upset that he had missed it so many times...

...to the point of rage on these forums (which is how your posts come out) then frigging change the rules for your campaign to something you can stomach rather than belittle the rest of us that don't have an issue.

Well, that was harsh, my thin-skinned friend. I place quite a large gulf between annoyance/sarcasm and "rage". I'll take the extra hit points, though.

-Fletch!

 

[IceBear]

Well, I'm sorry, but that's how your posts read to me. As is often the case I'm probably quite mistaken in your intent, but I've been lurking a lot lately, but post of the posts that I've read from you over the past 2 months haven't struck me as friendly or positive.

Again...before you're offended...that's how I'm reading them, so it could be misreading on my part.

In this thread, and a couple of others today you seem to have no tolerance for 3E rules that are the same for no apparent reason than for 2E historical precedent and you seemed bitter about that to the point, of what I thought, was you raging against the system. I tend to just accept the fact that the rules were playtested extensively and try to stick with what's written unless it's imacting a player's fun (like a summoner in my group) so I'll change the rules rather than complaining about it on here.

IceBear

 

[daemonslye]

Well, I'm back - Lovely discussion BTW; Lets try to
wrap this one up:

For those who dont see the benefit of taking Refocus
while hasted, please read above and do the math.
If you have lost init, a refocus while hasted will net you
an extra free action and partial BEFORE your opponent
can react. Think about for a moment, it is easy to miss this.

MainFAQv10252002:

When you refocus, you spend your entire round refocusing;
you cannot act or move. You can’t even move except for a 5-
foot step.

This is ridiculous - They state that you "cannot act or move"
(which supports the concept that Refocus overrides haste
AND free actions) but then state you can take a 5' step
(which contradicts the SRD).

If there is no further info or input from ex-Official Sages, etc.
I would be willing to treat the second sentence from the FAQ
as human-error and go with a restrictive ruling on refocus.

Refocus then becomes the one "special full round action"
that will supersede all other actions for a full round (until
your next turn on the preceding round).

When you use Refocus, you cannot:

- Use Free Actions (until the beginning of your next turn)
- Move INCLUDING a 5'step (until the beginning of your next turn)
- Use the extra partial action granted from haste (to move OR perform ANY OTHER ACTION)

Is this acceptable?

Thanks!

~D

 

[mkletch]

Well, I'm sorry, but that's how your posts read to me. As is often the case I'm probably quite mistaken in your intent, but I've been lurking a lot lately, but post of the posts that I've read from you over the past 2 months haven't struck me as friendly or positive.

Again...before you're offended...that's how I'm reading them, so it could be misreading on my part.

I tend to have a 'tell it like I see it' and, occasionally, sarcastic personality. And the only things that I can see, in common with you, are the rules as written in the books. It really is that simple, at least for me. I've read the material, and kind of expect others to do the same. To me, the rules are obvious. The only 'flaws' are gaps or contradictions in those rules.

I'm sure my posts on the general RPG discussion have a much different tone than in this rules forum.

In this thread, and a couple of others today you seem to have no tolerance for 3E rules that are the same for no apparent reason [other] than for 2E historical precedent and you seemed bitter about that to the point, of what I thought, was you raging against the system.

[My addition]

I had expected a complete overhaul of D&D when I got into 3E. I have been playing D&D, fairly continuously, for over 21 years. I was there as TSR got strange in the 1E days, and there when 2E was released, and disappointed by the superficiality of some of the the changes that made 2E, and hearbroken as 2E became a morass of supplements and books with no core ethos or goal. When I got 3E, I wanted the core values an mechanics, the essence of D&D, really, rebuilt from scratch into a solid, consistent system. The fact that there is so much traffic on this rules forum is a testament to my disappointment. I still love the game, and play 1-3 times per week with different groups. But the learning curve is there, for gamers joining our group, or when I go to play with another group. Why is there a learning curve, other than directions of where we are playing and people's names? A game system that is supposed to be a standard medium for entertainment interaction should not have a steep learning curve every time you sit down with a new group of players. That might just be life, but life is not a "system" either.

I tend to just accept the fact that the rules were playtested extensively and try to stick with what's written unless it's imacting a player's fun (like a summoner in my group) so I'll change the rules rather than complaining about it on here.

I have seen people point out where there were copy and paste errors in the first printings of the PHB, for example, where the text was taken directly from 2.5E (the black book printings and the players/DM options books). There was some playtesting, but the groups playing were familiar and comfortable with 2E. They did not mind, at the time, the contagion of 2E into 3E. Nor did they really have enough time to discover all of the problems before release. Like any software product, the beta test does not necessarily catch all of the problems. Remember how bad the Battle.net realms were when Diablo II first was released. They had no idea what would happen, or what problems would surface, when the user base increased 500-fold.

3E playtesting is the same thing. So we have a magic item system that is ignored (ring of invisibility or speed weapon ability) or used but hated/errata'd (the speed armor ability from DotF). We have spells that are constantly bickered about (Harm) or ignored (most Summon Monster spells), and a system where the designers specifically admit that "not all spells of the same level are equal" (how is it a system then?). Rule-0 is too big a part of 3E. I add a dash of salt, not a truck-load, to season food.

So, take this as a combined apology, explanation and manifesto, if you will. It's just how I see things.

-Fletch!

 

[mkletch]

When you use Refocus, you cannot:

- Use Free Actions (until the beginning of your next turn)
- Move INCLUDING a 5'step (until the beginning of your next turn)
- Use the extra partial action granted from haste (to move OR perform ANY OTHER ACTION)

I would agree.

-Fletch!

 

[Stalker0]

When you use Refocus, you cannot:

- Use Free Actions (until the beginning of your next turn)
- Move INCLUDING a 5'step (until the beginning of your next turn)
- Use the extra partial action granted from haste (to move OR perform ANY OTHER ACTION)

Is this acceptable?

Thanks!

~D

Well it depends on how your read the version of refocus. It is most definately true that you cannot move during refocus, not even with haste. That is perfectly clear, and cannot be questioned.

The question is the line in refocus that says you do nothing real text or flavor text?

The SRD makes it sound like flavor text, because it only mentions a limit on movement, not on any other action. From that, it sounds like the haste action is allowed, as long as it doesn't involve movement.

Personally, I think the original intention of refocus was that you could do NOTHING during that action, basically its an action for those who have really no other options.

However, with the rules presented as is it sounds like its the other way.

 

[IceBear]

Fletch, this goes back to what I was saying earlier - they were afraid to make some changes. Monte himself said that if he had it all to do over again he would have done a LOT more, especially with the magic item creation system.

Many, many, many people I know (and I'm a long time gamer too) wanted nothing to do with 3E when it was announced. Given that attitude, I'm surprised they changed as much as they did. We all know it's not perfect, but it's evolving and maybe with the 4th Edition (if there is one) they'll get even more right.

IceBear

 

[mkletch]

Fletch, this goes back to what I was saying earlier - they were afraid to make some changes. Monte himself said that if he had it all to do over again he would have done a LOT more, especially with the magic item creation system.

Many, many, many people I know (and I'm a long time gamer too) wanted nothing to do with 3E when it was announced. Given that attitude, I'm surprised they changed as much as they did. We all know it's not perfect, but it's evolving and maybe with the 4th Edition (if there is one) they'll get even more right.

That, unfortunately, is where my hope now rests. For the time being, I take bits from d20 Mod, d20 SW, d20 CoC, d20 WoT, and forge this frankenstein of a game. I wish it wasn't necessary to do all that. My solution to spells and items that are out of balance: low magic campaign. Everybody is excited. Now I have a couple months of work to do on that.

-Fletch!

 

[IceBear]

Well, I've always run a low/average magic campaign with the same players for the past 7 years so we rarely have any stumbling over the rules -we all have the same expectations and are easy to get along with (despite what you might think ) so we don't usually let the rules interfere with fun. In all honesty, we run the game pretty much as written (except for Harm ) and have few issues (as long as we don't try to relate some rules to reality ). However, as we tend to low levels/magic we rarely run into some of the more tricky/complex situations.

I also try to keep the basic idea of what the game is in mind. D&D isn't meant to simulate reality - it's meant to be heroic fantasy, and thus I REALLY don't let hitpoints, etc bother me. I also know that it's a game and some rules are there for no good reason other than it's a game . Now, if I'm playing a different system, like say, Alternity, then I'll have different expectations and judge the rules in a different light.

IceBear