PDA

View Full Version : Turn overload



Shirocco
2009-09-22, 08:59 PM
Turns are funny things. Players - particularly when under pressure - sometimes have very optimistic ideas of how much they can do in one turn. I've seen them try to do a full turn's movement, then pull bullets out of a friend and bandage them all in 6 seconds once or twice. Full paragraph monologues while engaged in intense combat are nearly par for the course in some groups - Order of the Stick teases about this occasionally.

What's the most you've seen players try and do in one turn? Whether or not the GM let them get away with it. :smallbiggrin:

Ledeas
2009-09-22, 09:01 PM
I will let them bend the rule to save a friend.

I return the favor for bad guy getting away.

Thajocoth
2009-09-22, 09:13 PM
Turns are funny things. Players - particularly when under pressure - sometimes have very optimistic ideas of how much they can do in one turn. I've seen them try to do a full turn's movement, then pull bullets out of a friend and bandage them all in 6 seconds once or twice. Full paragraph monologues while engaged in intense combat are nearly par for the course in some groups - Order of the Stick teases about this occasionally.

What's the most you've seen players try and do in one turn? Whether or not the GM let them get away with it. :smallbiggrin:

I once crit 7 times in one turn in a 4th ed game. 8 if you count my interrupt on the enemy's turn.

To explain: My rogue is a Dagger Master. (He crits on 18-20). He also gets to make an off-hand attack when he crits with his main hand (from a feat). He also has a minor action attack he can only use on a round he crit in. He also has a gem that gives him an extra basic attack as a free action on a turn he crits on. And I action pointed...

So that's:
Move up to enemy
Standard action Attack
Free Off-hand attack from critting
Free basic attack from gem from critting
Free offhand attack from critting again
Minor Attack from critting
Free offhand attack from critting again
Action Point Attack
Free offhand attack from critting again
EDIT: Nearly forgot... I missed one of the offhand attacks and did a Nasty Backswing, Unfortunately, did not crit on that, so I was one attack short of my max possible for a round.

On enemy's turn:
Interrupt attack
Free offhand attack from critting again

Of the above, 2 of the free offhand attacks didn't crit. I've got a Bloodiron dagger, so the enemy took a huge amount of damage again at the start of my next turn. The above was the opening round too... Avandra certainly smiled on Hank that day... The monster didn't die though... It wasn't even a solo. I killed it during my following turn.

Olo Demonsbane
2009-09-22, 09:28 PM
I critted 588 times in one turn, dealing 44756 damage. Thats probably my most impressive. That, or killing all the gods in one swift action...

SurlySeraph
2009-09-22, 10:03 PM
I critted 588 times in one turn, dealing 44756 damage. Thats probably my most impressive. That, or killing all the gods in one swift action...

Against yourself. I'm not sure if that counts.

And as for the godslaying... details? Because that's kinda just a little bit incredibly epic.

sambo.
2009-09-22, 11:51 PM
And as for the godslaying... details? Because that's kinda just a little bit incredibly epic.

many moons ago, in 1st ed (just after Unearthed Arcana was originally released), our party Paladin/Cavalier killed Tiamat, the Chromatic Dragon, with one single lance thrust (ok, he was in full charge at the time).

with all the huge multipliers along with a decent damage roll (and a critical hit), he dealt a little over double her total hitpoints in damage in the first attack of the first round of an encounter that was supposed to take us most of the night to get through (the DM was more than a little cheesed off btw).

voila: one dead god(ess).

bosssmiley
2009-09-23, 10:27 AM
Turns are funny things. Players - particularly when under pressure - sometimes have very optimistic ideas of how much they can do in one turn. I've seen them try to do a full turn's movement, then pull bullets out of a friend and bandage them all in 6 seconds once or twice. Full paragraph monologues while engaged in intense combat are nearly par for the course in some groups - Order of the Stick teases about this occasionally.

What's the most you've seen players try and do in one turn? Whether or not the GM let them get away with it. :smallbiggrin:

D&D combat, for all its pretensions to mechanical exactitude, actually runs on Hollywood action movie 'stretchy time'. A character has enough screen time in those six second rounds to do whatever his actions entitle him to. There is always time for cool dialogue. :smallbiggrin:

Side note: D&D seconds are not Earth seconds. Being stretchy they are not a universal constant, and thus make Einstein cry.

jiriku
2009-09-23, 11:06 AM
I often see players who want to double-move, reload a crossbow or drink a potion while moving, then ready an action to attack the first enemy to come within reach. They're always sad when I say no :P

Person_Man
2009-09-23, 11:42 AM
Talking is a free action (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TalkingIsAFreeAction).

Interestingly enough, you can also use Sleight of Hand as a free action. Open to all sorts of abuse.

daggaz
2009-09-23, 12:01 PM
Yeah, talking is a free action, but in the very next paragraph it says the DM should limit it to what can reasonably be said in within six seconcds. It specificaly mentions the inability to give a complete oration as a free action.

Curmudgeon
2009-09-23, 12:06 PM
Interestingly enough, you can also use Sleight of Hand as a free action. Open to all sorts of abuse.
Oh, yeah. My Rogue character once removed just about everything an enemy had except her weapon in hand on a single turn, dropping it in the square behind him. Good thing, too, because if she'd still had that Belt of Giant Strength when she attacked, my character would have been mincemeat. :smallcool:

crazedloon
2009-09-23, 12:11 PM
well I cast I think 3 or 4 spells in one turn (none of them were quickened or readied) and that was against an opponent who did the same and then there were a few other actions done.... The other players were a little bored after the dm and myself sorted it all out and found out the result was nothing happened at all :smallbiggrin:

Random832
2009-09-23, 12:27 PM
Yeah, talking is a free action, but in the very next paragraph it says the DM should limit it to what can reasonably be said in within six seconcds. It specificaly mentions the inability to give a complete oration as a free action.

The problem is, it's not necessarily reasonable to make four melee attacks or run 120 feet (30 ft*4) in six seconds, either. Combat time is very screwy, and pinning it down as six-second rounds makes no more sense than 2e's one-minute rounds, where it's assumed that in all the chaos of combat you only get an average of one (or however many attacks you get per round) clear shot per minute, or that (someone whose normal outdoor walking speed is 120 yards) can maneuver 60 feet [e.g. to close in, or move around while firing arrows], charge 180 feet, withdraw 40 feet, or flee (provoking a proto-OA) 120 feet.

Talya
2009-09-23, 12:41 PM
Side note: D&D seconds are not Earth seconds. Being stretchy they are not a universal constant, and thus make Einstein cry.

Actually, Einstein was the first one to propose that time itself was not a constant, so he'd be fine with that.

Godna
2009-09-23, 12:53 PM
The problem is, it's not necessarily reasonable to make four melee attacks or run 120 feet (30 ft*4) in six seconds.

Actually that totals to a little over 13miles per hour and thats not quite Olympic speed.

Talya
2009-09-24, 10:08 AM
Actually that totals to a little over 13miles per hour and thats not quite Olympic speed.

And from watching my husband and 7 year old son duel with fake lightsabers, 4 attacks per 6 seconds is entirely possible! I've heard those things smack against each other at least that fast.

Carden
2009-09-24, 11:34 AM
The problem is, it's not necessarily reasonable to make four melee attacks or run 120 feet (30 ft*4) in six seconds, either.

Actually, you can easily make four melee attacks with a heavy weapon in six seconds. Now, what's screwy with combat is that it's limited to that four at max BAB, worse in the monk's case, who trains almost exclusively with his fists and only gets three. I can toss out four without experience or speed training. Maybe if they cartwheeled their arms in a hilariously cartoonish fashion before punching each time they'd be reduced to three attacks per turn, but, other than that, I see no reason why a full unarmed attack should take 6-1.5 seconds, except for practical purposes. Basic balancing, even if it makes no sense.

Curmudgeon
2009-09-24, 11:47 AM
n the monk's case, who trains almost exclusively with his fists and only gets three.
Huh? The Monk trains with all sorts of body weapons.
Unarmed Attacks

Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts ... Fists are just a small part of unarmed attacks. There's nothing even close to exclusive about a Monk's fists.

Yuki Akuma
2009-09-24, 11:55 AM
...Also, the monk gets five attacks per round. Up to eight if he's dual-wielding monk weapons.

So, okay, you can throw four punches in six seconds. Go you. Can you throw four punches that could actually hit someone and do some damage, all while avoiding their own attacks, in six seconds?

I highly doubt it, somehow.

Indon
2009-09-24, 11:58 AM
Interestingly enough, you can also use Sleight of Hand as a free action. Open to all sorts of abuse.

Why draw your throwing daggers when you could attempt to pickpocket them from yourself instead?

Xenogears
2009-09-24, 12:01 PM
Actually that totals to a little over 13miles per hour and thats not quite Olympic speed.

A barbarian with the run feat would get a 200 ft per round movement rate while running and still be slightly slower than the world record.

tyckspoon
2009-09-24, 12:02 PM
...Also, the monk gets five attacks per round. Up to eight if he's dual-wielding monk weapons.

So, okay, you can throw four punches in six seconds. Go you. Can you throw four punches that could actually hit someone and do some damage, all while avoiding their own attacks, in six seconds?

I highly doubt it, somehow.

In a turn-based world where I get those six seconds all to myself and don't actually have to worry about avoiding counter attacks until he gets his own six seconds? Absolutely. (Well, not personally, because my punching technique sucks, but I could certainly make four attempts.) D&D's initiative/round system makes it near impossible to compare anything that happens in a combat to a real-world fight.

Xenogears
2009-09-24, 12:06 PM
In a turn-based world where I get those six seconds all to myself and don't actually have to worry about avoiding counter attacks until he gets his own six seconds? Absolutely.

Oh it specifically says that those six seconds are shared by everyone so even if there are 10 million opponents all the combined actions only take a total of six seconds. Sure it's illogical but thats what it says...

Also remember that those 8 hits are not just 8 hits they also include a bunch of feints and other moves. As it says in the PHB. One game hit is representative of a series of feints and misses with one actual strike. So that 8 attacks that the monk gets is more like 8 hits that connect, 15 fients, 10 set up hits, etc. No I don't think yoiu could do it.

Indon
2009-09-24, 12:10 PM
Also remember that those 8 hits are not just 8 hits they also include a bunch of feints and other moves. As it says in the PHB. One game hit is representative of a series of feints and misses with one actual strike. So that 8 attacks that the monk gets is more like 8 hits that connect, 15 fients, 10 set up hits, etc. No I don't think yoiu could do it.

Until you spend a full attack on sundering something.

Epinephrine
2009-09-24, 12:12 PM
The problem is, it's not necessarily reasonable to make four melee attacks or run 120 feet (30 ft*4) in six seconds, either.

That's not incredibly fast. When I was a kid in elementary school I recall doing 50m (more than 160 feet) sprints in ~6 seconds, as part of the fitness program at the time (Canada Fitness). And I was a kid (10, 11 years old?), and short for my age.

Random832
2009-09-24, 12:17 PM
Oh it specifically says that those six seconds are shared by everyone so even if there are 10 million opponents all the combined actions only take a total of six seconds. Sure it's illogical but thats what it says...

How is it illogical? It's only "illogical" if everyone's interacting with everyone else at the same time, and 10 million medium-sized participants in a battle requires a minimum of almost nine square miles of battlefield. (or for three-dimensional battles, a volume equivalent to a cube a quarter mile on each side). And that's if everyone's packed in, one grid square to a person.

Each person gets to act once per six seconds, however that action is defined. The only "illogical" bit is the amount of stuff you can do in six seconds, and that problem doesn't scale with the number of opponents

"everyone acts at once" isn't illogical, it's reality.

Xenogears
2009-09-24, 12:18 PM
Until you spend a full attack on sundering something.

Even though I don't see why you couldn't apply feints to sunder attempts (If that is what you are implying) then just because it is possible to logically do one full-round action logically then it doesn't change the fact that in six seconds it seems unreasonable to perform that many attacks and feints.

Edit:
How is it illogical? It's only "illogical" if everyone's interacting with everyone else at the same time, and 10 million medium-sized participants in a battle requires a minimum of almost nine square miles of battlefield. (or for three-dimensional battles, a volume equivalent to a cube a quarter mile on each side) Each person gets to act once per six seconds, however that action is defined. The only "illogical" bit is the amount of stuff you can do in six seconds, and that problem doesn't scale with the number of opponents

"everyone acts at once" isn't illogical, it's reality.

It's illogical because as presented even though they all act at the same time they simultaneously act in order. IE: If person A runs forty feet to the left and then person B charges him then they had to act one after the other despite taking up the same six second time frame. Now if there are ten million people (or a smaller number like 100 works too) then now if everyone moves acts like the above example then 10 million people in the same six seconds have consecutive actions that each take six seconds.

Hell even just the two person one is illogical.

Keshay
2009-09-24, 12:23 PM
A barbarian with the run feat would get a 200 ft per round movement rate while running and still be slightly slower than the world record.

While wearing light armor, boots, helmet, a cape, a backpack with 50' of rope, a blanket, rations, a crowbar, etc..., and (most likely) a big honking axe. Throw all that junk on Usain Bolt and he's not breaking any records either.

Since its all still a light load, it does not hinder the Barb at all. Yet another example of how D&D physics in no way relate to real physics, this is not new information. Why do people still try to compare the two?

Random832
2009-09-24, 12:23 PM
Okay, that.

Separate declare/resolve stages (as used in some other systems, but not D&D) would solve that, but take a lot more bookkeeping. (and dealing with interrupts, aborts, etc).

Xenogears
2009-09-24, 12:39 PM
Oh I don't think there's anything wrong with the way that DnD combat works I just think it is very very illogical when you try to compare it to reality. But since the only time I ever do that is when I'm on this site thats not a big problem. More bookkeeping would be a very bad decision IMO. I don't even like playing casters because of the bookkeeping issue.

Talya
2009-09-24, 12:42 PM
Can you throw four punches that could actually hit someone and do some damage

...neither can the monk.