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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7388257" data-attributes="member: 6919838">"I'm interested to hear other people's take on this, especially people who might agree with Mike on this stance. Why does thinking about Action Economy mean the design team have failed?"I think its wrong. pie in the sky wishful thinking of a system where basic tactical complications don't play a major role."How many and what kinds of" things i can do is at the heart of chargen *for any game* where the combats are expected to be choice driven and tactical.But its also vague because action economy is used for several widely different things - the number of actions a group has *and* the number of types of actions a single entity has and how to get the most of them in play.When you take a look at what Mearls has said about BA and such, his suggestions and inklings were not to remove them, just repackage them. instead of Healing word being a BA that allows a cantrip there would have been a spell which had healing word healing and an attack. Put another way, instead of giving you turns as "box of stuff you do" where you assemble/load the box up yourself from a lot of different parts - one action, one bonus action, one reaction - you would get a lot of (an awful awful lot of) pre-loaded boxes.Want to healing word and stabilze? thats a new pre-loaded box. Want to healing word and guidance? Thats another pre-loaded box.etc etc etcIn other words, instead of selling you a kit you can make many many box-loads from... we will sell you a lot of boxes in a lot of different products.No thank you.****5e is far from perfect... i personally think the bonus action spell restriction should have been on quicken, not bonus action spells - since other BA do not limit actions. I do not have a problem myself with bonus actions not being usable as actions since they seem intentionally placed into "these will conflict - one or the other not both"  clusters.But, really, as far as "action economy" goes - even with the Mearls "sold by wotc pre-loaded boxes" you will still be looking for the same thing, the same optimizations - which of the "combo-boxes" best fits our needs right now while also looking for a good set of reaction options. looks like pathfinder is turning it into multiple boxes of the same size (three actions and one reaction) and making several of what are now "actions" into "multi-action" options. that *may* be cleaner in the long run but it still feeds the action economy optimization and keeps AE front and center during chargen.Edit to addIMO - their biggest error was to not utilize action economy and other factors as up-front elements in their scenario balance encounter design CR based mechanism in the DMG. there is where they can afford to be "not so simple" and get "under the hood" and they wound up with a system which IMO abstracts way too much to be accurate beyond low level parties of standard configuration.of course, arguably the Gm should not need it by later than that.</blockquote>

Verification