Action points and dazed

198 posts / 0 new
Last post

if a character is dazed and they take an action then spend an action point. can they take th3e action that that grants? i say no because dazed grants you one action no matter what but i would like to hear what others have to say

I don't allow action points to be used when the character/monster is dazed. Although, I could be wrong and this could be a case of specific beats general, but I doubt it.

Long Live Dragonlance and the Nexus! I still want an athasian nightmare beast and a warforged dragon mini! "Look, Meat, I'll tear your face off, rip your throat out and eat what's left-because that's what I do to food like you." ~Thrikreen Intimidation Tactic.
My Custom 4th edition Content (New Content:0)
* My Personal 4e Darksun Material found below: Currently updating.

Spending an action point is a free action, and you can take free actions while dazed.


My inclination is to read the dazed effect as describing the actions you normally have on your turn.  So, I think you do get the extra action.  (I think it fits in better with the thinking behind action points - it's a moment of heroic effort.)


I wouldn't consider it outrageously mean of a DM to read it the other way around though.

Hoard: may earn you gp; Horde: may earn you xp.

It's come up before and the general consensus (and I believe, rule, but I'm not sure) is that you can use Action Points while dazed and they still work to grant you an extra action.

Epic Dungeon Master

Want to give your players a kingdom of their own? I made a 4e rule system to make it happen!

Your Kingdom awaits!
Update 5th Sep 2011: Added a sample kingdom, as well as sample of play.

You can spend an action point (since spending it is a free action), but you cannot use the action, since you are still limited to using only one of your actions.


You would gain any benefits of spending an action point (like from your paragon path).

I agree that there is nothing stopping you from using an action point. As an action point is such a precious resourse, I would not stop it from granting the standard action.


I agree that there is nothing stopping you from using an action point. As an action point is such a precious resourse, I would not stop it from granting the standard action.




Ditto.
Daze limits you to an action and spending an AP gives you an extra action (P277 & 
286). I see no conflict between them.



I agree that there is nothing stopping you from using an action point. As an action point is such a precious resourse, I would not stop it from granting the standard action.




Ditto.
Daze limits you to an action and spending an AP gives you an extra action (P277 & 
286). I see no conflict between them.



It gives you an extra action, yes.


You start your turn with 3 actions, we will call them cards. You are allowed to play only 1 card on your turn, even though you have 3. Drawing another card does not mean you can play another card.




I agree that there is nothing stopping you from using an action point. As an action point is such a precious resourse, I would not stop it from granting the standard action.




Ditto.
Daze limits you to an action and spending an AP gives you an extra action (P277 & 
286). I see no conflict between them.



It gives you an extra action, yes.


You start your turn with 3 actions, we will call them cards. You are allowed to play only 1 card on your turn, even though you have 3. Drawing another card does not mean you can play another card.




You can play as many cards as you have in your hand.  When dazed, you only have one.  When you spend your Action  Point, you draw another card and can play it.

Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.


You can play as many cards as you have in your hand.  When dazed, you only have one.  When you spend your Action  Point, you draw another card and can play it.




No. You still have all 3 when dazed, you are just limited to one.



You can play as many cards as you have in your hand.  When dazed, you only have one.  When you spend your Action  Point, you draw another card and can play it.




No. You still have all 3 when dazed, you are just limited to one.




That's one way to look at it.


If nothing else, Action Point specifies you get to take an EXTRA action, aka one more than your standard allotment.  3+1=4, 1+1=2.

Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.


That's one way to look at it.


If nothing else, Action Point specifies you get to take an EXTRA action, aka one more than your standard allotment.  3+1=4, 1+1=2.




That is what dazed says.


Actually, an action point says you "gain" an extra action. It does not say you can "take" an extra action. In a normal turn, there are no restrictions on actions--there is only a normal allotment. On a dazed turn, there is a restriction.

Yeah, no-where in the dazed description does it say "you can only take one action on your turn." Instead, it lists a choice of actions you can take. Nothing there says, or even implies, that you cannot take additional actions via other sources (unlike stunned and unconscious, which are conspicuously clear).


"You can take an action" is NOT the same as "You can take only one action" or maybe "You can't take more than one action."


The dazed description's language is permissive, rather than restrictive. It's an important note to make.



That's one way to look at it.


If nothing else, Action Point specifies you get to take an EXTRA action, aka one more than your standard allotment.  3+1=4, 1+1=2.




That is what dazed says.


Actually, an action point says you "gain" an extra action. It does not say you can "take" an extra action. In a normal turn, there are no restrictions on actions--there is only a normal allotment. On a dazed turn, there is a restriction.




So, you can have an extra action and not use it?  I'm sorry, but that makes absolutely no sense to me.  If it's an extra action, it is over and above what you are ordinarily entitled to.  If you can normally take 3, you now get 4.  If you can normally take 1, you now get 2.

Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.


On a dazed turn, there is a restriction.




Yes, the restriction is that you can't take immediate or opportunity actions. It doesn't say you can't take additional granted actions.

Couldn't that same reasoning be applied to a normal turn though? On a normal turn you can take a standard, move and minor action. An action point trumps this general rule by allowing you to take another action. Why can't an action point also trump the dazed condition?


Seems more like a problem of which is the specific and which is the general rule in this scenario because one has to trump the other it seems.


Yeah, no-where in the dazed description does it say "you can only take one action on your turn." Instead, it lists a choice of actions you can take. Nothing there says, or even implies, that you cannot take additional actions via other sources (unlike stunned and unconscious, which are conspicuously clear).


"You can take an action" is NOT the same as "You can take only one action" or maybe "You can't take more than one action."


The dazed description's language is permissive, rather than restrictive. It's an important note to make.




"You can take either a standard action, a move action, or a minor action on your turn (you can also take free actions)."


That sentence is restrictive. "Either/or" means you can take only one of those said actions. If you have 50 standard actions, you can still take only one of them (and that cuts you off from a move or a minor as well).



Couldn't that same reasoning be applied to a normal turn though? On a normal turn you can take a standard, move and minor action. An action point trumps this general rule by allowing you to take another action. Why can't an action point also trump the dazed condition?


Seems more like a problem of which is the specific and which is the general rule in this scenario because one has to trump the other it seems.




On a normal turn you are given one of each of the three actions. There is no limit placed on a normal turn, so an action point action does not need to trump anything.


If you were allowed to only take one of each action, then trading a standard for a move would do nothing for you--since you already have (and probably took) your one move action.

Why can't daze simply be changing what your allotment of actions is by trumping the general rule that you get a standard, move & minor? Granting you a standard that you are able to trade down, albeit written differently than the trade down language but to the same exact effect.

From previous discussions, the concensus was that you could use action points while dazed (since dazed says "you can also take free actions"), but you cannot while stunned (since stunned says "You can’t take actions").


While RAW might be subject to debate, most people seemed to agree on RAI.


Why can't daze simply be changing what your allotment of actions is by trumping the general rule that you get a standard, move & minor? Granting you a standard that you are able to trade down, albeit written differently than the trade down language but to the same exact effect.




If dazed did say that, then I would agree that an action point action can be taken while dazed.


Dazed does not say that though. What happens if it is your turn and you start out undazed, then a monster uses a readied action and dazes you? Do you think you can still use all 3 of your actions, since you did not start the turn dazed? What if you start your turn dazed, but you are able to remove the condition before the end of your turn? Do you think that you are still restricted to the one action?


"You can take either a standard action, a move action, or a minor action on your turn (you can also take free actions)."


That sentence is restrictive. "Either/or" means you can take only one of those said actions. If you have 50 standard actions, you can still take only one of them (and that cuts you off from a move or a minor as well).




You are incorrect.


"either" does not imply that there are no other options - it is simply used to indicate a choice. "You can have either chips, or french fries" doesn't mean I can't have both if I'm willing to pay for the extra.


"or" without any other modifiers can be inclusive, or exclusive...it does not, by itself, indicate exclusion of choices. "Do you want mustard or ketchup?" doesn't mean I can't have both if I want them.


I'm hungry.


Once again, no-where in the dazed condition does it state that you cannot gain extra actions. Take a look at page 269, upper left-hand corner. Dazed changes the very first bullet - not the other ones. And one of them is "Extra Action"...

Not quite in answer to one of your rhetorical questions, at least I think they were, however what would happen if you were dazed in the middle of your turn because of a readied action.


Say you have used your minor action, you use your move action to get adjacent to an enemy because you are going to use a standard action to attack him but the enemy had a readied action against your movement that results in dazing you. Can you now take that standard action or not?

readying an action counts as immediate action which you can't use while dazed !

Think you misread my question. The PC is being dazed by a readied action of the enemy which is triggered by movement before they are able to use their standard action, it's not the person being dazed who is trying to use a readied action.

I think that since you have used at least one action you cannot use your remaining action(s).


Not 100% positive though.


I think that since you have used at least one action you cannot use your remaining action(s).


Not 100% positive though.




that would fit in with the rule about being slowed after you already started moving- if you have already moved 2 or more squares and become slowed, your movement ends

Adopt one today!Adopt one today!Adopt one today!Adopt one today!

That could have been what I was thinking about, but yeah it would be kinda consistent rules wise.



"You can take either a standard action, a move action, or a minor action on your turn (you can also take free actions)."


That sentence is restrictive. "Either/or" means you can take only one of those said actions. If you have 50 standard actions, you can still take only one of them (and that cuts you off from a move or a minor as well).




You are incorrect.


"either" does not imply that there are no other options - it is simply used to indicate a choice. "You can have either chips, or french fries" doesn't mean I can't have both if I'm willing to pay for the extra.


"or" without any other modifiers can be inclusive, or exclusive...it does not, by itself, indicate exclusion of choices. "Do you want mustard or ketchup?" doesn't mean I can't have both if I want them.


I'm hungry.


Once again, no-where in the dazed condition does it state that you cannot gain extra actions. Take a look at page 269, upper left-hand corner. Dazed changes the very first bullet - not the other ones. And one of them is "Extra Action"...





"You can have either the steak or the shrimp."  This implies that you have to choose between the two.  You can *ask* if you can have both, but the default choice is one or the other and most people will assume this and choose accordingly.

PHB 269:
Actions on your turn: 
-Your Actions: You get the following three actions on your turn.
Standard Action
Move Action
Minor Action


-Extra Action: You can take an extra action by spending an action point.


The extra action is separate thing from the normal actions your can take on your turn.


PHB 277
-Daze:You can take either a standard action, move action or minor action on your turn (you can also take free actions).  You can't take opportunity actions or immediate actions. 


Daze does not prevent you using an extra action, therefore you can take an extra action when you spend an action point while dazed.  


 


 

I think that both sides are correct here.  Suo makes a very good and valid point (usually does), while the plurality of the other posts in this thread make an opposing one that is also good and valid.  I think that this might be a case where your DM would have to make the call.  Logically, both work as the main difference is between something that the exact writing is ... well, it is not that it is vague, but rather simply not specific enough.


-TheNative

dazed says you can take "a" standard, minor or move action which means you can take only one of those. an action point grants an extra action however all actions fall under the category of being either a standard, free, minor, move, opportunity or immediate.  so a guy who spends an action point while dazed is theoretically left with this suite of actions: stamdard, minor, move, free, extra action(in this case the extra action will be a standard). now he can only take one standard action because of being dazed regardless so the action granted by the action point would not be usable

Why can't WotC rule on this one way or another so that it will stop all of these threads from occuring?  The closest they have come is 'Yes you can spend and action point while dazed.'


Personnaly, I rule that you CAN take the extra action while dazed, due to the aspect that it is a once/encounter ability, you only gain 1 AP/2 encounters, ext rest, and the concept of the action point is to pull off a 'super ability'


Ramius

58074418 wrote:
I strive for the freedom from expectations so many enjoy here; I fear I have a long journey to that level of spiritual creaminess.

but the fact that all you get is another action added your action pool doesn't change and because of the dazed condition the use to which you can put that move pool to is extremely limited. lol burning an action point to take a free action is the only thing you would be able to do while dazed since you are limited to only one stndard, minor, or move action.

The action granted by using an action point is an "extra action" and can be taken while dazed.


Just as being restricted to 3 actions normally doesn't prevent you from using an extra action, being restricted to 1 action also doesn't prevent you from using an extra action.

Looking at the exact wording, I think I'm changing my mind.


The rules do seem to distinguish between actions that you get or gain (i.e. are entitled to) and actions that you take (i.e. actually use).  So the turn flow goes:


How many actions does the character get?  (And the action point adds the action here.)


When does the character take their actions?  (And daze kicks in here.)


That means that contrary to what I was thinking, using an action point while dazed wouldn't allow you to take more than one action.  (Although you could still spend an action point to benefit from any warlord/PP/etc granted effects if you chose.)


However, the rules are not quite consistent in their terminology: in the box text the rules say that if you spend an action point you gain a free action.  However, in the follow-up text the rules say that if you don't take a free action you can instead get some other benefit you might be entitled to.  So it's not quite clear cut.


 

Hoard: may earn you gp; Horde: may earn you xp.

Yeah, well, being as this sort of parsing of phraseology is pretty much all I do for a living I'll weigh in as about as close to an expert on the unequivocal meanings of English as you're going to find outside of a court room...


I think Suo et al. are correct. The precise meaning of the RAW is "when you are dazed you can only use one action" and an AP doesn't change that. The argument that "or" can mean "and" is totally specious. It easily falls to reductio ad absurdum and any such position is untenable because were it so then english would lack any ability to express a choice of alternatives. The contra argument relies on changing the conditions of the choice, not any ambiguity in the meanings of the words "and" and "or". If "or" can mean the same thing as "and" then logic simply cannot be expressed in english at all and the entire PHB is nothing but mumbo jumbo.


So what we are left with is that the rule for the dazed condition clearly states you can take one action. It says nothing about what actions you have. The AP rule talks about giving you extra actions. The normal action rules say nothing about how many actions you can take, it only says you have a specified number of actions. By the sense of the rules normally if you have an action then you can take that action. The dazed condition rule imposes a limitation on which actions you can take and spending an AP does not modify that. Ergo you may only take one (non-free) action while dazed and expending an AP won't change that situation.


Of course it is fair to note that the dazed condition rule could have been specific and stated this outright. The fact that it didn't do that is a reasonable indication that RAI may be that an AP should let you take whatever action the AP gives you. The fact remains though that Suo and Thorn have quite correctly parsed the literal meaning of the rules text and their argument is cogent. I think in analyzing how you will actual handle the situation at the table its worth considering both what's more interesting as options for the players and also what the consequences are to the players since the same argument has to work in the case of monsters. So the question you'll want to answer is whether or not its better for dazed to be more or less of a strict limitation. I'd think as a player I'd probably be more in favor of being able to get an action for an AP while dazed given that monsters use APs a lot less often than PCs do, but as a DM I'm pretty neutral on the whole subject.

That is not dead which may eternal lie

 extra action where extra means more than what is usual, expected, or necessary. When you are dazed it is usual and expected that you get one action. When you spend an action point, you get an extra action, so therefore yes you can take it.

Adopt one today!Adopt one today!Adopt one today!Adopt one today!


 extra action where extra means more than what is usual, expected, or necessary. When you are dazed it is usual and expected that you get one action. When you spend an action point, you get an extra action, so therefore yes you can take it.




Again... you do not "get" one action while dazed. You still have all of your actions available to you. You are restricted to using one action.


[


Again... you do not "get" one action while dazed. You still have all of your actions available to you. You are restricted to using one action.




and an action point grants you an extra one. 
Adopt one today!Adopt one today!Adopt one today!Adopt one today!



[


Again... you do not "get" one action while dazed. You still have all of your actions available to you. You are restricted to using one action.




and an action point grants you an extra one. 



Yes... an extra one to have. Dazed still restricts you to using just one action. The specific rules for spending an action point do not say you get to "take" an extra action on your turn. You only "gain" an extra action.


On a normal turn, there is no action restriction--there is only action allotment. Adding to that allotment lets you spend extra actions. On a dazed turn there is action restriction. Adding to your allotment does not overcome that restriction.

Yes, dazed restricts you to one action (plus free actions) We agree on that. Spending an Action Point is a free action. I believe we also agree on that. Now when you spend that Action Point you gain an extra action. You were restricted to one action, now you are restricted to one plus an extra action. 

Adopt one today!Adopt one today!Adopt one today!Adopt one today!