- 11,660
- 26,491
Isn't it a quick action or something, basically it takes up your reaction slot, but you can still attack?
Sorry it's been a while since I played in a campaign
The D&D thread
- Thread starter Kovaks
- Start date
-
Guest, did you like the last podcast notification?? Well here's the second one, and for the third podcast! Yep. This Thursday 8-8-24 at 7pm Central
Go here to check out his podcast thread for info on topics and links!Go into the FoH discord and find the Happy Time Fun Hour channel and give it a listen!
Sorry it's been a while since I played in a campaign
Hoss
Make America's Team Great Again
- 26,761
- 14,603
Do the core rules allow you to take 2 bonus actions instead of an action and a bonus action? There have been times on my bard where I would rather have done 2 bonus actions.
Talos
Silver Baronet of the Realm
- 3,771
- 11,758
No, not the Reaction slot.
RAW a player can do one object interaction on their turn. If they want to do a second object interaction it uses their Action.
Putting away a weapon (happy
Palum
?) or pulling out a weapon are object interactions. If a player wanted to do both on their turn, they would use their object interaction to put away whatever weapon they're currently holding, then use their Action to pull out a different weapon. Therefore they wouldn't be able to use their Action to attack on that same turn.That's how I understood the rules.
Palum
mentioned a way around this is for the player to just open their hand and drop their currently held weapon on the ground (this does not use their object interaction), then use their object interaction to pull out a different weapon, then use their Action to attack, all on the same turn. The cost is that their weapon is now on the ground and can get kicked around, picked up.by an enemy, etc.- 1
- 11,660
- 26,491
Somebody else posted I guess it's a quick action. I just couldn't remember like I said it's been a long time since I've actually played a campaign.No, not the Reaction slot.
RAW a player can do one object interaction on their turn. If they want to do a second object interaction it uses their Action.
Putting away a weapon (happy
That's how I understood the rules.
Maybe our house rules were drawing a weapon was something that consumed your reaction slot. To us I think that just made more sense, but you were still subject to initiative, but if you had any skill or ability that allowed you to do something during a reactionary thing, you sacrificed it drawing said weapon.
Neno
Lord Nagafen Raider
- 58
- 3
For like the last 20 years I have let my players drop whatever they are holding to the ground to unsheathe and attack. This opens them up to having their stuff stolen, damaged, left behind in a retreat, etc.
So in your example I'd let the Ranger drop his bow and make his attacks. If his bow is expensive looking then maybe something would try to make off with it, or creature with flying might swoop in. Or the reverse where he drops his swords to take out his bow and shoot the dragon or harpy but now he has to be careful not to be swarmed on the ground. Obviously not every time he drops it of course but he gets to do his thing and you get an another way to manipulate or introduce encounter changes when you want.
I wouldn't let them ever put their weapons away, draw new weapons, and then attack in a single round unless they had feats, special abilities, haste, or whatever that allowed them to do that. Unless the game system I was using allowed for it.
Last edited:
- 3
I'm guessing that's a 5e thing? In that case I dunno tbh. Though I personally don't see a problem swapping 1 for 1 with actions.
Grabbit Allworth
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 1,526
- 6,382
We all know how easily abused resting is in 5e so awhile back I took on the task of trying to address it without having to ambush players. I find meaningless combat to be incredibly boring and there should be a better solution (which didn't work anyway because the players would just rest after the ambush).
Anyway, here's my system. We've been using for over a year and it works well, but I feel like the numbers need to be tuned slightly because it's still a little bit too easy.
**Obviously, this is for pre-5.24. Also, there are a few errors and typos that I need to fix so try to overlook those.
Anyway, here's my system. We've been using for over a year and it works well, but I feel like the numbers need to be tuned slightly because it's still a little bit too easy.
**Obviously, this is for pre-5.24. Also, there are a few errors and typos that I need to fix so try to overlook those.
- 2
Hoss
Make America's Team Great Again
- 26,761
- 14,603
We've seen that before, but it's really well put together. When I see it, I think it came from an official source.
By the time we rest, we're all ready to end for the day and we just ask the DM. Are we taking a long or short rest? he does consider how safe the area is.
Grabbit Allworth
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 1,526
- 6,382
Have I posted it before? if so, my apologies. There are a handful of places I look for feedback and sometimes I can't remember who has been asked what.
I try to take the subjectivity out of resting. Before I went with this system I occasionally had players say that I was making it "too hard" to rest. Now, their chance of success is almost entirely up to them.
Hoss
Make America's Team Great Again
- 26,761
- 14,603
Wasn't a complaint.
So how do you determine things like if they find a cabin or a secluded spot?
Is "We look for a spot to camp where we will be hidden. ". Or "we look for an abandoned house to camp in"?
Actually it seems like an abandoned house would have its own set of problems.
Szeth
Trakanon Raider
- 2,223
- 1,021
Is that charge a home brew? Or are we not talking about 5e?
- 1
Grabbit Allworth
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 1,526
- 6,382
It largely depends on the type of area they're in and the result of the Camp Setup Check. If the result is good they were successful in finding decent shelter. If not, they're under the stars, so to speak. That's really the only subjective part of the mechanic, but I should probably make it more black and white.
However, the Camp Setup check and Camp Location are something that I need to tune because the two are related but semi-redundant.
Heh, the more I look at the pdf the more I realize that the layout is horrific for everyone but myself. I really need to go back to the drawing board to make this a lot less confusing for other people.
Hoss
Make America's Team Great Again
- 26,761
- 14,603
I'm not going to disagree. I read the paragraph, then the chart, then read the paragraph again for it to make sense.
It's just a standard 4e thing everyone can do. I'd assume 5e would have a counter part.
Not dnd per say, but this is basically the meta rpg thread atm. Not involved with the thing at all, but hey free gaming pdfs! It's in the OSR vein, which i'm still trying to figure out wtf that means.
courtesy of
moordereht.com
courtesy of
Red Role-playing game
Red is a generic role-playing game system designed to bring your creativity to life across a variety of settings and genres. With mechanics adapted from Wretched, Red is easy to pick up for those a…
moordereht.com
- 1
Talos
Silver Baronet of the Realm
- 3,771
- 11,758
Anyone ever try something like this? Basically "zipper" initiative. Players roll initiative as usual. Then the highest initiative rolled by a player is compared to the big bad's initiative to determine who goes first (big bad is always going to go either first or second no matter what). If there are minions, the DM doesn't roll initiative for them but manually places one after each player. Any leftover minions just go at the end.
He claims it makes initiative a little faster and manageable because you're not rolling for each monster or group of monsters, just the big bad, and then manually placing any minions. Also keeps combat more engaging and balanced because it goes back and forth rather than having situations where one side nukes the other. And prevents anti-climactic boss fights if the big bad rolls poorly and gets nuked. Now he at least gets a turn near the beginning of combat.
My campaign has been four players for the first 10 sessions, but two more players are joining next session and I'm looking at ways to keep combat manageable, fast, and engaging for the players.
He claims it makes initiative a little faster and manageable because you're not rolling for each monster or group of monsters, just the big bad, and then manually placing any minions. Also keeps combat more engaging and balanced because it goes back and forth rather than having situations where one side nukes the other. And prevents anti-climactic boss fights if the big bad rolls poorly and gets nuked. Now he at least gets a turn near the beginning of combat.
My campaign has been four players for the first 10 sessions, but two more players are joining next session and I'm looking at ways to keep combat manageable, fast, and engaging for the players.
Last edited:
Grabbit Allworth
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 1,526
- 6,382
Talos
I've never used "zipper" initiative, but I'm familiar with it and I can see its potential value. Though I doubt I will ever use it.
When playing online, I stick with initiative being re-rolled every round because it's automatic and doesn't slow the game down, at all. I prefer it because it captures a bit of the unpredictable, frenetic aspect of combat. Also, it can create some extremely tense moments when the dice gods allow all the monsters to go at the end of a round and then the all the monsters take their turn again at the start of the following round. The bad guys effectively getting a Time Walk (MTG reference) is brutal but, on the flipside, it feels awesome when it happens for the group.
As far as keeping 5e combat fast-paced and engaging....that's extremely challenging because 5e is inherently fairly slow.
The most impactful suggestion I can give you is to be strict with players in regard to them knowing what they plan to do with their turn. If each player spends 2...3..or 5 minutes figuring out what they're going to do, a single round of combat can last a half hour. My players have 30 seconds to tell me what they're going to do. Otherwise they take the Dodge action and pass. There's some leeway if the player has pertinent questions or the situation is complicated and/or needs clarification. It doesn't take getting skipped many times before people figure it out.
Admittedly, paying attention can be tough for people because 5e isn't great at holding a player's attention when it's not the their turn. I've tried to help mitigate that flaw by introducing quite a few additional sources of Reactions (magic items, additional abilities, new spells, etc.). Players who pay attention can use the new tools to capitalize on openings during other people's turns. Though, to be fair, it requires a fair amount of work to create, balance, and implement those things.
P.S.
Awhile back I had a couple guys ask me to post my houserules file, which, at this point, has blossomed into an almost DC20-type-thing. My game is still definitely 5e, but I've created and scraped my hundreds of books for the version of each mechanic that best suites the style of game that I want to run/play. Anyway, the formatting wasn't fit for public consumption, but I am actively working on polishing it so I can share it with the few of you that were interested.
- 1
Talos
Silver Baronet of the Realm
- 3,771
- 11,758
Good advice. I'm going to implement the time limit. I also like the idea of adding things that give players something to do as a reaction to keep them focused on the fight.
I've never used "zipper" initiative, but I'm familiar with it and I can see its potential value. Though I doubt I will ever use it.
When playing online, I stick with initiative being re-rolled every round because it's automatic and doesn't slow the game down, at all. I prefer it because it captures a bit of the unpredictable, frenetic aspect of combat. Also, it can create some extremely tense moments when the dice gods allow all the monsters to go at the end of a round and then the all the monsters take their turn again at the start of the following round. The bad guys effectively getting a Time Walk (MTG reference) is brutal but, on the flipside, it feels awesome when it happens for the group.
As far as keeping 5e combat fast-paced and engaging....that's extremely challenging because 5e is inherently fairly slow.
The most impactful suggestion I can give you is to be strict with players in regard to them knowing what they plan to do with their turn. If each player spends 2...3..or 5 minutes figuring out what they're going to do, a single round of combat can last a half hour. My players have 30 seconds to tell me what they're going to do. Otherwise they take the Dodge action and pass. There's some leeway if the player has pertinent questions or the situation is complicated and/or needs clarification. It doesn't take getting skipped many times before people figure it out.
Admittedly, paying attention can be tough for people because 5e isn't great at holding a player's attention when it's not the their turn. I've tried to help mitigate that flaw by introducing quite a few additional sources of Reactions (magic items, additional abilities, new spells, etc.). Players who pay attention can use the new tools to capitalize on openings during other people's turns. Though, to be fair, it requires a fair amount of work to create, balance, and implement those things.
P.S.
Awhile back I had a couple guys ask me to post my houserules file, which, at this point, has blossomed into an almost DC20-type-thing. My game is still definitely 5e, but I've created and scraped my hundreds of books for the version of each mechanic that best suites the style of game that I want to run/play. Anyway, the formatting wasn't fit for public consumption, but I am actively working on polishing it so I can share it with the few of you that were interested.
They're in Barovia and all worship Lathander. Maybe short prayers to invoke some effect as a reaction? To balance it maybe make it a roll for a chance to fail.