Community

Jan 24, 2013 -- 10:49AM, wrecan wrote:

Jan 24, 2013 -- 7:44AM, ren1999 wrote:

So who agrees with this?

All players and monsters get 1 main, 1 off-hand and one reaction at 1st level.

Not I.  I like the limited action economy of Next.  i don't want a return of the minor action in the form of "off-hand action".

Agreed.  If there's one thing I want to stay as a feature of D&D Next, it's the killing of one of the worst min/max loopholes in D&D history, leaving it as a table houserule or a module at worst.  Just limit the game to action, reaction and [as part of an action/free action], and all that's left to worry about involves the actual spells and other features.

If the only valid reason for multi-attacks is limelight parity due to casters, then
1) remove multi-attack (area) spells as at-will options (which they have apparently)
2) restrict caster ability to spam area spells (and spells in general if you ask me)
3) raise the value of single attack spells somehow

Slow turn resolution is what slows down combat in any edition -- pre-4E warriors tended to have faster turns in spite of multi-attacks due to limitations on options [namely, high damage = no brainer], while casters had the longer turns due to the tower of options that they had during an adventure, especially during combat** -- so we must identify the elements that actually slow down combat. And as far as I can tell, those elements are:
1) non-standard actions (free/no actions, minor/quick actions, opportunity actions, immediate actions).  The simplification to just three actions is a major appeal IMHO, and the restriction of reactions help hasten round resolution (I do recall opportunity attacks being reintroduced somewhere, not sure which packet or if it's still in the current packet, for the sake of preventing a dozen kobolds just whooshing past the frontliner [might check later, way too early in the morning here right now]).  I'm not exactly happy about the prospect of "healbot" returning -- healing in general should be restricted to prevent abuse, and modified so that no one has to be "just" the healer (if you ask me) -- but if turns go by quickly enough I could easily see two turns go by and I can heal someone and not skip a beat or lament at the loss of a turn.  Healbot happens in MMORPGs after all.
2) multi-attacks (spells, weapon attacks).  Spellcasters are already hampered by less spell slots per day (I believe it was like 14 spell slots+3 cantrips at level 20?), so the only remaining offender is multi-attack stuff like Cleave.  4E Cleave and Flurry of Blows I actually found quite appealing by virtue of their being area attacks that don't require more than one attack roll to resolve (if only the loopholes weren't there).

What I like most about the idea of making rounds and turns really fast is the idea of being able to run a turn-based game as close to a real-time game as possible.  Heck, I personally wouldn't mind multi-turn spells myself if the number of opponents it can hit, as well as the power level of the spell and the opportunity cost for casting it, is that big; that way, just like in computer RPGs where spellcasters have these complex, flashy movements and chants (for powerful spells) that take far longer than several weapon swings to execute -- something that, as far as I know, ironically came from D&D -- you'd find it far more practical to utilize single-target cantrips and weapon-swinging, leaving the area spells to major skirmishes involving a lot more creatures than what a few well-placed swings can take down.

** while the good thing about 4E is that they significantly lessened the options each individual had, the entire group still had the same number of options that a pre-4E caster had, when combined with a greater emphasis on team play, resulted in combat being just as long as, if not longer combat than, 3E.  However, comparing 20 minutes per round with one player spending 10 minutes on his turn alone, I'd prefer the 20 minutes per round thank you very much.