Love or Hate: Immediate Actions?

[hong]

They're pretty cool.

 

[roguerouge]

In one campaign I'm in, we use them as a formal way to include cross-talk in combat. Rather than have incessant kibitzing or the inevitable "I can't take a free action to talk--it's not my turn!", we have people ask for advice and give orders with their once/rd immediate action.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

One thing I find myself dwelling on is that you don't "do" anything to leave yourself open to a plethora of immediate actions. With attacks of opportunity, you have to take some kind of action (generally) to trigger them. They happen because you did something on your round that left you open to it, usually because you made a concious choice to do something risky. A lot of the dramatic "goals" of having the immediate actions are already well represented by readied actions instead.

I haven't encountered a lot of offensive immediate actions, so the first part isn't a big concern of mine so far... my worries in that vein run more to the new feats where you take an AoO for opponent actions which don't provoke them (and in some cases even actions specificly taken NOT to provoke).

I will say that readied actions, in my experience, have been a horrible mechanic which more often than not leads to wasting your entire round when the situation you readied for doesn't happen to occur.

 

[Nifft]

I haven't encountered a lot of offensive immediate actions, so the first part isn't a big concern of mine so far... my worries in that vein run more to the new feats where you take an AoO for opponent actions which don't provoke them (and in some cases even actions specificly taken NOT to provoke).

Yeah. There's a build on the WotC CharOp board where your opponent will provoke multiple AoOs from you no matter what he does or does not do. It's called "Lester the Molester" or something if anyone's interested in seeing this peeve broken in horrible ways.

I will say that readied actions, in my experience, have been a horrible mechanic which more often than not leads to wasting your entire round when the situation you readied for doesn't happen to occur.

Again, agree. There are seldom times when I've been happy with the result of a PC (mine or a player's) readying an action. Seems much more like a tool for DMs, and the fifty NPC crossbowmen guarding the King.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Psion]

I will say that readied actions, in my experience, have been a horrible mechanic which more often than not leads to wasting your entire round when the situation you readied for doesn't happen to occur.

Yeah, that's were I am. I hardly ever see readied action used except in exacting and important situations.

 

[werk]

I'm still on the fence.

I seem to like them when I use them and dislike them when someone else uses them.

I've also seen players 'forget' that they can't use anothr immediate action until after their next turn, so there's definitely room for exploit if the DM isn't on his toes.

They are definitely powerful.

 

[GQuail]

Love them. That said...

My biggest problem with immediate actions is that it has slanted the game more towards the spellcasters - arcane in particular. With spells like Ruin Delver's Fortune (and worse, Celerity) it gets _very_ difficult to actually hit a prepared caster. I wouldn't mind this as much if the counters were more spread out across classes, but they aren't. This promotes a "I can do it, you can't" mentality.

Immediate actions: they're the new Knock.

I can sorta appreciate this. I like immediate actioins for the most part, and there's a few effects you couldn't really handle any other way: before hand, Feather Fall was always in a bit of a weird Zen state of actions. But because it only turns up in additional sourcebooks it can end up that only a player or two is having fun with them: otehr people are twiddling their thumbs and waiting for their turn, because Fighters dont get no Immediate Actions, or whatever.

I would be quite happy if one of 4E's changes is to build Immediate and Swift actions in from the start, and make soething using them available to everyone. Something simple like "The Dodge feat is now a +2 to ACfor the next attack that's an immediate action to activate" would mean that all players get to have the satisfaction of "breaking the turn order" rather than it being just what the Psion or whatever gets to do.

 

[GQuail]

In one campaign I'm in, we use them as a formal way to include cross-talk in combat. Rather than have incessant kibitzing or the inevitable "I can't take a free action to talk--it's not my turn!", we have people ask for advice and give orders with their once/rd immediate action.

You know, that's a nice way to keep turn order important and make talking mid-battle between players less of a metagame issue: people have to actually spend a resource to yell advice to friends, even if it's not a major resource. (But it will be for some players, so the Wilder might regret telling his friend what weapon to use to break the villain's DR while another enemy telports out and he can no longer use Divert Teleport.)

 

[Hypersmurf]

... the inevitable "I can't take a free action to talk--it's not my turn!"...

Speak
In general, speaking is a free action that you can perform even when it isn't your turn. Speaking more than few sentences is generally beyond the limit of a free action.

-Hyp.

 

[WhatGravitas]

I've also seen players 'forget' that they can't use anothr immediate action until after their next turn, so there's definitely room for exploit if the DM isn't on his toes.

Give all players a 'action card'. If they use an immediate or swift action, turn it - it means they cannot use any swift or immediate actions. Unflip it at the end of the player's turn. This way, it's foolproof.

For immediate actions - a small addendum to my post: In 3.5E, I think, they're a bit wonky - mainly because they were integrated as an afterthought. Still, I'm loving 'em, though I admit: In 4E they need to be integrated more tightly, not as a tack-on for some spells and powers.

Cheers, LT.