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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Syrsuro" data-source="post: 4403743" data-attributes="member: 58162">I was just reading a thread on another forum and the subject of discussion was opening doors while moving.  As I read it, by the RAW, opening a door is a minor action and thus can occur either before or after a move action, but not during a move action. The consequence of this is that the distance you can travel down a corridor blocked by a door depends on the position of the door, and not your speed. I.e. - a character standing 5' from a door and another character standing 30' from a door are equally (in)capable of opening that door and moving through it. More specifically: Character has a move of 6 and will only move during the turn (using his standard action to move). Character will not run (running will change the specific numbers, but not the overall concept). Corridor A: 12 squares long, door between the sixth and seventh square. Character can travel the entire length of the corridor (Move action: Move 6 squares, Minor action: Open door, Standard action: move 6 squares). Corridor B: 12 squares long, door between the second and third squares. Character can travel only 8 squares down the corridor (Move action: Move 2 squares, Minor action: Open door, Standard action: move 6 squares). Corridor c: 12 squares long, door between the 7th and 8th squares. Character can only travel 7 squares down the corridor, and cannot move through the door. (Move action: 6 squares, Standard action: move 1 square, Minor action: Open door). This, while easy to adjudicate, is not particularily logical (not that simulationism is the goal). Obviously, if you are happy with the current RAW then this effort will seem pointless. But just for the sake of argument, lets say that too much illogic in basic movement is undesirable. The thread I was reading suggested several options (treat door as difficult terrain, assign a 'movement cost' to opening doors, create a special rule which allowed movements to be split for door and doors only). My thought, rather than to create a rule for that specific corner case, was to introduce a new variation on the concepts of readying an action. And yes, I know that this will bend/ break the current rules for readying actions (and, technically, immediate actions)- my question is: Is there merit to the approach (both in general and in specific) and what obvious exploits am I missing that will make the following approach broken if extended generally. By the current rules, readying an action is a standard action and can only be triggered as an immediate reaction on someone else's action. My proposed rule is as follows: A minor action (only) can be readied prior to taking a move or moving as a standard action, with a specified trigger as described for readying an action. This minor action is triggered when the appropriate conditions occur, interrupting the move action. If the trigger condition does not occur, the move action is not interrupted.  In the case of the door, the character examines the door from a distance and decides to try to open it on the run (readies a minor action to open the door when he gets to it). He heads down the corridor and when he gets to the door the readied minor action is triggered and he attempts to open the door. If the door opens, he resumes the interrupted move action and moves through the door. If the door fails to open, he obviously cannot move through the door, but can continue moving to the limit of his movement. Note: This does not allow him to then shut the door behind him - to do that he would have to stop movement and then use his standard action as a minor action to shut the door.  In the case of a door, I think it does what it is intended to do. But if this house rule were extended to other minor actions, what abuses are likely to happen to make this rule a bad idea? Other uses I can imagine would be grabbing an item as you run past it or stowing an item on the run. Where I am most concerned is the use of minor action powers 'on the run'. Carl</blockquote>

Verification