|
2 years ago ::
Aug 04, 2011 - 8:52PM
#1311
|
Date Joined:
Jan 31, 2011
|
#10 - There are no more Full Round Actions, get over it.
haven't gotten far enough to see if it is quoted yet
i think it should be re-written as "characters have no full round actions, only specific situations warrant a full round action"
quoting open Grave page 85:
Crevice in the wall: A break in the wall provides the only easy means of entering the tower. Any medium or small creature that wants to get through the crevice must take a full round to enter the opening and pull itself through.
essentially: full round action--> Enter tower
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 05, 2011 - 4:55AM
#1312
|
|
|
#10 - There are no more Full Round Actions, get over it.
haven't gotten far enough to see if it is quoted yet
i think it should be re-written as "characters have no full round actions, only specific situations warrant a full round action"
quoting open Grave page 85:
Crevice in the wall: A break in the wall provides the only easy means of entering the tower. Any medium or small creature that wants to get through the crevice must take a full round to enter the opening and pull itself through.
essentially: full round action--> Enter tower
A specific, unique thing that a specific terrain feature of a specific dungeon does does not a general rule make. And even then, that's not a "full round action" with any associated rules regarding stuff that happens "until the end of the current action", etc.
That's a single, exceptional, weird situation
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 05, 2011 - 7:59PM
#1313
|
Date Joined:
Jan 31, 2011
|
#10 - There are no more Full Round Actions, get over it.
haven't gotten far enough to see if it is quoted yet
i think it should be re-written as "characters have no full round actions, only specific situations warrant a full round action"
quoting open Grave page 85:
Crevice in the wall: A break in the wall provides the only easy means of entering the tower. Any medium or small creature that wants to get through the crevice must take a full round to enter the opening and pull itself through.
essentially: full round action--> Enter tower
A specific, unique thing that a specific terrain feature of a specific dungeon does does not a general rule make. And even then, that's not a "full round action" with any associated rules regarding stuff that happens "until the end of the current action", etc.
That's a single, exceptional, weird situation
which is why i'm saying that the rule should be reworded, one unique feature does not doesn't make a rule but it can break one
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Sep 18, 2011 - 9:08PM
#1314
|
Date Joined:
Jun 16, 2009
|
#10 - There are no more Full Round Actions, get over it.
haven't gotten far enough to see if it is quoted yet
i think it should be re-written as "characters have no full round actions, only specific situations warrant a full round action"
quoting open Grave page 85:
Crevice in the wall: A break in the wall provides the only easy means of entering the tower. Any medium or small creature that wants to get through the crevice must take a full round to enter the opening and pull itself through.
essentially: full round action--> Enter tower
A specific, unique thing that a specific terrain feature of a specific dungeon does does not a general rule make. And even then, that's not a "full round action" with any associated rules regarding stuff that happens "until the end of the current action", etc.
That's a single, exceptional, weird situation
which is why i'm saying that the rule should be reworded, one unique feature does not doesn't make a rule but it can break one
So, it takes a move action and two minor actions to enter the crevice. QED. A round is made of combatant turns based upon initiative. Turns are a mechanic to organize what is essentially a simultaneous round of combat. In effect, a combatant’s turn always takes a full round.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Sep 20, 2011 - 9:59PM
#1315
|
Date Joined:
Jan 31, 2011
|
So, it takes a move action and two minor actions to enter the crevice. QED. A round is made of combatant turns based upon initiative. Turns are a mechanic to organize what is essentially a simultaneous round of combat. In effect, a combatant’s turn always takes a full round.
the idea of a full round action to enter is you can do nothing else with your turn and you can't say "hey guys this monster looks hungry, better turn back," and it being one action it cant't be broken into:
i use a move action and a minor action to get mostly through but will wait until my next turn to use a minor action to get through and still be able to move and fight. QED.
edit: also the post of what is in open grave is as written, it says a full round to enter, not a move and two minors, just curious where did that come from?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2011 - 12:20PM
#1316
|
|
|
Not sure if this has been address yet, as I haven't read more than the first and last pages of the thread, but...
"Didn't realize it rule" #1 -
The number of times that you can use a daily power granted by a magic item is limited by level.
I didn't realize this. On page 226 of the PHB it points out that from level 1-10 you can only use 1 magic item daily power pre day. Regardless of the item. If you are level 1-10 and use a daily power from a magic item, you cannot use any daily power from any other (Or the same) magic item until after an extended rest. From level 11-20 this increases to two such uses and from 21-30 this becomes 3 such uses. I guess you'd better really think about it when it comes to using a magic item's daily use.
Is now completely wrong...4.5 (I mean essentials) updated this.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2011 - 12:23PM
#1317
|
|
|
Not sure if this has been address yet, as I haven't read more than the first and last pages of the thread, but...
"Didn't realize it rule" #1 -
The number of times that you can use a daily power granted by a magic item is limited by level.
I didn't realize this. On page 226 of the PHB it points out that from level 1-10 you can only use 1 magic item daily power pre day. Regardless of the item. If you are level 1-10 and use a daily power from a magic item, you cannot use any daily power from any other (Or the same) magic item until after an extended rest. From level 11-20 this increases to two such uses and from 21-30 this becomes 3 such uses. I guess you'd better really think about it when it comes to using a magic item's daily use.
Is now completely wrong...4.5 (I mean essentials) updated this.
#1: We can't edit the OP. The only guy who could is long gone.
#2: The 2011 Heroes Of Whatever books are better termed "PHB1 Power" and "PHB2 Power" if you want to be snarky. Calling them "4.5" is simply inaccurate, since they're both a) compatible and b) balanced with the rest of the D&D material. There's no D20ish "toss your old books, they're crap" problem.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2011 - 12:41PM
#1318
|
|
|
#1: We can't edit the OP. The only guy who could is long gone.
#2: The 2011 Heroes Of Whatever books are better termed "PHB1 Power" and "PHB2 Power" if you want to be snarky. Calling them "4.5" is simply inaccurate, since they're both a) compatible and b) balanced with the rest of the D&D material. There's no D20ish "toss your old books, they're crap" problem.
Understandable about the OP being gone; but I would suggest perhaps someone take a bit of time and recreate this... someone who intends to be around a while.
As to my 4.5 comment, it was made in jest - but compatible or not, it IS a new edition. Being backwards compatible doesn't negate that fact. Being a new edition doesn't make it inherintly bad...I like it, as much as (possibly a tad more than) I liked 4e in the first place, I just find it ridiculous that WotC adamantly denies this obvious fact.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2011 - 12:45PM
#1319
|
|
|
#1: We can't edit the OP. The only guy who could is long gone.
#2: The 2011 Heroes Of Whatever books are better termed "PHB1 Power" and "PHB2 Power" if you want to be snarky. Calling them "4.5" is simply inaccurate, since they're both a) compatible and b) balanced with the rest of the D&D material. There's no D20ish "toss your old books, they're crap" problem.
Understandable about the OP being gone; but I would suggest perhaps someone take a bit of time and recreate this... someone who intends to be around a while.
Feel free. If you build it, they will sticky.
(Or, make a Wiki page. That way it's editable even if you leave.)
As to my 4.5 comment, it was made in jest - but compatible or not, it IS a new edition. Being backwards compatible doesn't negate that fact. Being a new edition doesn't make it inherintly bad...I like it, as much as (possibly a tad more than) I liked 4e in the first place, I just find it ridiculous that WotC adamantly denies this obvious fact.
You need to define "edition" carefully. In publishing terms, yes. In RPG design terms, no. In some other terms? Maybe, what other terms have you got?
In the sense of "AD&D" versus "D20" versus "D20.5" versus "D&D" being defined as editions? Essentials D&D is not a new edition, it's a large series of option books.
In the sense of Magic The Gathering releases, heck yes it's an "edition", but using that term when discussing an RPG is misleading because "a new edition of Magic" versus "a new edition of GURPS" has *completely* different baggage.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 02, 2011 - 2:51PM
#1320
|
|
|
You need to define "edition" carefully. In publishing terms, yes. In RPG design terms, no. In some other terms? Maybe, what other terms have you got?
In the sense of "AD&D" versus "D20" versus "D20.5" versus "D&D" being defined as editions? Essentials D&D is not a new edition, it's a large series of option books.
In the sense of Magic The Gathering releases, heck yes it's an "edition", but using that term when discussing an RPG is misleading because "a new edition of Magic" versus "a new edition of GURPS" has *completely* different baggage.
To me, in the same way that 3.0 to 3.5 to Pathfinder (also known as 3.75) are edition changes; 4e and 4Essentials are likewise separate editions.
3.5 was mostly backwards compatible with 3.0; what wasn't compatible was clearly defined, and how to adjust for it.
Same with Essentials; with the exception that if you try to play a pre-essentials 4.0 game, and use online tools, you are screwed - you can't opt to have the original version of the many updated powers...though many outdated feats are still available (and wouldn't be outdated without essentials material overriding/overpowering them)...
All in all, I am not trying to start a flame war, an edition war, or say I like either better than the other. I liked 4.0, and I like 4.5. I also like 3.0 and 3.5. I still remember D&D before it was renamed Basic D&D, and I liked it too. I am not one of those too narrow-minded to try a new version of a game, or to turn my nose up at an improvement simply because it isn't how things were done before.
I am more laughably annoyed at WotC (and Hasbro) for their stance that red is actually green here... a new edition is a new edition; they just remember all of those who jumped ship at 3.5/4.0 changeovers, and tried to avoid it by calling an apple an orange.
|
|
|
