Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6239462" data-attributes="member: 1465">Yes I actually already had it in mind while writing my previous post..."How to play", Page 16, paragraph "Your Turn", first lines of the second column (emphasis mine):You can take only one reaction per round.When you take a reaction, you can’t take another one until the start of your next turn.Here we have two consecutive sentences that seem to refer each to one of the opposing views <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />Let's say your Init is 10. Going by the first alone, if you take a reaction when Init count is 15, you can't take another when Init is 5; but if you take the first reaction this round at 5, you can take another next round at 15, for a total of 2 between your turns. This also creates the odd result that an intermediate Init score is better than both a very high and a very low Init score.Going by the second alone (what I'm using right now) guarantees max 1 reaction between your turns, always. Higher Init score is always better at the beginning of the combat, but then everything becomes cyclic (i.e. there is no special narrative meaning of the start or end or a round) and it's not advantageous in absolute terms anymore.Going by both at the same time (but using your meaning of "round") is actually not that different from going by the first alone IMO, just more complicatedly worded and yielding some occasional weird corner case (e.g. if you are second-last in Init score and you have already taken a reaction in "round N", you can't take a reaction if provoked by the last character but you can take a reaction if provoked by the next character because it's already "next turn".Because of these considerations, I think their intent is round as "moving window", like it was in 3e. To reiterate what I wrote before, I think the main reason for having rules for Readying an Action in the game is narrative, which is why I come to the same conclusions as you.As for the issue of (a) allowing to lose the readied action to take a different reaction VS (b) not allowing to take any other reaction while waiting for the trigger, I would probably prefer (a) over (b), but in either case I definitely wish the designers make a decision and spell it clearly.</blockquote>

Verification