D&D 5E I am thinking of eliminating reactions.

[ad_hoc]

You could cut down on reaction abilities instead.

Do you use feats? If so you could just not use the ones that give reactions.

You could eliminate the Ready action without throwing out all reactions as well if that is the main issue. Or maybe it is the adjudication of Ready? It's bad with extra attack classes as you only get 1 attack. With spells it uses your concentration so you can't have a different concentration spell going (and you could lose it if you get hit between ready and the reaction).

For these reasons I don't see the Ready action used very often. It's mostly used for attacking something that pops out of and back into safety during its turn.

 

[Bawylie]

Reactions/AoO’s and readied actions all seem to contribute to interrupting the flow of a round. This interruption is creating confusion about who’s turn is next. This sometimes means people miss a turn even when paying attention. I haven’t liked AoO’s since third edition because they are cumbersome and insipid. I feel like countering spells is a worthwhile endeavor. How would you handle countering?

I’d have “counterspell” take the same position/time as a saving throw.

 

[Horwath]

Reactions/AoO’s and readied actions all seem to contribute to interrupting the flow of a round. This interruption is creating confusion about who’s turn is next. This sometimes means people miss a turn even when paying attention. I haven’t liked AoO’s since third edition because they are cumbersome and insipid. I feel like countering spells is a worthwhile endeavor. How would you handle countering?

What?

What is so complicated to write down a couple of single and double digit numbers? That take turns in a descending order.

In 3rd edition, every campaign had one or two characters with combat reflexes and it never was a problem with that.

This seems more that players are on their smartphones browsing facebook or similar BS instead of playing the game with 100% concentration

 

[robus]

I've certainly experienced the OPs issue a few times, because interacting with the reacting player can sometimes make you think they were the one acting and, because you're trying to keep combat fast and exciting, you mistakenly go to the next player in initiative. The players generally catch this, but I know there's been at least one combat where I missed someone.

I imagine a simple solution would be to make the initiative track more public so that the players can see who is going to be next, because as a poster said, they're keen to take their turn. I like using my Pathfinder combat pad, so that's not going to work for me. But it's also not happened enough for me to be worried about changing rules.

 

[Mistwell]

When I say I want to keep counterspell I have been misunderstood. I want to keep the ability to prevent a spell. I do not want it to be a reaction. I want it to be an action. As for the other abilities like uncanny dodge I would be looking for suitable replacements sans interruption.

Tracking initiative is a problem. I have tried many different methods. Some work better than others. I still feel that this mechanic exacerbates the problem without actually adding something of value. Instead it adds dice rolls and extra decision points. These tend to most penalize players without system mastery by increasing delay between turns.

Some things are non issues. Like legendary resistance (or even shield) It doesn't require a new roll or a target at best it just changes the outcome of one dice-roll that has already been made.

Ah OK, well then I guess list the issues you think need replacement and we can talk about each one? Most can probably fit that same pattern of moving it into an action, or wrapping it up with another ability, or replacing it entirely if neither of the other two solutions will work.

 

[5ekyu]

Our group does not have these issues.

Reactions keep your attention on the events even when not your turn.

I see it as a net positive. Heck, I would like more.

 

[Wiseblood]

I've certainly experienced the OPs issue a few times, because interacting with the reacting player can sometimes make you think they were the one acting and, because you're trying to keep combat fast and exciting, you mistakenly go to the next player in initiative. The players generally catch this, but I know there's been at least one combat where I missed someone.

I imagine a simple solution would be to make the initiative track more public so that the players can see who is going to be next, because as a poster said, they're keen to take their turn. I like using my Pathfinder combat pad, so that's not going to work for me. But it's also not happened enough for me to be worried about changing rules.

Haha it is already tracked publicly. When I say I’ve tried a lot I mean it. Outside your turn actions muddy the water for our whole table.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

Thanks for the warning.

 

[Wiseblood]

Thanks for the warning.

Huh?

 

[Blue]

Reactions/AoO’s and readied actions all seem to contribute to interrupting the flow of a round. This interruption is creating confusion about who’s turn is next. This sometimes means people miss a turn even when paying attention. I haven’t liked AoO’s since third edition because they are cumbersome and insipid. I feel like countering spells is a worthwhile endeavor. How would you handle countering?

If I recall correctly, part of the reason they were added was to help keep players interested between their turns because they had a chance to affect it.

Since then it's grown to play an important role in the expected tactics of battle, such as not being able to just rush past the front line and kill the more fragile characters.

There are plenty of ways to make sure players don't miss their turns, including the DM calling out who is next since they are the one with the full initiative count.

Make the rule changes you want, but it seems like your pain point can be solved fairly easily, and in such a way that doesn't have unintended consequences.