D&D 5E Is multiple actions per rounds a good idea?

[JeffB]

I voted no, but additional attacks are ok for me as long as they are a Fighter's exclusive schtik and don't start spreading to other classes.

This. Whether its 3e style multi attacks, or LBB style fighter gets # of attacks = to level vs. 1hd or less monsters.

 

[Jester David]

Two attacks is nothing. It's twin strike. The equivalent of two-weapon fighting. It's quick. An extra action is big, but this isn't that. Quicker than iterative as the math is consistant.

 

[CAFRedblade]

Full extra actions.. in general no. Perhaps through the action point mechanic depending on setting.

However, multi-attack options are fine if done well.

 

[GX.Sigma]

In theory? Yes, that sounds awesome.
In actual gameplay? No, that sounds terrible.

 

[ren1999]

I'm now of the 1 main action, 1 off-hand action and one kick action per turn along with 1 reaction out of turn crowd.

If a character wants two main actions with two large weapons, fine. But the second weapon should not have any bonuses and do less damage.

Multiple attacks per round never slowed down the game because hit points were reduced so rapidly. Game play was usually 5 rounds or a little more. I think that the idea wouldn't fly because some of you have players who can't seem to make up their mind what to do. I purposed punishing the players with only one standard action if they didn't have a plan for multiple actions immediately. Most of you didn't like the idea so I dropped it.

And expertise dice allows for multiple actions, the same multiple actions I wanted anyway, especially Parry and Protect. I think I can accomplish all my original goals with expertise dice in promoting multiple actions per turn and the 1 reaction out of turn. I'm satisfied so I'm not going to push multiple actions anymore.