D&D 5E Would Allowing Multiple Reactions Break The Game?

[Argyle King]

Is there some way other than reactions to increase the amount of interaction that a PC has with the game when it's not their turn?

Part of what I'm looking at that other games I play (and the previous edition of D&D) had less time of just sorta being static between turns.

 

[commandercrud]

Is there some way other than reactions to increase the amount of interaction that a PC has with the game when it's not their turn?

Part of what I'm looking at that other games I play (and the previous edition of D&D) had less time of just sorta being static between turns.

The best way to do that is speed turns up, not give more options to do between turns.

 

[loverdrive]

I'd just gave everyone Reactive ability — it's simpler and easier to track.

 

[Kinematics]

Check the Cavalier (Fighter archtype in Xanathar's). At 18th level, in addition to your normal reaction, you can use a reaction to make an opportunity attack on every creature's turn, though not twice on the same turn. Combine it with Sentinel, Polearm Master, and Mounted Combatant (because Cavalier), and you can completely shut down enemy movement in a pretty large area, with bonus damage on top.

I suppose, given it's an 18th level ability, it's in the "break the game" range that all classes have anyway, so may not answer the OP's question. Still, it's a thing that already exists in the game, and a more limited version at lower levels should not be out of the question.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Is there some way other than reactions to increase the amount of interaction that a PC has with the game when it's not their turn?

Part of what I'm looking at that other games I play (and the previous edition of D&D) had less time of just sorta being static between turns.

Yes, encourage and allow reasonable in-game PC to PC communication even when not a specific player’s turn. Similarly, as DM, have the NPCs/monsters interact socially with various PCs.
Also, not insignificantly, players should be paying attention to the progression of the combat when not their turn and hence be even more ready on their turn with their proposed action. Theater of the mind, even every once in a while, even if playing online, is a great way to “train” players to pay attention. “Ok what’s going on now?” doesn’t cut the mustard if the DM has been fulfilling their role in the play loop and doing a quick description of changes to the scene before each player’s turn. If a player is not ready on their turn (or within 10 seconds or some other reasonable amount of time) their PC takes the Dodge Action and things keep moving through the initiative order. Another idea is a complication jar (or counter) - if someone is not ready on their turn, a die goes in the complication jar. When enough are in there, they get rolled and... stuff happens... probably some bad, nasty stuff!

You don’t absolutely need reactions or specific action economy between turns to ensure a player doesn’t feel “static”. And a great amount of that is on the player.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The biggest worry would be making turns take too long, because everyone has a bunch more stuff they can do and that adds time (especially if you want to pause to give people a chance to jump in with their reaction). In 4e this got out of hand.

It might be better to look at specific cases and rule around those, rather than make a blanket change to the basic rule and hope it doesn't cause problems.

Yup. This would be my concern. The game is unlikely to break, but highly likely to become significantly slower and more annoying. I loved 4E but in combat the greatest flaw it had was that you could have so many Immediate Actions, Reactions, Interrupts, and so on, which could lead to lengthy chains of stuff happening, and drastically slowed the game down as they became common (usually somewhere in the level 11+ range).

 

[CleverNickName]

I don't mind the idea, but it could cause some balance issues at my table, particularly with the Abjuration wizard and the Rogue.

If I were going to allow multiple reactions, I'd have to find a way to slow it down and let it be introduced gradually. Maybe as a feat?

Lightning Reflexes or Whatever​

Prerequisite: Level 4 maybe​

Your character has quicker-than-average reflexes, allowing them to react to danger and take action more quickly. You gain the following benefits:​

Your Dexterity increases by 1, to a max of 20​

You may take one additional Reaction every round.​

You may take his feat multiple times, and its effects stack.​

Eh...(shrug) I dunno. I think it's a lot more powerful than the OP anticipates, but it's probably not powerful enough to mandate a feat or several feats. It really depends on the players and how hard they push the envelope of game optimization.

And what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If I allowed players to take multiple reactions, I'd allow a handful of high-dex or skirmish-type monsters (like will o'wisps and kobolds) to do it also. Not every monster, but just enough to keep things spicy.

 

[Quickleaf]

To get a sense of how valuable the designers view additional reactions, you can look at the Cavalier Fighter's 18th level subclass feature:

Vigilant Defender​

Starting at 18th level, you respond to danger with extraordinary vigilance. In combat, you get a special reaction that you can take once on every creature's turn, except your turn. You can use this special reaction only to make an opportunity attack, and you can't use it on the same turn that you take your normal reaction.

More broadly, if your intent is more dynamic combat... to me dynamic implies more movement... then increasing the occurrence of opportunity attacks (which discourage movement) seems contrary to your design objective. Instead, enabling limited amount of movement as a reaction would be more dynamic.

The idea of a front-line is more applicable to fighting in an enclosed space or mass combat, but less so with a skirmish between a small party and a group of goblins in the woods. You've got to remember, what's good for the goose is often good for the gander, so your rule could disproportionately hurt the players if they often face large groups of monsters, each able to make multiple opportunity attacks.

 

[Argyle King]

Yup. This would be my concern. The game is unlikely to break, but highly likely to become significantly slower and more annoying. I loved 4E but in combat the greatest flaw it had was that you could have so many Immediate Actions, Reactions, Interrupts, and so on, which could lead to lengthy chains of stuff happening, and drastically slowed the game down as they became common (usually somewhere in the level 11+ range).

It's interesting to hear how things work at other tables. Options wasn't the source of extra time in 4E for the group; instead, it was usually more on how early monsters were built.

Likewise, in 5E, it's my perception that lack of choices causes things to be slower.

 

[ECMO3]

To solve your problem you could house rule a controlled area and an enemy can not move through it in one turn.

Personally I have not been faced with this problem, and if I was I think Sentinel would go a long way to stopping it.