Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Duchess of Gorgombert
Offline
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Originally Posted by Madoric
Originally Posted by vometia
Disagree as action points are so scarce, but I can see that doesn't seem to be a popular opinion...
I feel DND is an managing resources, especially during combat. In able to switch to two hander then change to shield on enemy turn with no cost diminished that.

I can understand that, but only if there are enough resources to manage. At the moment, one combat action and one other action per turn is a little... frugal. Especially with the very high chance to miss and even if you do hit to find you rolled "used strong language" instead of actually causing damage. I know some of it comes down to both tactics and experience with D&D, and I have none of either.

Originally Posted by 0Muttley0
I agree with the OP but I know what you mean. I for one spam the shit out of being able to move things about the inventory(to my advantage). Also IIRC, there was a distance limit too for swapping items between characters.

It's very handy for selling stuff when on a looting spree: park one character next to a vendor and have the others covet steal all the precious things.

Must remember to use the phrase "spam the shit out of" more often.


J'aime le fromage.
Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Yeah, lets make this take even longer...

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Bonus action for swapping the currently equipped melee and ranged weapons. Equipping something else in either slot should be a full action point. Yes, action points are few and precious, but weapon swapping shouldn't be a routine thing, especially equipping new weapons. Putting on a new set of armor is flat out ridiculous.

Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Duchess of Gorgombert
Offline
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
In common with something else I recently replied to, how about making it a player choice? I suppose I don't really see it as being any different to any other element of RP: if you think it should come at a cost, then apply that cost; if you don't, then don't. It's slightly awkward as there is this temptation to "compromise" an otherwise arguably purist play-through when it gets tough, but my feeling is that this should be at the player's discretion rather than the game's unwavering imposition of particular rules. But as ever, where does one draw the line? There's a very wide area between total anarchy and extreme pedantry.


J'aime le fromage.
Joined: Oct 2020
B
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
B
Joined: Oct 2020
+1

Joined: Oct 2020
W
stranger
Offline
stranger
W
Joined: Oct 2020
As far as managing the actual inventory doesn't matter either way for me. However I do want to be able to swap between my equiped weapon sets without any kind of penalty.

Last edited by WinterbornGuard; 17/10/20 03:11 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
B
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
B
Joined: Oct 2020
the swap to shield at end of turn seems like a problem though

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Anything that makes combat take longer is not good.

I agree that equipping shield at the end of a turn is a bit cheesy. So maybe only allow armor and potion swapping at the start of each turn, and then lock it until the next turn. Weapon swaps shouldn't take an action unless you want combat to be even more of a grind than it already is.

Joined: Oct 2020
C
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
C
Joined: Oct 2020
+1

Joined: Sep 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
Agree that you should be able to freely swap between your equipped melee and ranged weapons before you make an attack, but are locked after the fact! As the game plays rn, no matter what weapon I attack with, I always swap to melee weapons before ending my turn so I can take opportunity attacks. Which is silly.

It should cost an action to equip a new weapon/shield/maybe jewelry. You'll be forced to weigh your decisions: "Do I spend an action to draw a bludgeoning weapon that will do more damage against this enemy, or do I keep equipped the piercing weapon the enemy is resistant to and instead use my action to attack/throw a grenade/something else this turn?" 5e RAW you can draw a new weapon as a free action if you drop your equipped weapon, but I think that's too complex/unintuitive for a video game. Plus, that adds more stuff to pick up after a combat ends which this game definitely does not need.

You should not be able to swap your armor/helmet/boots during combat. Really, right in front of enemies who are attacking you, you're going to take off your helmet? Really?

Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Quebec
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Quebec
5e rules do not require an Action to change weapon, BUT you need an Action to remove a shield and you of course cannot change armor.

That said, you cannot switch weapons 10 times in a turn either. It is called an "Interaction" in 5e (similar to the Free Action in other editions).

I see no reason to make BG3 more restrictive than the core rules.

Sure, I can pull out my spear and do a Rush, but that is once per Short Rest, and therefore once per combat by definition. Not a big deal.

Last edited by Baraz; 17/10/20 06:15 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Baraz
5e rules do not require an Action to change weapon, BUT you need an Action to remove a shield and you of course cannot change armor.

I see no reason to make BG3 more restrictive than the core rules.


You get 1 free action a turn. It costs a free action to draw or sheathe a weapon. Given the fact that players, if making the choice that they need a new weapon, would drop their old one on the ground and use a free action to unsheathe the new weapon I usually just say its a free action to change out a weapon, but it is once a turn. It is the effect of the economy on that and enemies arent going to go scrabbling for a shortsword so lets make all of our lives easier.

You are right, to equip or unequip a shield is a full action.

What they havent addressed is clerics who shield and mace it. You cannot, without the War Caster feat, cast a spell if both hands are occupied. Holding a weapon and a shield means you cant cast. So you sheathe your weapon to cast. You cannot unsheathe it now as you used your 1 free action. If someone left your threat range and you were to make an AOO it would be with your fist. That is ultimately the effect of that economy. War Caster is nice for clerics that fight - the ones in the back mainly benefit from the concentration advantage.

If a sword and board wanted to go to 2h glaive id say that is going to be their action and free action, they have bonus and movement left. Otherwise, its never been an issue with the 5e mechanics to do mid battle weapon adjustment.

Last edited by Orbax; 17/10/20 06:37 PM.

What is the problem you are solving? Does your proposed change solve the problem? Is your change feasible? What else will be affected by your change? Will your change impact revenue? Does your change align with the goals and strategies of the organizations (Larian, WotC)?
Joined: Aug 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2020
Originally Posted by Orbax
Originally Posted by Baraz
5e rules do not require an Action to change weapon, BUT you need an Action to remove a shield and you of course cannot change armor.

I see no reason to make BG3 more restrictive than the core rules.


You get 1 free action a turn. It costs an action to draw or sheathe a weapon. Given the fact that players, if making the choice that they need a new weapon, would drop their old one on the ground and use a free action to unsheathe the new weapon I usually just say its a free action to change out a weapon, but it is once a turn. It is the effect of the economy on that and enemies arent going to go scrabbling for a shortsword so lets make all of our lives easier.

You are right, to equip or unequip a shield is a full action.

What they havent addressed is clerics who shield and mace it. You cannot, without the War Caster feat, cast a spell if both hands are occupied. Holding a weapon and a shield means you cant cast. So you sheathe your weapon to cast. You cannot unsheathe it now as you used your 1 free action. If someone left your threat range and you were to make an AOO it would be with your fist. That is ultimately the effect of that economy. War Caster is nice for clerics that fight - the ones in the back mainly benefit from the concentration advantage.

If a sword and board wanted to go to 2h glaive id say that is going to be their action and free action, they have bonus and movement left. Otherwise, its never been an issue with the 5e mechanics to do mid battle weapon adjustment.


+1 to this, beat me too it.

Trust in the rules of 5e, please. Weapon swap once a turn? Sure. Swap a shield? Put on or take off your shield, that takes your Action.

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Orbax
Originally Posted by Baraz
5e rules do not require an Action to change weapon, BUT you need an Action to remove a shield and you of course cannot change armor.

I see no reason to make BG3 more restrictive than the core rules.


You get 1 free action a turn. It costs an action to draw or sheathe a weapon. Given the fact that players, if making the choice that they need a new weapon, would drop their old one on the ground and use a free action to unsheathe the new weapon I usually just say its a free action to change out a weapon, but it is once a turn. It is the effect of the economy on that and enemies arent going to go scrabbling for a shortsword so lets make all of our lives easier.

You are right, to equip or unequip a shield is a full action.

What they havent addressed is clerics who shield and mace it. You cannot, without the War Caster feat, cast a spell if both hands are occupied. Holding a weapon and a shield means you cant cast. So you sheathe your weapon to cast. You cannot unsheathe it now as you used your 1 free action. If someone left your threat range and you were to make an AOO it would be with your fist. That is ultimately the effect of that economy. War Caster is nice for clerics that fight - the ones in the back mainly benefit from the concentration advantage.

If a sword and board wanted to go to 2h glaive id say that is going to be their action and free action, they have bonus and movement left. Otherwise, its never been an issue with the 5e mechanics to do mid battle weapon adjustment.
+1

One more problem that could be solved by not tampering with 5e.


Necromancy is just recycling...
Page 2 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5