Sneak attatck of opportunity

[Machiavelli]

The combat system in D&D, while fun and somewhat efficient, sucks for realism. If you want efficient realism, you should go for a computer game, where many times a second the CPU handles your "rolls" for randomness, and never stops to debate its thousands of rules.

D&D is carving a niche where, if all goes well, a computer game will not render it obsolete, so efficient realism is NOT a realistic goal.

 

[mvincent]

Sage says that the Run penalty only applies during the character's turn. See FAQ quote in my post above.

While I found that previously in the FAQ (and yes, it is good support for Hype's assertion), I was actually curious what the Sage would've said specifically about the run AC penalty.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If a character spends all of one turn running, and then all of his next turn running, did he ever actually stop running?

Let's say he takes a full round action to run, and a free action to drop prone. Next round, he makes a DC35 Tumble check to stand as a free action, and takes a full round action to run.

Did he ever actually stop running?

Bad example since the Hustle power grants an "extra" move action.

Anything that adds "extra" actions already goes outside of the normal rules doesn't it?

So do you feel that the extra move action it grants happens at the end of your turn (in which you take a full round action), or just before your next turn (since you took a full round action, and the move action can't happen until that's over, and you're contending the action isn't over until your next turn)?

So what does the text mean in the PHB?

That there's an implicit 'your turn' in there, just as sometimes 'your next action' means 'your next turn in the initiative order' as opposed to 'the next free, standard, or move action you take'.

There're enough other references to how long a full round action takes - such as the quote about full round spells vs 1 round spells - that we know that a full round action is completed in the turn it is begun, before the next character's turn in the same round begins.

-Hyp.

 

[mvincent]

Let's say he takes a full round action to run, and a free action to drop prone. Next round, he makes a DC35 Tumble check to stand as a free action, and takes a full round action to run.

Good example. Ok, I'm convinced. It might be possible that the writer intended something else, or that a future documents decides differently, but sans that I'll be playing by Hype's definition.

 

[Zaruthustran]

They really should have used the term "full turn action"

As far as I can tell, there are only a few cases of a full-round action actually taking a full round. As in, the action is started in a character's turn, continues throughout the round during other characters' turns, and ends just before the character's next turn.

-z

 

[Thurbane]

D&D is carving a niche where, if all goes well, a computer game will not render it obsolete, so efficient realism is NOT a realistic goal.

Hmm, I disagree somewhat.

True, 100% realism would not work in the D&D combat system, but making a concession this small for the sake of some realism can't really hurt. Our group has a number small houserules along these lines. But I can also appreicated the view of the RAW afficiandos - every house rule increases the possibility of potential rule conflicts.

 

[Sithobi1]

Full round actions are what you term "Full turn action", they're just not called that. Actions that you think should be Full Round actions are 1 round actions.

 

[ZSutherland]

Perhaps life would have been easier if they had delineated between "turn" and "round." A "turn" being the action(s) you begin and potentially complete on the initiative count where you get to act, and a round being one complete cycle through the initiative count from current initiative back to current initiative again. Thus, a sorcerer casting mage armor expends 1 standard action, but if he casts extended mage armor he expends 1 turn action (a full turn beginning and ending before moving to the next person in initiative sequence). The same sorcerer casting Summon Monster I expends 1 round action (starting on his initiative count and continuing throughout the full round until just before his next "turn" begins.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

If the difference between running 1 round, running another 1 round, running another 1 round... or running continually for 3 rounds... is that in both cases I travel 360 feet, but in the first case I lose my Dex bonus during my turn, and in the second, I lose my Dex bonus for three rounds, it's pretty obvious which one I'm going to pick!

If you'd do that in my campaign, bad things would happen to you. We're not talking about DDM. It's the DMs job to keep people from abusing the rules like that.

 

[irdeggman]

Take a deep breath and repeat mantra. D&D combat is abstract, D&D combat is abstact, D&D combat is abstract.


Ahh yes. The FAQ is pretty clear (and supported by the text on spell casting). I fell into that old (in 2nd ed it was like this) and the "apply common sense to the rules" failure mode.

The rules allow a character to run (using a full round action that is started and completed on his turn in the initiative) in a straight line. On his next turn he can continue to run in a different direction since it is now a different action.

Again repeat with me - D&D combat is abstract, D&D combat is abstract.