| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You are correct. You can Delay into the next round because the end of the round is not a special time, though hitting your original initiative position is (that's when it's been an entire round).
Actually, I don't think that is correct.
I can see why the rules can be read that way.
However, looking at the Encounter Mode section in the CRB on p. 486, it says:
"Step 2: Play a Round: A round begins when the participant with the highest initiative roll result starts their turn, and it ends when the one with the lowest initiative ends their turn."
This would not seem to allow you to delay into the top of the next round.
Delay (p 470, CRB) says, "You wait for the right moment to act. The rest of your turn doesn’t happen yet. Instead, you’re removed from the initiative order. You can return to the initiative order as a free action triggered by the end of any other creature’s turn."
Delay removes you from the Initiative order, but it does not say that you can go past the end of the round.
Normally, I think they would say that you could delay until the beginning of your next turn if that's what they meant.
I can see the argument to allow it, I don't think it would be necessarily unbalanced to allow it since you still essentially lose your turn in the current round when you delay into the new round and reset your initiative number, but I think the stronger rules interpretation is that you cannot delay outside of the round you are in.
Happy gaming...
I see where the confusion may come from. Rounds are (like hours) both a measure of time and duration. So, there is round 1, round 2, round 3 (1PM, 2PM, 3PM) and there is 1 round, 2 rounds, 3 rounds (1 hour, 2 hours, 3 hours).
When the rules say you can delay an entire round (hour), you don't stop it when you change round (hour) but when your are back at the very same moment in the next round (hour).
So, Fuzzy-Wuzzy answer is right, you can delay as long as it's not back to your turn, even if it means acting during the next round.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
What would it matter if he is last or first? Nothing happens the instant one round is over and the next begins. Whether the PC is at Ini 2 or Ini 29 is irrelevant, he doesn't get any benefit of that.
(Also he can't delay in that way, because the trigger to return into Initiative order is "the end of any other creature’s turn".)
So, Fuzzy-Wuzzy answer is right, you can delay as long as it's not back to your turn, even if it means acting during the next round.
I don't see why not. If one of my players delayed and delayed all the way until their turn in the next round, then their character effectively did nothing for a round, skipping their turn. It would be the same result as if they "spent" all three actions to do nothing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, Fuzzy-Wuzzy answer is right, you can delay as long as it's not back to your turn, even if it means acting during the next round.I don't see why not. If one of my players delayed and delayed all the way until their turn in the next round, then their character effectively did nothing for a round, skipping their turn. It would be the same result as if they "spent" all three actions to do nothing.
You can Delay until it is exactly back to your turn, at which point your actions and reactions have been wasted, your Delay is over, and your new turn begins. You can of course Delay again, with the same effects as the first time; e.g. you take persistent damage immediately. You just can't Delay through your original initiative position, as that would let you skip things like persistent damage. Delays are max one round each, string 'em together if you like but they're all distinct.
So, Fuzzy-Wuzzy answer is right, you can delay as long as it's not back to your turn, even if it means acting during the next round.I don't see why not. If one of my players delayed and delayed all the way until their turn in the next round, then their character effectively did nothing for a round, skipping their turn. It would be the same result as if they "spent" all three actions to do nothing.
My formulation was not ideal. I was trying to say it stops when it's back to your turn.
I think you cannot delay in the next round, because otherwise you will be able to trigger any negative effect on your character less than one time every six seconds: if every turn you delay in the next round and act in a position one step better that your actual initiative position, you will trigger the negative effects nearly one time every two rounds.
There is only one definition of "round" in 2e: "A round begins when the participant with the highest initiative roll result starts their turn, and it ends when the one with the lowest initiative ends their turn. "
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think you cannot delay in the next round, because otherwise you will be able to trigger any negative effect on your character less than one time every six seconds: if every turn you delay in the next round and act in a position one step better that your actual initiative position, you will trigger the negative effects nearly one time every two rounds.
The rules for Delaying anticipate that and say:
When you Delay, any persistent damage or other negative
effects that normally occur at the start or end of your turn occur
immediately when you use the Delay action. Any beneficial
effects that would end at any point during your turn also end.
The GM might determine that other effects end when you
Delay as well. Essentially, you can’t Delay to avoid negative
consequences that would happen on your turn or to extend
beneficial effects that would end on your turn.
So you can delay as much as you want, but you're not escaping any bad stuff or prolonging any good stuff.
There is only one definition of "round" in 2e: "A round begins when the participant with the highest initiative roll result starts their turn, and it ends when the one with the lowest initiative ends their turn. "
Ah, that's incorrect. There's also a different definition, as given in the Spells chapter:
Durations
The duration of a spell is how long the spell effect lasts.
Spells that last for more than an instant have a Duration
entry. A spell might last until the start or end of a turn, for
some number of rounds, for minutes, or even longer. If a
spell’s duration is given in rounds, the number of rounds
remaining decreases by 1 at the start of each of the
spellcaster’s turns, ending when the duration reaches 0.
The important word really is "round". The game goes round and round and everyone gets a turn in order (unless they Delay and change the order).
When you roll initiative, for a brief moment, you actually care about the number everyone rolls. Then you sort people in order of that number and they start taking turns, and when you're at the last one, you go back to the first one. It goes round and round.
You can envision that as a clock, as SuperBidi proposed. If at 9:15 AM you cast a spell that lasts for one hour, it doesn't end at 10 AM or 11 AM, it ends at 10:15 AM. It's the same with spells. If I cast a spell at initiative count 15 that lasts for one round, it lasts until initiative count 15 in the next round.
So suppose you have a persistent burn condition and you cast a one-round buff spell on yourself last round. Now it's your turn and you decide to Delay. The rules for Delay say that you take the persistent damage now, and the buff spell ends. You haven't gained any unreasonable advantage from delaying.
Worse actually: suppose you delayed, failed the flat check to remove the persistent damage, and then you jump back in the initiative order and take a turn: you take persistent damage again. So you're actually being punished more.
Negative effect triggers when you choose to delay. So, with your strategy, you'll take them more often actually. When you delay you take them and when you choose to act you take them. A bit more than once per round.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another way of representing initiative order is with cards. For everyone in the combat, make a card with their name on it. Everyone rolls initiative. You sort the cards based on descending roll results. Then you start running the combat. The top card is the character whose turn it is. When it's done, the top card goes on the bottom.
For any card, the time it takes to go from top to top again is one round.
If someone delays, turn the card sideways. If they come out of delay, pull it out and put it on top and do their turn.
The important thing is not to attach too much sentimental value to the actual numbers in initiative. Whether you got a 20 or a 30 doesn't matter, as long as it was more than the enemy. And when the enemy has just acted on say, number 10, it doesn't matter if your turn comes at number 0 or 20, the only thing that matters is that your turn is before his next turn.
People sometimes get upset because someone delaying might change their result from a 5 to a 25 in the next round. So what? They haven't gained any extra actions from that or skipped the line or anything.
One could get Initiative 100 doing that, there's still no benefits.
Unlike in PF1, there is absolutely nothing to a "round" except the number 0. Unless anyone here is aware of an effect that ticks off "initiative 0" or "end of the round".
The only thing I can think of is Infiltration, where there is 1 point of Awareness gained at the end of each round... but I struggled with representing that, so I made that the Fortress's turn in Initiative. More cohesive with the system.
Now, there is one case in which that can turn into an advantage, exemplified by an old acquaintance of mine who used to GM in the same store:
>provoke initiative during a negotiation
>do nothing
>delay
>act first.
Needless to say we disagreed on a few fine points and I was not sitting at his table.
Negative effect triggers when you choose to delay. So, with your strategy, you'll take them more often actually. When you delay you take them and when you choose to act you take them. A bit more than once per round.
Yes, they trigger when you choose to delay, but you don't re-trigger them when you "complete" (re-enter initiative order) your turn. Otherwise, if you re-enter turn order in the same round, you would trigger the negative effect twice in same round.
So if you delay into the next round, the next time you will trigger them will be two rounds from the last trigger.
Edit: better wording.
The rules for Delaying anticipate that and say:
When you Delay, any persistent damage or other negative
effects that normally occur at the start or end of your turn occur
immediately when you use the Delay action. Any beneficial
effects that would end at any point during your turn also end.
The GM might determine that other effects end when you
Delay as well. Essentially, you can’t Delay to avoid negative
consequences that would happen on your turn or to extend
beneficial effects that would end on your turn.So you can delay as much as you want, but you're not escaping any bad stuff or prolonging any good stuff.
Sure, but I think that you don't re-trigger them when you re-enter initiative order.
Otherwise, if you re-enter turn order in the same round, you would trigger the negative effect twice in same round.Ah, that's incorrect. There's also a different definition, as given in the Spells chapter:
Durations
The duration of a spell is how long the spell effect lasts.
Spells that last for more than an instant have a Duration
entry. A spell might last until the start or end of a turn, for
some number of rounds, for minutes, or even longer. If a
spell’s duration is given in rounds, the number of rounds
remaining decreases by 1 at the start of each of the
spellcaster’s turns, ending when the duration reaches 0.The important word really is "round". The game goes round and round and everyone gets a turn in order (unless they Delay and change the order).
When you roll initiative, for a brief...
I certainly understand the "round" concept for spell duration and in general the round concept as for 3.5. It just seems to me that Pathfinder 2e uses a different round definition in Encounter Mode.
Edit: better wording.
|
|
The rules for Delaying anticipate that and say:
When you Delay, any persistent damage or other negative
effects that normally occur at the start or end of your turn occur
immediately when you use the Delay action. Any beneficial
effects that would end at any point during your turn also end.
The GM might determine that other effects end when you
Delay as well. Essentially, you can’t Delay to avoid negative
consequences that would happen on your turn or to extend
beneficial effects that would end on your turn.So you can delay as much as you want, but you're not escaping any bad stuff or prolonging any good stuff.
Sure, but I think that you don't re-trigger them when you re-enter initiative order.
Otherwise, if you re-enter turn order in the same round, you would trigger the negative effect twice in same round.
Yes, delaying when you're on fire is bad. That's working as intended.
Ah, that's incorrect. There's also a different definition, as given in the Spells chapter:
Durations
The duration of a spell is how long the spell effect lasts.
Spells that last for more than an instant have a Duration
entry. A spell might last until the start or end of a turn, for
some number of rounds, for minutes, or even longer. If a
spell’s duration is given in rounds, the number of rounds
remaining decreases by 1 at the start of each of the
spellcaster’s turns, ending when the duration reaches 0.The important word really is "round". The game goes round and round and everyone gets a turn in order (unless they Delay and change the order).
When you roll initiative, for a brief...
I certainly understand the "round" concept for spell duration and in general the round concept as for 3.5. It just seems to me that Pathfinder 2e uses a different round definition in Encounter Mode.
Edit: better wording.
Nope, rounds are round here too.
The rules for Delaying anticipate that and say:
When you Delay, any persistent damage or other negative
effects that normally occur at the start or end of your turn occur
immediately when you use the Delay action. Any beneficial
effects that would end at any point during your turn also end.
The GM might determine that other effects end when you
Delay as well. Essentially, you can’t Delay to avoid negative
consequences that would happen on your turn or to extend
beneficial effects that would end on your turn.So you can delay as much as you want, but you're not escaping any bad stuff or prolonging any good stuff.
Sure, but I think that you don't re-trigger them when you re-enter initiative order.
Otherwise, if you re-enter turn order in the same round, you would trigger the negative effect twice in same round.Yes, delaying when you're on fire is bad. That's working as intended.
Nope,...Ah, that's incorrect. There's also a different definition, as given in the Spells chapter:
Durations
The duration of a spell is how long the spell effect lasts.
Spells that last for more than an instant have a Duration
entry. A spell might last until the start or end of a turn, for
some number of rounds, for minutes, or even longer. If a
spell’s duration is given in rounds, the number of rounds
remaining decreases by 1 at the start of each of the
spellcaster’s turns, ending when the duration reaches 0.The important word really is "round". The game goes round and round and everyone gets a turn in order (unless they Delay and change the order).
When you roll initiative, for a brief...
I certainly understand the "round" concept for spell duration and in general the round concept as for 3.5. It just seems to me that Pathfinder 2e uses a different round definition in Encounter Mode.
Edit: better wording.
The parts you quoted from the manual do not prove your point. I mean, it is possible that you are right, just I don't see any evidence of it in the text you quoted.
I think instead that what Melfast quoted indicates that the "Delay" action could not be completed into the next round (as defined at page 468), and that the description of the "Delay" action indicates that you will not re-trigger the negative effects: (page 470) "the rest of your turn doesn’t happen yet" seems to indicate that in the first part of your turn you trigger the negative effects and declare the delay. Then you are going to complete you turn when re-enter initiative order: it is not a new turn, so no negative effects trigger.
There could be a question for negative effects happening at the start of your turn.
But the sentence "Essentially, you can’t Delay to avoid negative
consequences that would happen on your turn or to extend
beneficial effects that would end on your turn." is quite clear. If there's a choice between double negative effect and delayed negative effect, the answer is double effect.
There could be a question for negative effects happening at the start of your turn.
But the sentence "Essentially, you can’t Delay to avoid negative
consequences that would happen on your turn or to extend
beneficial effects that would end on your turn." is quite clear. If there's a choice between double negative effect and delayed negative effect, the answer is double effect.
There is not a choice. It seems clear to me that you apply the negative effects in your turn, when you select the "Delay" action, not later in the round when you re-enter initiative order: (Page 470) "When you Delay, any persistent damage or other negative effects that normally occur at the start or end of your turn occur immediately when you use the Delay action. Any beneficial effects that would end at any point during your turn also end."
You conclude your turn later in the round if you re-enter initiative order, but you have already applied the negative effects for this round.In this way, and if you can't "Delay" into the next turn, you apply the negative effects exactly once every turn, and I think this is the rule intent.
The part you quoted is necessary, otherwise if you "Delay" without applying the negative effects, and then you skip your turn because you don't re-enter initiative order, you will miss the negative effects part for this round.
|
Which is exactly the same as waiting the same number of turns within a round. It doesn't make any difference.
The Delay rules mention your next turn, which by definition is always during the "next round" if you count by Initiative rolls (something I think most people don't keep track of once you've started--I certainly don't!)
It also doesn't make any sense.
It's my turn, then Sarah's, then Bob's. I hesitate, waiting for something to happen--a Delay. Sarah acts. I still want to wait... but I can't. Why not? Because Bob acted first three rounds ago.
(I have played a d20 game where Delays explicitly couldn't go past the bottom of the Initiative order, Mutants & Masterminds 2E, but that game also featured the Refocus action, which let you skip your turn this round to act first next round. In other words, it turned delaying past three characters' turns into delaying, then refocusing, then delaying. It made no difference and was dropped in 3E.)
Which is exactly the same as waiting the same number of turns within a round. It doesn't make any difference.
There is a difference. If I am last in turn order and I "Delay", I trigger the negative effects in the moment I delay. I then re-enter initiative as second-to-last into the next round, completing my turn, without trigger any negative effects (I have already triggered them). I re-trigger them one round later as second-to-last, nearly 2 round from the previous trigger. Then I "Delay" one more time... I'm triggering the negative effects nearly once every 2 rounds, and I think this is not the rule intent.
If you can't "Delay" into the next round, you trigger the negative effects exactly once every round (as defined at page 468).
|
|
That's exactly the same effect as moving from "first" to "last" (which isn't accurate anyway, since both are part of a cycle; "first" is only first when the battle starts).
You're also actively trying to game the system, and you're still paying the massive cost of completely skipping your turn. You'll still suffer the negative effect the same number of times, too. All you really accomplished was losing a turn.
That's exactly the same effect as moving from "first" to "last" (which isn't accurate anyway, since both are part of a cycle; "first" is only first when the battle starts).
You're also actively trying to game the system, and you're still paying the massive cost of completely skipping your turn. You'll still suffer the negative effect the same number of times, too. All you really accomplished was losing a turn.
You can move from first to last just one time, because if you can't "Delay" into the next round, you are now last and you can't "Delay" anymore. So no, this is not the same effect.
The massive cost of skipping your turn has nothing to do with the discussion topic. I'm not arguing about game balance, nor I'm saying that a cyclic initiative system is a bad or good system. I'm just saying what in my opinion the rules say.
Going last is exactly the same as going first in the second round.
You can't delay past where your initiative would be in the next round, but nothing stops you from delaying into the next round.
Going last is exactly the same as going first in the second round.
You can't delay past where your initiative would be in the next round, but nothing stops you from delaying into the next round.
Quote from the 2e rulebook:
If you Delay an entire round without returning to the initiative order, the actions from the Delayed turn are lost, your initiative doesn’t change, and your next turn occurs at your original position in the initiative order.
This can be read both ways. "Delay" an entire round (as per definition at page 368) can mean until the end of the round. If your initiative is last (the last turn before the end of the round) you can't delay any further.
In Pathfinder 1e srd you can find this phrase under "Combat Round":
When the rules refer to a “full round”, they usually mean a span of time from a particular initiative count in one round to the same initiative count in the next round. Effects that last a certain number of rounds end just before the same initiative count that they began on.
And, under "Initiative Consequences of Delaying":
Your initiative result becomes the count on which you took the delayed action. If you come to your next action and have not yet performed an action, you don’t get to take a delayed action (though you can delay again).
If you take a delayed action in the next round, before your regular turn comes up, your initiative count rises to that new point in the order of battle, and you do not get your regular action that round.
If I didn't miss any rule, this is not what Pathfinder 2e says about "Round" and "Delay". Moreover, Pathfinder 2e rules specify the part about negative effects as discussed.
That in my opinion suggests that the "Delay" action in 2e works differently from Pathfinder 1e and that you can't "Delay" into the next round.
You all noticed this paragraph?
You can return to the initiative order as a free action triggered by the end of any other creature’s turn.
This means you can't specifically delay to any initiative count or until "the end of round" or into the next round unless the initiative order more or less allows for it.
If you are the first to act with 3 creatures behind you, you get exactly 3 chances to trigger your delay in the initial round. If you let all 3 opportunities pass your delay action is lost, your initiative count will not be modified and you start your 2nd turn on your original initiative as normal.
If you are the third to act with one creature behind, you could indeed delay into next round, and then choose to act after the first creature. Basically this will forfeit your actions in the first round for a better initiative count in the 2nd and all subsequent rounds.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What Ubertron_X said.
Arguing that you can only delay until a certain point in time that makes no sense in-game means complicating your own life for no gain. Is it worth to do that just to follow a particular interpretation of RAW?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you Delay an entire round without returning to the initiative order, the actions from the Delayed turn are lost, your initiative doesn’t change, and your next turn occurs at your original position in the initiative order.
Emphasis mine. This seems plain - if you only delay from your turn until initiative zero, then you have not delayed "an entire round", only part of one.
Ergo, it must be possible to delay an entire round.
PF2e is mostly written to read logically. It doesn't rely on arcane and specific keywords for the most part. When it says "an entire round" it means "an entire round" and expects you to understand that is plain English.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Going last is exactly the same as going first in the second round.
You can't delay past where your initiative would be in the next round, but nothing stops you from delaying into the next round.
Quote from the 2e rulebook:
This can be read both ways. "Delay" an entire round (as per definition at page 368) can mean until the end of the round. If your initiative is last (the last turn before the end of the round) you can't delay any further.If you Delay an entire round without returning to the initiative order, the actions from the Delayed turn are lost, your initiative doesn’t change, and your next turn occurs at your original position in the initiative order.
The rulebook also says that if a rule can be read two ways, choose the reading that makes sense. The only reading that makes sense is that you can delay an entire round into the next.
Have to agree with the above.
Something that takes a round lasting from your turn until your next turn is pretty consistently how 'rounds' are used throughout the game for every effect I can find that describes things lasting in rounds.
Arguing that the person who goes last in combat can never delay doesn't seem like it makes a lot of sense, either. It's not consistent with the language (you haven't delayed 'an entire round' if the initiative hasn't even changed once) and I'm not sure how such an interpretation does anything to make the game better.
The rulebook also says that if a rule can be read two ways, choose the reading that makes sense. The only reading that makes sense is that you can delay an entire round into the next.
And the only way to assure that an effect trigger exactly once every round, is that you can't "Delay" into the next round.
Example:
Just as example, assume that you have a negative effect on you with duration of 30 seconds (5 rounds). There are 8 partecipant in combat. You are last in initiative order.
Round 1: you "Delay". You don't do any other action or activity in this round, you just trigger the effects. (4 rounds of negative effect remain)
Round 2: you re-enter initiative as 7th and complete your turn. You don't retrigger the negative effects.
Round 3: you "Delay". You don't do any other action or activity in this round, you just trigger the effects. (3 rounds of negative effect remain)
Round 4: you re-enter initiative as 6th and complete your turn. You don't retrigger the negative effects.
Round 5: you "Delay". You don't do any other action or activity in this round, you just trigger the effects. (2 rounds of negative effect remain)
Round 6: you re-enter initiative as 5th and complete your turn. You don't retrigger the negative effects.
Round 7: you "Delay". You don't do any other action or activity in this round, you just trigger the effects. (1 rounds of negative effect remain)
Round 8: you re-enter initiative as 4th and complete your turn. You don't retrigger the negative effects.
Round 9: the negative effect triggers and ends.
The negative effect should have a duration about 30 seconds and end at round 5, its duration was of about 54 seconds instead and ended at round 9. This is not as the durations are intended, I think.
(And note that more the combatants, more times you can use "Delay" to "delay" the negative effects)
Just to make it clear: I certainly know the round concept used in many d20 games, I played 3e, 3.5 and Pathfinder 1e. "Delay" into the next round make perfect sense, and have precise tactical effects on combat.
I just noted the different wording used in Pathfinder 2e and as they explicitly says that you can't "Delay" to delay the negative effects. But Delay multiple times into the next round let you do exactly this: delay the negative effects. My interpretation is that they are confining "Delay" in the same combat round to assure that the effects trigger once every combat round.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Kelebrar, I don't think there's anything to indicate that you don't also suffer those effects when you actually take your turn; I think you are reading that into the rules.
Yes, delaying can cause you to get hit by persistent damage twice in one round. I think that is on purpose. Sitting around and hesitating while you are on fire isn't smart.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, delaying can cause you to get hit by persistent damage twice in one round. I think that is on purpose. Sitting around and hesitating while you are on fire isn't smart.
.
If a player starts to delay in round 1 he will immediately get hit by persistent damage because the delay rules say so:When you Delay, any persistent damage or other negative effects that normally occur at the start or end of your turn occur immediately when you use the Delay action.
If the player is taking his turn (doesn't matter if still in round 1 or already in round 2) and the persistant damage is still in effect (remember the DC15 flat after the first occurance) he will again get hit by persistant damage because the persistant damage rules say so:
.Instead of taking persistent damage immediately, you take it at the end of each of your turns as long as you have the condition, rolling any damage dice anew each time.
As far as I can see (but I may be wrong) there is nothing in the rules that prohibits potentially taking the damage twice in one round.
Yes, delaying can cause you to get hit by persistent damage twice in one round. I think that is on purpose. Sitting around and hesitating while you are on fire isn't smart..
If a player starts to delay in round 1 he will immediately get hit by persistent damage because the delay rules say so:When you Delay, any persistent damage or other negative effects that normally occur at the start or end of your turn occur immediately when you use the Delay action.If the player is taking his turn (doesn't matter if still in round 1 or already in round 2) and the persistant damage is still in effect (remember the DC15 flat after the first occurance) he will again get hit by persistant damage because the persistant damage rules say so:
.
Instead of taking persistent damage immediately, you take it at the end of each of your turns as long as you have the condition, rolling any damage dice anew each time.As far as I can see (but I may be wrong) there is nothing in the rules that prohibits potentially taking the damage twice in one round.
The "Delay" action is not the action you take when you re-enter initiative, but the free action you select to delay. It is when you select the "Delay" action that you trigger the negative effect.
In my opinion you don't take the negative effects twice in the same round: you are not playing two turns, you just "split" your turn in two distinct parts ("The rest of your turn doesn’t happen yet.", under "Delay" action, page 470). First you take the negative effects and select the "Delay" action, then, when you re-enter initiative, you complete your turn.
Typically in a cyclic round system when you and another character are, for example, first and second in the iniziative order, you can swap the order with your mate. This is actually using the "Delay" action. So do you imply that you will take twice the negative effects this round because you swapped position with the other player character?
Yes, delaying can cause you to get hit by persistent damage twice in one round. I think that is on purpose. Sitting around and hesitating while you are on fire isn't smart.
Typically in a cyclic round system when you and another character are, for example, first and second in the iniziative order, you can swap the order with your mate. This is actually using the "Delay" action. So do you imply that you will take twice the negative effects this round because you swapped position with the other player character?
If it is so, I can rewrite the previous example just changing when you re-enter: if you delay and then re-enter into the same round, you are ending a 5 rounds negative effect in 3 rounds (about 18 seconds) instead of 5 (about 30 seconds):
Round 1: you "Delay" and you trigger the negative effect (4 rounds of negative effect remain). You re-enter later in this round, and re-trigger the effect. (3 rounds of negative effect remain)
Round 2: you "Delay" and you trigger the negative effect (2 rounds of negative effect remain). You re-enter later in this round, and re-trigger the effect. (1 rounds of negative effect remain)
Round 3: the negative effect triggers and ends.
In my opinion you don't take the negative effects twice in the same round: you are not playing two turns, you just "split" your turn in two distinct parts ("The rest of your turn doesn’t happen yet.", under "Delay" action, page 470). First you take the negative effects and select the "Delay" action, then, when you re-enter initiative, you complete your turn.
This is where you are wrong. When you Delay, you are taken out of initiative. When you return to initiative, you have a complete turn including a beginning and end.
In my opinion you don't take the negative effects twice in the same round: you are not playing two turns, you just "split" your turn in two distinct parts ("The rest of your turn doesn’t happen yet.", under "Delay" action, page 470). First you take the negative effects and select the "Delay" action, then, when you re-enter initiative, you complete your turn.This is where you are wrong. When you Delay, you are taken out of initiative. When you return to initiative, you have a complete turn including a beginning and end.
Could you please show me where the rules say so?
And what does it means then "The rest of your turn doesn’t happen yet." (page 470)?
And what does it means then "The rest of your turn doesn’t happen yet."(page 470)?
The rest of your turn doesn't happen yet means that a couple of things out of step 1 and 3 of a regular turn order do happen when you delay, all other steps and substeps that are not mentioned in the delay rule do not happen (page 469).
Step 1
* Reduce duration for effects that you have created => happens when you delay
* Recovery checks => happens when you delay
* Can use "start of turn" free actions or reactions => does not happen
* Regain actions => does not happen
* "Do anything else at start of turn" => depends, if it is a negative effect it happens when you delay, else not
Step 2 => does not happen at all
Step 3
* End all effects that last until end of turn => happens when you delay
* Persistent damage => happens when you delay
* Can use "end of turn" free actions or reactions => does not happen
* "Do anything else at end of turn" => depends, if it is a negative effect it happens when you delay, else not
The only thing I am not 100% sure is conditions like frightened, which are negative conditions but would be reduced at the end of your turn. Probably falls under "Essentially, you can’t Delay to avoid negative consequences that would happen on your turn...", else you would indeed be able to get rid of frightened 2 in 1 round just by delaying.
The GM might determine that other effects end when you Delay as well. Essentially, you can’t Delay to avoid negative consequences that would happen on your turn or to extend beneficial effects that would end on your turn.
This seems pretty clear. The GM makes sure that the players cannot "game" the delay function to get around bad effects or extend positive ones.
You don't need to do a deep dive on any of the language above this sentence about what it means when you delay, because fundamentally it is supposed to be up to the GM AND the GM should not allow duration shenanigans.
And what does it means then "The rest of your turn doesn’t happen yet."(page 470)?The rest of your turn doesn't happen yet means that a couple of things out of step 1 and 3 of a regular turn order do happen when you delay, all other steps and substeps that are not mentioned in the delay rule do not happen (page 469).
Step 1
* Reduce duration for effects that you have created => happens when you delay
* Recovery checks => happens when you delay* Can use "start of turn" free actions or reactions => does not happen
* Regain actions => does not happen* "Do anything else at start of turn" => depends, if it is a negative effect it happens when you delay, else not
Step 2 => does not happen at all
Step 3
* End all effects that last until end of turn => happens when you delay
* Persistent damage => happens when you delay* Can use "end of turn" free actions or reactions => does not happen
* "Do anything else at end of turn" => depends, if it is a negative effect it happens when you delay, else notThe only thing I am not 100% sure is conditions like frightened, which are negative conditions but would be reduced at the end of your turn. Probably falls under "Essentially, you can’t Delay to avoid negative consequences that would happen on your turn...", else you would indeed be able to get rid of frightened 2 in 1 round just by delaying.
Exactly. And Step 2 happens when you re-enter initiative order, and so you complete the rest of your turn.
He is pointing you to page 470 of CRB where that sentence is located.Could you please show me where the rules say so?
And what does it means then "The rest of your turn doesn’t happen yet." (page 470)?
Actually I'm pointing to this sentence :)
The GM might determine that other effects end when you Delay as well. Essentially, you can’t Delay to avoid negative consequences that would happen on your turn or to extend beneficial effects that would end on your turn.This seems pretty clear. The GM makes sure that the players cannot "game" the delay function to get around bad effects or extend positive ones.
You don't need to do a deep dive on any of the language above this sentence about what it means when you delay, because fundamentally it is supposed to be up to the GM AND the GM should not allow duration shenanigans.
If you can't "Delay" into the next round, no duration shenanigans will happen, and every effect lasts exactly the right amount of time.
Exactly. And Step 2 happens when you re-enter initiative order, and so you complete the rest of your turn.
Actually I think more than just step 2 happens, but I see where you are comming from now.
I was arguing along the line that you:
1) Start your turn
2) You delay
3) All negative start of turn and end of turn things happen, not because it is actually your start or end of turn but because the delay action tells you to do so, i.e. your turn is not split up
4) You trigger your reaction
5) You start your full turn, i.e. including all start and end activities
You were arguing along the line that you:
1) Start your turn
2) You delay
3) All negative start of turn and end of turn things happen, and your turn is thus split up
4) You trigger your reaction
5) You start your remaining turn aka minus the things that already happened
If your argument is correct, than you could - as per your example above - indeed slow down negative effects at the cost of being inactive every other round.
However even if you are correct this sentence is very much killing this suggested course of action: "Essentially, you can’t Delay to avoid negative consequences that would happen on your turn or to extend beneficial effects that would end on your turn."
So if you delay within a round the negative effects would be applied once in this round, and once in the next round, when you start your next turn.
If however you delay from this round into the next round (and before you forfeit your actions), the GM is advised to apply the negative effects once in the first round and once again in the next round, no matter how often you act or how your turns are split, simply by the "no shenanigans" rule section.