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="Blue" data-source="post: 8283337" data-attributes="member: 20564"><p>"Break the game" is a bit open ended.</p><p></p><p>Action economy is a big deal in the game, and it already doesn't handle when one side or the other hand a lot more or less - usually through incompatible numbers. If there's more on one side, there's more opportunities to trigger reactions already, and now more reactions to go around. This will exasperate that issue.</p><p></p><p>Some classes and builds can make better use of reactions. This furthers that imbalance. A rogue getting three sneak attacks during a round - one on their turn, and more from (sometimes triggered) OAs or things like Commander's Strike or Order Cleric. That starts to get quite powerful. A martial with sentinel at a choke point can shut down a bunch of foes - and cause rules issues but reducing two creatures to 0 speed in the same square</p><p></p><p>Being able to pull out multiple magical defenses in the same turn as opposed to leaving yourself vulnerable by picking one helps casters. If you did Absorb Elements you can still do Shield later. Or even another Absorb Elements since that spell is single source.</p><p></p><p>Some class features, like the Glamour Bard's Mantle of Inspiration grant bonuses to a good number of people and then additional bonuses if they can spend their reaction. So certain classes can take advantage that others have more as well.</p><p></p><p>All in all it will have an effect on play that will be uneven based on the classes, features, and feats that the players have.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Blue, post: 8283337, member: 20564"] "Break the game" is a bit open ended. Action economy is a big deal in the game, and it already doesn't handle when one side or the other hand a lot more or less - usually through incompatible numbers. If there's more on one side, there's more opportunities to trigger reactions already, and now more reactions to go around. This will exasperate that issue. Some classes and builds can make better use of reactions. This furthers that imbalance. A rogue getting three sneak attacks during a round - one on their turn, and more from (sometimes triggered) OAs or things like Commander's Strike or Order Cleric. That starts to get quite powerful. A martial with sentinel at a choke point can shut down a bunch of foes - and cause rules issues but reducing two creatures to 0 speed in the same square Being able to pull out multiple magical defenses in the same turn as opposed to leaving yourself vulnerable by picking one helps casters. If you did Absorb Elements you can still do Shield later. Or even another Absorb Elements since that spell is single source. Some class features, like the Glamour Bard's Mantle of Inspiration grant bonuses to a good number of people and then additional bonuses if they can spend their reaction. So certain classes can take advantage that others have more as well. All in all it will have an effect on play that will be uneven based on the classes, features, and feats that the players have. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Would Allowing Multiple Reactions Break The Game?
Top