Yesterday I posted that I had changed Flanked into a Condition and today I will mention that I also changed Readied into a Condition. This one will probably be more controversial (and potentially broken) but I wanted to get others opinions on it.
The reason I did this was one of my players was continually bothered by the delay in each combat round when one player or another would take time to carefully enunciate the terms of his readied action, causing a noticeable delay in the action while he thought about what might happen and what he would do in that case.
The player who proposed this idea to me did it purely in the interest of speeding up combat rounds. With all of that said, here is the house rule I implemented (but have yet to really see happen in play much):
A player may state that he is “readying himself”. This applies the “Readied” condition to his character.
Readied: The character or creature chooses to take no action at the time of his initiative and instead waits for a time later in a round to act. If he wishes to interrupt the actions of another creature or character he must make a Perception check opposed by a Dexterity check by the character or creatures he wishes to interrupt. If the readied character or creature wins then he may interrupt the other character or creature. If the opponent wins then he finishes his action before the readied character can act. In any event, the readied character or creature may only use a single standard, move, or free action when he decides to act.
In comparison, choosing to delay allows a character or creature to use all of his actions normally, but at a later point in the round. He is not able to interrupt other actions when delaying.
Thoughts?
|
I certainly think players should be cut some slack, re what they are readying for.
One DM I had would hear us say 'I ready to disrupt him casting a spell', then have the enemy wizard pull out a wand or scroll. No readied action for you, because he's not casting, he's triggering or completing a spell...
Same deal with readying for someone drawing a weapon; this should still apply to them pulling a potion out of their pocket.
These adverserial DM-rulings may seem 'hilarious' (if only to them), but it just causes ill feeling, especially if the players suspect that the DM is not restricting the NPCs in the same way (Yeah, I'm sure he reeeaaly expected that...).
The end result is simply to have the exasperated players declare they are readying 'to interrupt his next action', or in extreme cases, 'for any damn thing I feel like', in which case you may as well not have a trigger declaration at all.
|
|
I would generally allow a much more lenient declaration of a trigger for readied actions. For example, if there are two adjacent doors, I would allow an archer to cover both simultaneously, assuming he was positioned far enough back to see both without turning more than a few degrees.
I think a Perception check is a good way of leaving the trigger less-specific, without being abusive.
I think the player should be able to declare one opponent as his focus, against whom he doesn't have to make a Perception roll, but have the option to change his readied action against another hazard, if he can perceive it.
Modern D&D doesn't have facing rules, but for the sake of these situations, it may be worth applying modifiers to Perception inside or out of a 'fire arc', which may be an actual cone or line (for a readied archer), or a small burst (for a melee-specialist wanting to watch 'anyone in reach').
Effectively, he trades in some of his peripheral concentration, for a tunnel-vision against his main foe(s), which allows him an attempt to interrupt them, whatever they do, plus a chance to spot nearby danger, and a much-reduced chance of spotting danger in his blind-spot.
I think a Perception check is a good way of leaving the trigger less-specific, without being abusive.
I think the player should be able to declare one opponent as his focus, against whom he doesn't have to make a Perception roll, but have the option to change his readied action against another hazard, if he can perceive it.
Modern D&D doesn't have facing rules, but it may be worth applying modifiers to Perception inside or out of a 'fire arc', which may be an actual cone (for a readied archer), or a small burst (for a melee-specialist wanting to watch 'anyone in reach').
Personally i agree but all of my players would say it was too complicated.
|
|
I'm thinking it could actually speed up play, by removing the dithering when players choose a trigger (Should I watch Door A or Door B? Pick them both! They're close enough!).
And remove the potential for arguments, regarding whether an NPC would have picked a specific PC or action to interrupt (No way would he know I was a caster! He wouldn't have readied against a spell!).
There may be a few more Perception checks during the round, but only if the players care to make them.
If you're readied to disrupt a wizard, who's proved capable of casting say, third level spells, then you're not going to opt to lose your readied status, for the sake of preventing his goblin (warrior1) minion from attempting to plug someone with an arrow for 1d4 damage.
The DM will point to the goblin figure, go 'Peeow' at the target PC, the players will go 'Yeah. Whatever', and the goblin's turn plays out as normal.
If that same goblin were creeping round the edge of the battlefield, to perform a coup-de-gras on an unconscious PC, then I expect there'd be a chorus of "Whoah, do I see that?" from any readied players.
If they don't see him, then they can't stop it. If they do see him, then the wizard-disrupter suddenly has a dilemma, but they're no worse off than the current rules, which wouldn't have allowed them to act against that goblin at all.
I'm thinking it could actually speed up play
That's the theory. Now when I go around the table and its Player A's turn he just says "I Ready". I note it and move on. Later in the round, he decides to go. I don't think its too powerful because although you COULD interrupt someone (assuming you make the perception check) you are still limited to a standard OR a move action, whereas with delaying you get to take your full normal turn. Seems pretty ok to me and it speeds things up.