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="Shiroiken" data-source="post: 8283836" data-attributes="member: 6775477"><p>4E was the only edition that had lots of reactions, and even then it was limited to once per turn. While it wouldn't "break" the game, it will have a lot more impact than you think. I have a few suggestions on your issues.You get 1 reaction, and trying to stop someone from moving by you (with an attack) also takes up that 1 reaction. It's also somewhat easier to move around someone in 5E than it was in other editions already. So, in a combat with multiple foes, trying to use traditional tactics to protect someone behind you doesn't work as well.</p><p></p><p>It depends on what you mean by "traditional." In 3E and 4E attacks of opportunity were a method of controlling the battlefield, but 5E works almost identical to 3E (except more spaces provoke). In AD&D and BECMI the tactic was forming a wall of heavily armored characters; you can't run past if there's no room. Something to consider, from the DM's perspective, is the intelligence of the enemy. Tactics often used by PCs, such as focused fire and taking attacks of opportunity, shouldn't be utilized by low intelligent creatures. Technically PCs shouldn't do this either, since it's manipulating the mechanics of the game, but that's a different issue.</p><p></p><p>This is an abstraction of the game. Everything in game is happening all at the same time, but the game breaks the 6 second round down into turns for ease of use. Characters don't ever just "stand there," but are taking their action at the same time. If you want to expand the round from 6 seconds to 10 seconds, it won't make that much of a difference, except to spells of 1 minute duration (and most of the time those won't be affected).</p><p></p><p>Not to be offensive (which means I'm about to offend you), but this sounds like either a DM issue or a bad player issue. As the DM, you need to keep the action moving and descriptions vivid. Large combats can bog down, in which case you need to try and keep everyone engaged as much as possible, usually by have enemies attacking multiple players or separating them. This isn't always easy, especially if playing over a VTT, but suggestions include using fewer, more powerful monsters (which most DMs seem to like anyway).</p><p></p><p>It's also possible it's the players. I've had players who didn't give a crap about anything other than their turn. One particular guy used to pull out his handheld video games (pre-smartphone era) both between combats and when it wasn't his turn. He only paid attention when he had to do something. He was a crappy player, and I'm glad I no longer game with him.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Shiroiken, post: 8283836, member: 6775477"] 4E was the only edition that had lots of reactions, and even then it was limited to once per turn. While it wouldn't "break" the game, it will have a lot more impact than you think. I have a few suggestions on your issues.You get 1 reaction, and trying to stop someone from moving by you (with an attack) also takes up that 1 reaction. It's also somewhat easier to move around someone in 5E than it was in other editions already. So, in a combat with multiple foes, trying to use traditional tactics to protect someone behind you doesn't work as well. It depends on what you mean by "traditional." In 3E and 4E attacks of opportunity were a method of controlling the battlefield, but 5E works almost identical to 3E (except more spaces provoke). In AD&D and BECMI the tactic was forming a wall of heavily armored characters; you can't run past if there's no room. Something to consider, from the DM's perspective, is the intelligence of the enemy. Tactics often used by PCs, such as focused fire and taking attacks of opportunity, shouldn't be utilized by low intelligent creatures. Technically PCs shouldn't do this either, since it's manipulating the mechanics of the game, but that's a different issue. This is an abstraction of the game. Everything in game is happening all at the same time, but the game breaks the 6 second round down into turns for ease of use. Characters don't ever just "stand there," but are taking their action at the same time. If you want to expand the round from 6 seconds to 10 seconds, it won't make that much of a difference, except to spells of 1 minute duration (and most of the time those won't be affected). Not to be offensive (which means I'm about to offend you), but this sounds like either a DM issue or a bad player issue. As the DM, you need to keep the action moving and descriptions vivid. Large combats can bog down, in which case you need to try and keep everyone engaged as much as possible, usually by have enemies attacking multiple players or separating them. This isn't always easy, especially if playing over a VTT, but suggestions include using fewer, more powerful monsters (which most DMs seem to like anyway). It's also possible it's the players. I've had players who didn't give a crap about anything other than their turn. One particular guy used to pull out his handheld video games (pre-smartphone era) both between combats and when it wasn't his turn. He only paid attention when he had to do something. He was a crappy player, and I'm glad I no longer game with him. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Would Allowing Multiple Reactions Break The Game?
Top