Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Side by Side Initiative
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5814010" data-attributes="member: 54877"><p>You have to be flexible, but not allow just everything. A round is kind of an abstract thing, still even at 6 seconds. So in this particular case, I'd allow this if the wizard shifted or didn't move, and thus cast while the movement from the other characters was started. They've heard the wizard cast before, they see the monster glow and start to move, they stay on course. If the monster saves and doesn't move, they might change direction. Then while they are attacking at their final destination, the wizard can be using the rest of her actions.</p><p> </p><p>But what I would <strong>not</strong> allow is the wizard to do make a full move, whip out an item, cast the spell, and then the other characters wait to see what happens before they do anything. If the wizard needs to do that, then they have to delay until after the monster moves. (And note that with many dominate effects, this is how it would play out, because the monster won't act until its turn comes up anyway.)</p><p> </p><p>Basically, cut everyone a lot of slack on order of operations, but not infinite slack. If you can squint, and kind of, sort of, see that working--allow it.</p><p> </p><p>Some side-by-side systems get around a lot of these problem by having a separate movement phase (or separate movement phases). Everyone moves. Everyone attacks in some order (similar to mine). Everyone moves again. I considered it. But given all the other changes, that seemed a bit too much to tangle with, and still keep a lot of the 4E rules in place. And it is not as if that kind of movement doesn't have its own set of issues, too.</p><p> </p><p>Edit: Keep in mind with simultaneous actions, <strong>intent</strong> is far more important than plotting a tactical course on the map. If the paladin says he is "charging the nearest orc as soon as the wizard's spell goes off", then it doesn't matter exactly which orc that is until after the spell has taken effect. If the spell moves a bunch of the orcs, it might change. And if the spell moved a bunch of rubble between the paladin and the now nearest orc, he might stumble or not make it--because he was already running as the blast hit. You picks ya poison, ya takes ya chances. <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" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5814010, member: 54877"] You have to be flexible, but not allow just everything. A round is kind of an abstract thing, still even at 6 seconds. So in this particular case, I'd allow this if the wizard shifted or didn't move, and thus cast while the movement from the other characters was started. They've heard the wizard cast before, they see the monster glow and start to move, they stay on course. If the monster saves and doesn't move, they might change direction. Then while they are attacking at their final destination, the wizard can be using the rest of her actions. But what I would [B]not[/B] allow is the wizard to do make a full move, whip out an item, cast the spell, and then the other characters wait to see what happens before they do anything. If the wizard needs to do that, then they have to delay until after the monster moves. (And note that with many dominate effects, this is how it would play out, because the monster won't act until its turn comes up anyway.) Basically, cut everyone a lot of slack on order of operations, but not infinite slack. If you can squint, and kind of, sort of, see that working--allow it. Some side-by-side systems get around a lot of these problem by having a separate movement phase (or separate movement phases). Everyone moves. Everyone attacks in some order (similar to mine). Everyone moves again. I considered it. But given all the other changes, that seemed a bit too much to tangle with, and still keep a lot of the 4E rules in place. And it is not as if that kind of movement doesn't have its own set of issues, too. Edit: Keep in mind with simultaneous actions, [B]intent[/B] is far more important than plotting a tactical course on the map. If the paladin says he is "charging the nearest orc as soon as the wizard's spell goes off", then it doesn't matter exactly which orc that is until after the spell has taken effect. If the spell moves a bunch of the orcs, it might change. And if the spell moved a bunch of rubble between the paladin and the now nearest orc, he might stumble or not make it--because he was already running as the blast hit. You picks ya poison, ya takes ya chances. :D [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Side by Side Initiative
Top