Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9331828" data-attributes="member: 29398">Yep, and over time it eventually gets hammered out as to what can be done and what can't, in general.The main issue I had with how 3e did it was movement.&nbsp; You're here up until your initative, and on your action suddenly you're over there as if you'd done a very short-range teleport.&nbsp; I'm not sure 4e or 5e improved on this any; there's a thread going right now about continuous initiative in which a very elegant solution is proposed: you move one square per initiative &quot;pip&quot; e.g. if your init is 18 and you're moving 4 squares, you get there on a 14.The other big issue with 3e - and this caused a nasty argument in a 3e game I was in - was that because initiatives (and thus, actions) couldn't be simultaneous, two characters couldn't act together e.g. the higher-init character delays to match the lower then they hold hands to run through a smoke barrier and not get separated.For things like multi-attacks (in any edition) I far prefer they each get their own initiative so as to both randomize their timing and to indicate they're not all happening in a sudden flurry.We had to convert all the casting times in 1e from a 10-segment round to fit 6-segment rounds in order to line up with everything else, but it's something we only had to do once.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 9331828, member: 29398"] Yep, and over time it eventually gets hammered out as to what can be done and what can't, in general. The main issue I had with how 3e did it was movement. You're here up until your initative, and on your action suddenly you're over there as if you'd done a very short-range teleport. I'm not sure 4e or 5e improved on this any; there's a thread going right now about continuous initiative in which a very elegant solution is proposed: you move one square per initiative "pip" e.g. if your init is 18 and you're moving 4 squares, you get there on a 14. The other big issue with 3e - and this caused a nasty argument in a 3e game I was in - was that because initiatives (and thus, actions) couldn't be simultaneous, two characters couldn't act together e.g. the higher-init character delays to match the lower then they hold hands to run through a smoke barrier and not get separated. For things like multi-attacks (in any edition) I far prefer they each get their own initiative so as to both randomize their timing and to indicate they're not all happening in a sudden flurry. We had to convert all the casting times in 1e from a 10-segment round to fit 6-segment rounds in order to line up with everything else, but it's something we only had to do once. [/QUOTE]

Verification