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
*Dungeons & Dragons
Would Allowing Multiple Reactions Break The Game?
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="Argyle King" data-source="post: 8283309" data-attributes="member: 58416"><p>Normally, a 5E character only gets 1 reaction.</p><p></p><p>Most of the time, that is fine. However, I am of the opinion that there may be aspects of the game which may benefit from allowing more than 1. For example, creating a front line to protect squishy party members is difficult to do when a character can only attempt to hit/stop one enemy. There are also fighting styles -such as the protection style- which seem rather weak because you get one use per turn and then your fighting style effectively turns off (as opposed to being constantly usable like most styles are). Also, I feel as though combat could feel less static if there are more opportunities to react to what is happening and engage in the action.</p><p></p><p>I do not want an unlimited number of reactions. Off the top of my head, my rough idea is to either allow something like </p><p>[# of reactions = 1/2 proficiency bonus (round up)].</p><p>This would mean 1 reaction for levels 1 - 4; 2r for levels 5 - 12; and 3r for levels 13 - 20.</p><p></p><p>How do you feel this would change play?</p><p></p><p>More importantly, would this break the game?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Argyle King, post: 8283309, member: 58416"] Normally, a 5E character only gets 1 reaction. Most of the time, that is fine. However, I am of the opinion that there may be aspects of the game which may benefit from allowing more than 1. For example, creating a front line to protect squishy party members is difficult to do when a character can only attempt to hit/stop one enemy. There are also fighting styles -such as the protection style- which seem rather weak because you get one use per turn and then your fighting style effectively turns off (as opposed to being constantly usable like most styles are). Also, I feel as though combat could feel less static if there are more opportunities to react to what is happening and engage in the action. I do not want an unlimited number of reactions. Off the top of my head, my rough idea is to either allow something like [# of reactions = 1/2 proficiency bonus (round up)]. This would mean 1 reaction for levels 1 - 4; 2r for levels 5 - 12; and 3r for levels 13 - 20. How do you feel this would change play? More importantly, would this break the game? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Would Allowing Multiple Reactions Break The Game?
Top