Ready a Re-Action

[Destil]

Ok, ready is starting to give me headaches... call it the final death cry of the hoirrid 2E rules where you declare what you do before the round and then when you got to your initaitave what you wanted to do at first was now a stupid idea. Same idea, I'm quite annoyed with ready because of the flexibility issues and players wanting to tie in to many conditions.

So here's the idea: You ready in responce to something, but you don't need to decide what you're going to do until action you're reacting to happens. So:

PC: Ready an action for when BBG casts a spell.

Now when the spell is cast they can make their free action spellcraft check to ID it and react from there. Possibly counterspelling, possibly casting a defensive spell to deal with it, possibly just unloading with a fireball and hoping it breaks their concentration.

Thoughs?

 

[Khorod]

Readying an action is not just waiting for someone else, its waiting for something specific. It is more like

Bad Guy is casting a spell. I choose to observe his hands and mouth and be ready to counterspell with whatever I have. Since I am doing that, I could not choose to be ready to jump out of the way on a moment's notice.

The point of ready is that it is a simple, single, if-then statement. Players cannot tie in conditions. They can choose one action to take, which they don't HAVE to take even if the condition is met.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

The point of ready is that it is a simple, single, if-then statement. Players cannot tie in conditions. They can choose one action to take, which they don't HAVE to take even if the condition is met.

I think the point is that this is not what the poster's players want, nor is it totally realistic/fair/fun.

I too would perfer a much looser ready/interupt action mechanic. "I spend my action waiting for an action from X" makes more sense to me than "I ready a counterspell if X casts a spell." "he shoots a crossbow instead".

Readied actions acording to the current motif also make it very hard for the dm to fairly plot the course of npc actions. The knowlege of a PC's readied action on the part of the dm vs the players having no idea whatsoever what npcs may be waiting to do makes it so that strategy is very hard for the players (and for a killer dm no one can prove the bbg WASN'T readying a strike against a spring attack, now can they...)

I would allow a more general readied action in exchange for (sometimes) a spot check to see the threat you want to respond to and possibly a sense motive check on the opponents part to realize what you are doing.

Kahuna Burger

 

[Khorod]

Ah, I thought it was a rules-interpretation question.

Well, the reality of this is that the individual is ready to do a particular thing- his muscles are tensed, a specific action is rehearsed in the mind.

If I were going to expand Ready action, I think it would be something like 'you can ready one sort of action per 1 + Int bonus'. Thus, when the evil sorcerer goes to cast a spell, your brilliant wizard can be prepared to duck, counterspell, poke the sorcerer with his staff, or scream bloody murder. He could not, however, run the other way, for this wizard has only a 17 Intelligence, and didn't manage to think about preparing for that contingency.

And, of course, you could not ready an action with more than one piece of equipment.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Ah, I thought it was a rules-interpretation question.

Well, the reality of this is that the individual is ready to do a particular thing- his muscles are tensed, a specific action is rehearsed in the mind.

*shurg* or not. perhaps the person is watching someone, preparing to react to them but staying loose enough to act simultaneosly no matter what they do. Will a good officer when apprehending a suspect be tensed with the idea only of shooting them if they attack and stand there like a moron if they turn to run instead?

If I were going to expand Ready action, I think it would be something like 'you can ready one sort of action per 1 + Int bonus'. Thus, when the evil sorcerer goes to cast a spell, your brilliant wizard can be prepared to duck, counterspell, poke the sorcerer with his staff, or scream bloody murder. He could not, however, run the other way, for this wizard has only a 17 Intelligence, and didn't manage to think about preparing for that contingency.

were I to put in such a restriction it would without question be based on dex, not int. but I would be more likely to allow anyrange of reasonable responses to a general trigger and see what happens first before limiting it.

And, of course, you could not ready an action with more than one piece of equipment.

even if the chracter was ambidexterous and could use both peices of equipment simlultaneously? Or put another way can you prepare to either use a hand crossbow or an unarmed strike depending on the circumstances?

kahuna burger

 

[Maximillian]

A readied action must fulfil three characteristics to be legitimate:

1) Must be a specific action (ie attack, cast a spell, move).

2) Must be against a specific person or place (ie, "I ready to shoot an arrow at the guy in the hat," or "I ready a fireball at that general area if someone comes through the door.")

3) Must not be changed at any point, until the character's action comes up again in the round order.


This, all together means that my PCs tend to use readied actions mostly for taking prisoners, waiting in ambush, or trying to stop spellcasters. I think that the three criteria don't limit it too much. I've had a few characters wish, from time to time, that they'd readied their action against a different target, but many of them have just been using it as an interrupt version of delay, saying, "I ready a partial charge for the first person to enter my threat range."

I don't think I'd like things the way you intend, Destil, because it would only make readying a MORE common entity, further complicating my already annoying, evershifting initiative order.