D&D 3.x Refocus disappeared in 3.5?

[werk]

Strange. I always saw Refocus as the best possible option to take when you didn't have anything to do or couldn't do anything that round (blocked from the front line by meat shields, etc, etc...) and so just geared yourself up to jump into combat that much faster for the next round.

The revised delay rules address this even more effectively, and I group delay with ready in my understanding. With ready, you wait until something happens, then act before it, but only a standard action. When you delay, you wait for something to happen, then act afterwards, but you get a full action. (or that's the way we've been playing it, please speak up if I'm off.) So rather than refocusing and losing your whole round, you can delay until you want to act and pick up from there.

 

[Infiniti2000]

The revised delay rules address this even more effectively, and I group delay with ready in my understanding. With ready, you wait until something happens, then act before it, but only a standard action. When you delay, you wait for something to happen, then act afterwards, but you get a full action. (or that's the way we've been playing it, please speak up if I'm off.) So rather than refocusing and losing your whole round, you can delay until you want to act and pick up from there.

You're off! And I can't believe we hugged.

First, let me point out that I rule it as you do. You must delay until a specific event occurs (e.g. someone acts or something happens). However, this is a houserule. Per the rules, you delay until a specific initiative count, such as 10, 3, 24, or even 400. It's stupid, but that's the rule. It's stupid because it strongly encourages metagaming and unless the DM tells the player what the initiative count is, you can't even delay until after an action occurs. As an example:

PC: I delay.
DM: Okay, a troll comes through the doorway and attacks (rolls dice, etc.).
PC: I stop delaying and . . .
DM: At what count do you stop delaying?
PC: Er, now...?
DM: No, I need an initiative count.

Okay, this is really stupid example, but it's that way to show how stupid the Delay rule really is if you run it as printed.

 

[KarinsDad]

You're off! And I can't believe we hugged.

First, let me point out that I rule it as you do. You must delay until a specific event occurs (e.g. someone acts or something happens). However, this is a houserule. Per the rules, you delay until a specific initiative count, such as 10, 3, 24, or even 400. It's stupid, but that's the rule. It's stupid because it strongly encourages metagaming and unless the DM tells the player what the initiative count is, you can't even delay until after an action occurs. As an example:

PC: I delay.
DM: Okay, a troll comes through the doorway and attacks (rolls dice, etc.).
PC: I stop delaying and . . .
DM: At what count do you stop delaying?
PC: Er, now...?
DM: No, I need an initiative count.

Okay, this is really stupid example, but it's that way to show how stupid the Delay rule really is if you run it as printed.

Not in my copy of the rules.

By choosing to delay, you take no action and then act normally on whatever initiative count you decide to act. When you delay, you voluntarily reduce your own initiative result for the rest of the combat. When your new, lower initiative count comes up later in the same round, you can act normally. You can specify this new initiative result or just wait until some time later in the round and act then, thus fixing your new initiative count at that point.

This is an either or situation. You are not forced to specify an initiative count.

 

[Infiniti2000]

This is an either or situation. You are not forced to specify an initiative count.

"Fixing your initiative count" doesn't mean that you set the initiative count?

 

[KarinsDad]

"Fixing your initiative count" doesn't mean that you set the initiative count?

You set it, but you do not have to explicitly specify it and that is what that rule I bolded states.

In other words, if the DM keeps track of initiative counts and the troll goes, you can immediately say after the troll goes "I want to go now". If it is crucial to the DM that you have an actual count, he will assign you whatever he deems appropriate.

You did not say "I want to go on initiative 12". You said "I want to go now".


What I responded to was your statement:

"Per the rules, you delay until a specific initiative count"

No, this is not the only choice. You do not have to delay until a specific initiative count. You can delay until you suddenly want to go back in.

 

[werk]

It seems to suggest that you must select a 'count' in the initiative in the delay rules.

But...wouldn't you chose to delay until the next init count EVERY count? So you would delay over and over until something happened, then you would act afterwards.

15 Player init, I delay
14 I delay
13 I delay
12 I delay
11 (DM compares dex to see who acts first, player does) I delay.
11 BG acts
10 I act

I clarified it as I did above to assist my players with differentiating ready (going before/standard action) with delay (going after/full action)...which is why I brought it up.

At any time, on his turn, the player can declare a ready action rather than delaying.

 

[KarinsDad]

It seems to suggest that you must select a 'count' in the initiative in the delay rules.

Yes it does. But, there is a reason for that. Initiative is a concept that must have fairly strict and non-ambiguous rules concerning it. If you do not, it creates a mess.

So, they made very number oriented count rules for initiative. This makes it crystal clear as to when actions occur.

However, I do not know of anybody who actually uses counts anymore (I think we used them in 2E). It's much easier to use other systems like lists or 3x5 cards or some such.

 

[irdeggman]

Full text:

DELAY
By choosing to delay, you take no action and then act normally on whatever initiative count you decide to act. When you delay, you voluntarily reduce your own initiative result for the rest of the combat. When your new, lower initiative count comes up later in the same round, you can act normally. You can specify this new initiative result or just wait until some time later in the round and act then, thus fixing your new initiative count at that point.
You never get back the time you spend waiting to see what’s going to happen. You can’t, however, interrupt anyone else’s action (as you can with a readied action).

Initiative Consequences of Delaying: Your initiative result becomes the count on which you took the delayed action. If you come to your next action and have not yet performed an action, you don’t get to take a delayed action (though you can delay again).

If you take a delayed action in the next round, before your regular turn comes up, your initiative count rises to that new point in the order of battle, and you do not get your regular action that round.

Basically as I read it - you first speficy an initiative count (after your initial one) on which you get to take your normal action (i.e., it is delayed until that point).

If you choose not to act at that point, then you continue to delay until the next round when your action would come up again - at which point you need to delay again or take an action.

Whenever you take your action, after the inititive count you first speficied with the initial delay that becomes yuor new initiative count.

Basically - you can't act until the initiative count you first specified by the delay action but you can choose to act anytime aftet that point until your next normal action and that causes your initiative count to change.

Does that make any sense or did I just make it more confusing?

 

[Bullgrit]

In 3.0 the DM and a couple Players didn't understand the concept of Refocus. We'd roll initiative, and if they didn't roll really well, the Players said they were Refocusing *immediately*. The DM then put them at the top of the initiative before anyone at all got to act. So basically, they always got 20+ on the first round of combat.

I tried to explain it, but they were all annoyed by my explanation. "Well that makes Refocus worthless." "Why would anyone want to skip their first turn?" It drove me crazy.

I no longer play with that group. And I'm so glad Refocus was removed from 3.5.

Bullgrit

 

[Infiniti2000]

However, I do not know of anybody who actually uses counts anymore (I think we used them in 2E). It's much easier to use other systems like lists or 3x5 cards or some such.

No initiative counts? Wha? Do you mean not at all or not recorded after rolled?