Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 5741890" data-attributes="member: 53980">I think there's some interesting design space to be explored in having only one action.  It would certainly be different from the current paradigm, but I think whether it's better or worse would depend mostly on the implementation.You could use class design to push play style even more (I realize that for some people that's undesirable).  -Frontline fighters might get a significant bonus to charge (or be the only ones capable of charging at all).  This would push them to want to get into the enemy's face, which is what they typically should want to do anyway.-Sneaky rogues, on the other hand, might gain a large "Size 'Em Up" bonus to their next attack if they take no offensive actions this round.  It might represent their cautious engagement of their foe, waiting for an opportunity to take them out with a single shot).  It would encourage them, mechanically, to wait for the fighter to mark a target before engaging it.I realize that this might sound a bit like shrouds, but I think it could work.  Firstly, the bonus should apply to the rogue, rather than being applied to an enemy.  Secondly, I expect players will find it worth it if you make the bonus worth it.  Let's assume that the average monster takes 4 hits to kill.  If you make the bonus equal to two average hits, then waiting 1 round in order to kill a creature 1 round sooner becomes a viable tactic.Movement powers become more valuable in a system that restricts actions.  If my choice is move OR attack, then powers like Wolf Pack Tactics, Footwork Lure, and Hit and Run become much more valuable, because they let me attack AND move.  A potential direction might even be to make all attack powers like the monk's; every power has an attack and a movement associated with it.It might open the way to make wizards a bit more "old-school".  Powerful arcane spells wouldn't grant an associated movement, forcing a wizard to stand still and cast (hopefully while his allies cover him).  He might still have a few quick and dirty weaker spells that grant a move, for situations where he can't reasonably stand still and cast.Whether the move action stays or goes, I don't think it would be a bad idea to get rid of both minor and opportunity actions.  I think they add a needless layer of complexity.  While it's an interesting choice, I think decisions like "Should I use Kip Up or Healing Word this turn?" waste time.  Make them free actions usable once per round and I think you'll see some increase in play speed.  I'm willing to sacrifice some interesting choices if it means faster rounds.  Eliminating OAs ensures that, at most, characters will act once per round outside their turn.  That's a lot more reasonable IMO.I'm interested in seeing where this goes (if anywhere).</blockquote>

Verification