All About Actions

Wednesday, March 7, 2018

One of the most important aspects of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game is combat. Monsters and villains are a very real threat that adventurers have to deal with on a daily basis, and quiet negotiation is rarely the answer. When talking fails, swords are drawn and combat is joined. In Pathfinder First Edition, combat could become rather bogged down just by the weight of options available. Time and time again, we heard new players talk about the complexity of the action system, how it made the game slow down as players looked to eke the most out of their turns.

Basically, the previous system was a barrier, and so it should come as no surprise that we are looking at ways that we can simplify it to make the game run more smoothly and intuitively. The hard part was making sure that the versatility of the old system was still present, while cleaning up the overall experience. We want your turn in combat to be exciting and full of interesting choices. We want you to be elated by coming up with just the right combination of actions to win the day. We just don't want those choices to be hedged in by a number of complex categories.

Seven Types

Before I explain the new way of doing things, it might be good to look back to find some perspective. The previous edition of Pathfinder featured seven distinct action types: free, full-round, immediate, move, standard, swift, and a nebulously defined “other” category. These helped to curb what a character could do and encouraged varied tactics to get the most out of your round. In particular, the immediate action was of interest because it was something you could do outside your turn.

This approach has served us well over the years, but we have long looked for better ways to accomplish some of the same goals with a more intuitive system.

Three Actions

It's your turn. You get to take three actions. That's it. You want to move three times? Done. Instead you want to move once, draw your sword, and attack? No problem. How about attack three times? Go ahead (but you'll take an increasing penalty for each additional attack). With only a few notable exceptions, most things in the game now take one action to accomplish. Opening a door, drawing a weapon, reloading a crossbow, moving up to your speed, raising your shield, taking a guarded step, swinging your greataxe—all of these and much more take just one action to perform.

There are, of course, some exceptions. A few things don't take an action at all, like talking or dropping a weapon. Conversely, most of the spells in the game take two actions to cast, although some can be cast quickly, such as a heal spell that targets yourself. Many of the classes can teach you specific activities that take two more actions to perform. The fighter, for example, has a feat that you can select called Sudden Charge, which costs two actions but lets you to move twice your speed and attack once, allowing fighters to get right into the fray!

One Reaction

One aspect of Pathfinder First Edition that was important to us was the ability to occasionally, if the circumstances were right, act outside your turn. While this was most often a simple attack of opportunity, we saw this as a way to add a whole new dimension to the game.

So now, all characters get one reaction they can take when the conditions are right.

Reactions always come with a trigger that must occur before the reaction can be taken. Let's say you're playing a paladin with a shield and you have spent an action to defend yourself with that shield. Not only does this boost your Armor Class; it also allows you to take a special reaction if you are hit by an attack. This shield block reduces the damage taken by an amount up to the shield's hardness!

Not everybody will have a reaction they can use during combat, but you can always ready an action that allows you prepare a special action that you can take later if the conditions you specify are met. You might ready an action to attack the first orc that walks around the corner, allowing you to make a strike if that happens before your next turn.

Finally, some monsters have reactions they can take as well. While some have simple reactions that allow them to attack those who drop their guard while adjacent to them, others have wildly different abilities. An earth elemental, for example, can spend its reaction after being hit to crumble into a pile of rocks, burrowing down into the ground for safety.

The New System in Practice

The three-action-and-a-reaction system really has done a lot for gameplay around the office. Turns are quite a bit more dynamic. The breadth of options now compete with each other, not based upon what action type they are, but instead on their merits in the current combat situation. Concentrating on a spell might be vital, but not if you need to move away, draw a potion, and drink it. Maybe you could wait to drink it until your next turn to keep the spell going, or maybe you could not move and hope the monster does not eat you.

Most importantly, taking your turn in Pathfinder is now filled with a wide variety of possibilities, allowing you to get the most out of your time in the spotlight, while still keeping the game moving and engaging.

Well, that about wraps up our in-depth look at the new action system for Pathfinder. Come back on Friday for a blog post looking into all of the spoilers from the first part of the Glass Cannon Network's podcast of their playtest of the game. In addition, if you want to see the game yourself, and maybe even get a chance to play, stop by Gary Con this weekend, where we will be running a number of Pathfinder charity games, raising money for the Wounded Warrior Project!

Jason Bulmahn
Director of Game Design

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Playtest
751 to 759 of 759 << first < prev | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | next > last >>

TheAlicornSage wrote:
Fifth, if reposition was grabbing an enemy, then it would require you to actually grab said enemy, which means unarmed range limit (not weapon range limit), a grab, then a shove/throw/drag.

Are you implying that someone can't smash someone with a Lucerne hammer or slash a leg with a bardiche or puncture a groin or underarm or kidney with a spear in order to physically reposition with Reach?


TheAlicornSage wrote:
First, if you don't allow reposition as a manipulation (for which I always choose case by case according to narrative myself), then what do you use for manipulations like I described?

I'm fine with an option for doing it as a manipulative trick as well. In fact, I've proposed for PF2 in another thread that Dirty Trick should be a Bluff based 2 segment maneuver to duplicate any other 1 segment maneuver, while also adding conditions for a round on a hit or worse conditions on a critical.

But Reposition itself definitely reads as a physical act to me, especially with size factored into it.


TheFinish wrote:

1st: I don't use anything. It's unneeded. At best it's just flavor description.

Flavor description for what? If you didn't do anything, then what is there to describe in a flavorful way?

Quote:


3rd: If your idea of manipulation had any merit, then the cutoff point for the meneuver would not be Size, it would be Intelligence, as it is with Feint (which is what you describe, a manipulation that works if the enemy doesn't realize the danger you are setting them up for.) . A Size cutoff implies you have no physical way to act upon the enemy in a significant way. Much like Drag and Bull Rush.

As I said, larger targets wouldn't need to leave their current fighting space.

Also, what happens when you are really really strong, like from magic, then your augmented strength would be not limit the size of the creature you can shove around, only the weight and their strength to resist.

Thus, if reposition was from grabbing and manhandling, size wouldn't be the limit, weight and strength would be.

Additionally, holding someone allows them to hold you. Thus grabbing someone and tossing them over a ledge would certainly allow them to hold you and pull you with. This is why grapple affects both creatures and not just one. It is also why a trip, even with a weapon, allows the opponent to use the attack against you.

It should also be noted that the grappling section mentions "grappling, grab, and similar abilities" clearly placing the two as related.

Also, neither grab, nor trip, nor combat maneuvers, nor reposition clarify whether you need to touch, grab, or merely threaten an enemy. Clearly, they writers expect it to either be an obvious choice, or leave to the gm to go with what fits best for a given situation (I'd expect the latter myself).

Quote:


4th: Grapple is a specific way of manhandling an enemy, just like...

Not really, a grapple is when your trying to limit your opponent's options in a way that they can do the same to you. It does not specify a particular type of manhandling, however, it is a condition that applies to both you and your target. You can not grab someone without putting yourself in a place to be easily grabbed in return.

Also, the grappling rules already cover how to move someone you have grabbed.

There is the drag maneuver, which is new and has no heritage in d20 core, but it also can represent classic tactics of the medival era where polearms with hooks would try to catch an opponent and pull them around.

Trying to push an enemy sideways with a weapon is ridiculously difficult, as you have lots and lots of mechanical disadvantage (the physical kind of mechanical, not rules mechanical). But manipulation is actually possible.

Reposition is also new, but there was a gap, as there was not a mechanic for the classic maneuvers you see in movies with swashbucklers, where they fight and one person uses the flow of the fight to manipulate their opponent into moving from one place to another. Like in Pirates of the Caribbean.

Manhandling was covered, manipulation was not. Makes far more sense to add a mechanic to fill a gap than to cover something already covered. And even if they wanted to change the rules for manhandling an enemy, why leave the old method there (moving while grappled) and also add a new method?


Because Reposition isn't grappling. It's a swift single thing that can be done with weapons as well as arms and doesn't require you to enter their space (not any more than a punch does anyway, of you're doing it unarmed.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheAlicornSage wrote:

As I said, larger targets wouldn't need to leave their current fighting space.

Also, what happens when you are really really strong, like from magic, then your augmented strength would be not limit the size of the creature you can shove around, only the weight and their strength to resist.

Thus, if reposition was from grabbing and manhandling, size wouldn't be the limit, weight and strength would be.

A creature's Size is an easy way to eyeball their Strength and weight. The bigger you are, the stronger you are, the heavier you are. A size cutoff point IS a weight and strength cutoff point.

Reposition has the same size limit as Drag and Bull Rush. Back from the days of 3.5's Special Attacks, where a grapple would automatically fail if you were trying to grapple something 2 Sizes bigger than you, that limit has meant the same thing: whatever you're trying to affect is too big for you to physically move it or restrain it. It has nothing to do with any sort of manipulation. Feint is what you use for that, and it has very clear limits which are entirely different from Reposition/Drag/Bull Rush.

TheAlicornSage wrote:

Additionally, holding someone allows them to hold you. Thus grabbing someone and tossing them over a ledge would certainly allow them to hold you and pull you with. This is why grapple affects both creatures and not just one. It is also why a trip, even with a weapon, allows the opponent to use the attack against you.

It should also be noted that the grappling section mentions "grappling, grab, and similar abilities" clearly placing the two as related.

So when I Drag someone, they can Drag me right back? When I Push against someone with Bull Rush, they can push me right back? You need to look at Combat Maneuvers as a whole, not at each individually, and there's nothing to support this idea beyond Grappling and Trip.

As a side note, people being able to trip you back is almost assuredly a balance issue, given that in 3.5 if you had a trip weapon you couldn't be tripped yourself if you failed a trip attempt.

TheAlicornSage wrote:
Also, neither grab, nor trip, nor combat maneuvers, nor reposition clarify whether you need to touch, grab, or merely threaten an enemy. Clearly, they writers expect it to either be an obvious choice, or leave to the gm to go with what fits best for a given situation (I'd expect the latter myself).

Considering Trip automatically fails against creatures with no legs and gets a penalty for each additional leg, it's obviously a physical action you're undertaking against the enemy.

Furthermore, the fact in all maneuvers you're pitting CMB against CMD, and both of those are reliant on Strength, Dexterity and Size in addition to BAB implies it's all physical and there's no threatening going on.

Especially when you consider Size modifiers are reversed between AC and CMD. It's easier to hit a creature when it's bigger, but trying to grapple it, trip it, drag it, bull rush it, etc? Way harder. Because they're bigger and meatier and heavier.

TheAlicornSage wrote:
The Finish wrote:


4th: Grapple is a specific way of manhandling an enemy, just like...

Not really, a grapple is when your trying to limit your opponent's options in a way that they can do the same to you. It does not specify a particular type of manhandling, however, it is a condition that applies to both you and your target. You can not grab someone without putting yourself in a place to be easily grabbed in return.

Also, the grappling rules already cover how to move someone you have grabbed.

Grapple is specifically an ongoing attempt to manhandle your opponent throughout a period of time. That's why both gain the Grappled condition, because you're focused on keeping the other guy grappled and thus can't defend yourself very well against others.

All the other maneuvers are a one and done. You pushed the guy. You dragged the guy. You Repo'd him. You tripped him. Beyond that, no more manhandling. Therefore, no condition. The "condition" for them is that you eat an AoO if you don't have Improved X, because they're harder to pull off than just hitting them with your weapon.

TheAlicornSage wrote:
There is the drag maneuver, which is new and has no heritage in d20 core, but it also can represent classic tactics of the medival era where polearms with hooks would try to catch an opponent and pull them around.

It can, but you can do it with double swords, or a shield, or whatever you have that threatens, so I don't really see how this paragraph is relevant.

TheAlicornSage wrote:
Trying to push an enemy sideways with a weapon is ridiculously difficult, as you have lots and lots of mechanical disadvantage (the physical kind of mechanical, not rules mechanical). But manipulation is actually possible.

So is pushing a man 30 feet back by poking them with a longspear while inflicting no Damage. But you can do that just fine. The game doesn't care about any sort of real world mechanical disadvantage beyond the Size cutoffs in maneuvers.

Which themselves don't make a lot of sense when Grapple doesn't have any. It used to, but they got rid of it. Why, I don't know. It's dumb, bue there's no much to do about it.

TheAlicornSage wrote:

Reposition is also new, but there was a gap, as there was not a mechanic for the classic maneuvers you see in movies with swashbucklers, where they fight and one person uses the flow of the fight to manipulate their opponent into moving from one place to another. Like in Pirates of the Caribbean.

Manhandling was covered, manipulation was not. Makes far more sense to add a mechanic to fill a gap than to cover something already covered. And even if they wanted to change the rules for manhandling an enemy, why leave the old method there (moving while grappled) and also add a new method?

Reposition was added to allow you to move an enemy sideways in relation to you, nothing more. If you wanted to move them away, there was Bull Rush.

Notice also how Reposition tries to give the idea of inertia by saying:

"The target must remain within your reach at all times during this movement, except for the final 5 feet of movement, which can be to a space adjacent to your reach."

As in, you slammed your shield into an enemy to move them aside to your left, and hit 'em so hard they ended up away from you.

And, to answer your question again: because it's different ways of manhandling.

If Grapple was enough, we wouldn't have Bull Rush (just Grapple the guy and move them forward) and we wouldn't have Drag (just Grapple the guy and move them back).

All these Combat Maneuvers let you do what Grappling someone and moving does instanstaneously and at no donwnside to yourself besides getting an AoO. In exchange, they are much more limited in scope (only straight forward, only straight back, only your reach+5') and harder to pull off. To move someone with any of these as much as I can with a single Grapple+Move requires exceeding someone's CMD by 15, which is not easy.


Alright, I've been thinking about actions and here is my list of proposed changes intended to speed up play, improve story telling, and add depth to melee:

1. Require that all 3 actions taken by a character are declared up front and before resolving any one action.

2. Remove all negatives for multiple strikes in a single round. In general, don't penalize a player for spending their actions a certain way.

3. Introduce a new skill: 'combat stance'. For the cost of one action, a character can block/dodge 'normally'. When not performed, treat the character as being 'flat footed'.

4. Allow characters to 'focus' on a single action (e.g., strike) by spending two or three actions to perform the action. A focused action means rolling 2d20 or 3d20 for that action and using the highest die.

5. Allow characters to 'rush' an expensive action (e.g., spell casting) by spending only one action instead of the standard two or three actions. A rushed action means rolling 2d20 or 3d20 and using the lowest die.

Notes:

- 1. was inspired by West End Games' Star Wars RPG and it's probably the one I'd want most out of the list.

- 2., 3. & 4. provide depth in the fighter's turn by giving them a range of tactical choices such as:
-- all out attack (3 strikes),
-- strong attack (2 strikes, 1 stance)
-- standard attack (1 strike, 1 stance, 1 shield)
-- critical attack (1 focus-2 attack, 1 stance)

- 3. Also provides a nice hook for more fighting feats like shoulder throws and ripostes.

- 3. Also, also works well in surprise situations since a character that is surprised doesn't get the chance to perform actions like 'combat stance'

- 5. needs more work since lots of spells are automatic and don't require any d20 roll at all.

- I have not play tested these proposals which means there will be unintended consequences lurking in the shadows.

So, what do my fellow adventurers think of these proposals?


1. I like this. I'd consider having all players declare actions before any player's resolution, but that may be feasible only for pbp.

2. I don't like this, but I'd definitely consider doing it differently (such as a -2 to both attacks for two attacks) and either reducing the penalty or allowing combat focused characters to reduce the penalty.

I don't see this as a penalty for spending actions, I see it as a penalty for doing something more difficult. I also two attacks in a round as being practically simultaneous, and thus more difficult than striking once and then creating/waiting for an opening to strike again.

3. I really hate this. Defending yourself is instictive, even without training. Being trained builds on that instict, and ignoring your defense requires either a blind rage or significant discipline to specifically choose to favor attack at the expense of defense. It is a bold tactic that can work in the right circumstances, but is also risky and stupid move for an inexperienced warrior.

In any case, defending yourself should be the default state.

As for start of combat, no one follows the rules on that anyway, so, not helpful. Unless ambushed, characters will usually be aware of combat before the play starts running round-by-round.

4 & 5. I don't like this mechanic for single dice. I like it okay for multi-dice rolls, such as if using the 3d6 variant, but not for a single die.

In a 3d6, replacing 1 of the 3 has an impact, but a smaller one. Helps maintain consistency (you get less of "professional" one minute and "novice" the next).

It isn't as bad for pure pass/fail systems, but d20 is not and never has been pure pass/fail. Still prefer it replacing dice in a pool even in those cases though.

I guess it's possible for of2 to be a pure pass/fail system, but if so, I won't play it after the playtest. Being more than pass/fail is a requirement for me to play a system regularly.


Both of the following tactics would work best with an elf fighter with their higher speed. They likely work well for any build that has a higher than average speed build. Monks if they still get the boost to speed are going to be masters of the hit and run tactic with a reach weapon.

Style: Sword and Board, Feats: Lunge, feat to increase speed, shield blocking, extra reaction

Turn 1
1. Move to attack with lunge
2. Attack with lunge
3. Move away as far as possible

Result of this method of attack.
• Enemy does not get an AOO
• Takes enemy two actions to close
• Only gets one attack
• Using your two reactions: one to ready shield and the second to block you are trading one hit on the enemy for a mostly if not full blocked attack.

Turn 2
1. Attack
2. Guarded step or move if enemy does not have an AOO
3. Move away as far as possible

Result of this method of attack.
• Enemy does not get an AOO
• Takes enemy two actions to close
• Only gets one attack
• Using your two reactions: one to ready shield and the second to block you are trading one hit on the enemy for a mostly if not full blocked attack.

Style: Reach Weapon, Feats: feat to increase speed

Turn 1
1. Move to attack with reach weapon
2. Attack with reach weapon
3. Move as far as possible

Result of this method of attack.
• Enemy does not get an AOO
• Takes enemy two actions to close
• Get an AOO as the enemy closes
• Only gets one attack

Turn 2
1. Guarded Step
2. Attack with reach weapon
3. Move as far as possible

Result of this method of attack.
• Enemy does not get an AOO
• Takes enemy two actions to close
• Get an AOO as the enemy closes
• Only gets one attack

Both styles make use of the three actions a turn with a build that has a little bit of speed added. Speed is going to be a lot more important with this three action system.

Lantern Lodge Customer Service & Community Manager

Thanks for all the lively discussion so far in this thread. At this time we've decided to close up the blog discussion thread. If you have comments, questions or other things you want to post that do not fit into any currently open threads, you are welcome to start a new thread. Thanks!

751 to 759 of 759 << first < prev | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Paizo Blog: All About Actions All Messageboards
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion