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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
WoTC Rodney: Economy of actions
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="Majoru Oakheart" data-source="post: 4127758" data-attributes="member: 5143"><p>That's not a better solution. I don't want to make 30 rolls for my followers each round of combat. Heck, I don't even want followers. I want to play a cool character who kicks butt.</p><p></p><p>Now, if I want to be able to play ONE character and you want to play 30, what benefit do I get in order to make up for your 30 attacks per round and the time that I have to sit around watching you make those attacks?</p><p></p><p>Plus, how do you write a system that accurately measures how difficult an encounter will be when a party might have anywhere between 4 attacks per round and 180 attacks per round if all 6 players decide to bring along an army of soldiers or followers with them? Even if the followers are so useless that only 5% of them hit and they are much weaker than an actual PC, you still have a solid benefit from them that another group might not have. If it's minor enough, it might not even be a problem since balance isn't significantly affected. Then you only have the second problem: that your number of actions is now taking "stage time" away from the other players making the game more "about you" than anyone else. And purely for a minor benefit.</p><p></p><p>If the actions are worthwhile, mind you, then you need to balance that by trading off the power of your actual character to maintain balance. The idea is that if the game lets you have a cohort or followers then you should be just as powerful as any player who chose NOT to have them. If I choose Fireball and you choose Gain a Cohort(or summon a monster) then I should get just as much benefit from fireball as you do from the cohort. If you can cast lightning bolt doing 25 damage, I do the same with my fireball and then your cohort attacks for 25 damage, you are now more powerful than me purely because you get more actions. They are just split amongst the TWO characters you control.</p><p></p><p>Even if you are only able to do 15 damage and your cohort does 10, doing the same damage as me total, you are still more versatile as you can set up your own flanking, protect yourself from damage, open a door with your cohorts action so that you can move into the room and attack with your action and so on.</p><p></p><p>The only real way to do it and keep balance is to sacrifice your own actions for theirs.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Majoru Oakheart, post: 4127758, member: 5143"] That's not a better solution. I don't want to make 30 rolls for my followers each round of combat. Heck, I don't even want followers. I want to play a cool character who kicks butt. Now, if I want to be able to play ONE character and you want to play 30, what benefit do I get in order to make up for your 30 attacks per round and the time that I have to sit around watching you make those attacks? Plus, how do you write a system that accurately measures how difficult an encounter will be when a party might have anywhere between 4 attacks per round and 180 attacks per round if all 6 players decide to bring along an army of soldiers or followers with them? Even if the followers are so useless that only 5% of them hit and they are much weaker than an actual PC, you still have a solid benefit from them that another group might not have. If it's minor enough, it might not even be a problem since balance isn't significantly affected. Then you only have the second problem: that your number of actions is now taking "stage time" away from the other players making the game more "about you" than anyone else. And purely for a minor benefit. If the actions are worthwhile, mind you, then you need to balance that by trading off the power of your actual character to maintain balance. The idea is that if the game lets you have a cohort or followers then you should be just as powerful as any player who chose NOT to have them. If I choose Fireball and you choose Gain a Cohort(or summon a monster) then I should get just as much benefit from fireball as you do from the cohort. If you can cast lightning bolt doing 25 damage, I do the same with my fireball and then your cohort attacks for 25 damage, you are now more powerful than me purely because you get more actions. They are just split amongst the TWO characters you control. Even if you are only able to do 15 damage and your cohort does 10, doing the same damage as me total, you are still more versatile as you can set up your own flanking, protect yourself from damage, open a door with your cohorts action so that you can move into the room and attack with your action and so on. The only real way to do it and keep balance is to sacrifice your own actions for theirs. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
WoTC Rodney: Economy of actions
Top