Free action house rule [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Ashtagon

2012-07-23, 07:45 AM

My house rule on free actions is as follows:

You have a maximum of six free actions per round (certain action economy hax may break this).
No free action in a single round can be a repeat of a previous free action in that round. (eg. you can't quick draw, attack, quick draw).
No free action in a single round can be the polar opposite of a previous free action in that round.

This is intended to remove the cheese from free actions.. Two questions:

Are there any realistic/reasonable tasks that would be prevented by these rules?
Is there any free action cheese that would still be allowed under this rule?

qwertyu63

2012-07-23, 07:54 AM

To answer your first question, yes. But it seems it is exactly what you are trying to cut. I speak of "quick draw, attack, quick draw". What is the problem with that? I don't see it.

Ashtagon

2012-07-23, 07:57 AM

To answer your first question, yes. But it seems it is exactly what you are trying to cut. I speak of "quick draw, attack, quick draw". What is the problem with that? I don't see it.

or how about attack, quick draw, attack, quick draw. Repeat for the other hand. Six attacks, each with a different weapon. And each taking advantage of Iaijutsu Focus.

Allanimal

2012-07-23, 08:00 AM

qwertyu63

2012-07-23, 08:05 AM

or how about attack, quick draw, attack, quick draw. Repeat for the other hand. Six attacks, each with a different weapon. And each taking advantage of Iaijutsu Focus.

Tell me, where are you getting six attacks? For that matter, can you switch weapons in the middle of what I assume is a full attack? Because if so, then you might be right in trying to rein this in.

I talking something like "Start with longsword, QD to longbow, full attack, QD to longsword, repeat next turn." Is this kind of thing a problem?

Thomasinx

2012-07-23, 08:06 AM

This is intended to remove the cheese from free actions.. Two questions:

Are there any realistic/reasonable tasks that would be prevented by these rules?
Is there any free action cheese that would still be allowed under this rule?

This seems like an unnecessary rule.

I also don't see how there's any cheese in free actions. They are above and beyond the weakest, and least impactful.

Besides, this change makes it impossible to make a Thrower. (if you throw your weapon away and can't draw another with quick-draw, you're screwed)

One of the reasons quick-draw isn't broken is because it doesn't make sheathing a weapon a free action.

Keep in mind what other free actions there are:
-Cease concentration on a spell
-Drop an item
-Drop to the floor
-Prepare spell components to cast a spell
-Speak
Limiting this type of thing (or even making people keep track of # of free actions a round) is a pain for everyone. (I'm sorry, you can't speak to your allies since you used up your allotment of free actions for this round!)

Tim Proctor

2012-07-23, 08:23 AM

Keep in mind what other free actions there are:
...
-Speak
...

I try to limit the players to 6 seconds of speech during a round, and when they don't I ask them if they took a feat to alter time for the purpose of extending their monologues.

I think it is the Thief-Acrobat who can drop prone and kip up as a free action a thousand times in a round, don't know of a way to abuse it. Except one.

SRD states:

Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat, or putting it away so that you have a free hand, requires a move action. This action also applies to weapon-like objects carried in easy reach, such as wands. If your weapon or weapon-like object is stored in a pack or otherwise out of easy reach, treat this action as retrieving a stored item.

So in order to abuse the Iaijutsu Focus, you need to attack/drop it, drop prone/pickup the weapon (which is now within easy reach), kip up and attack, drop the weapon, drop prone, pick up the weapon, kip up, etc. etc.

So in order to really do this they have to go with the Rogue/UA Fighter Feat variant. So you're gonna get penalized somewhat by needing a level in Rogue and a level in Thief Acrobat.

Or be smart and get the Attack from Prone feat, that way you are prone and the weapon is easily within reach. Last attack puts you back on your feat and you can take your 5 ft adjust.

Gandariel

2012-07-23, 08:30 AM

it sounds simple, kills Iajutsu focus cheese AND teleport-via-horses.

Still doesn't kill the Commoner Railgun though :P

Fitz10019

2012-07-23, 08:34 AM

No free action in a single round can be the polar opposite of a previous free action in that round.

I'm interested to hear an example of a pair of 'opposite' actions that would be abusive. I can't think of any.

Are there any realistic/reasonable tasks that would be prevented by these rules?

You know you can draw a weapon as a free action combined with a regular move if your BAB is greater than 1. You can also draw 2 weapons as a free action this way if you have the feat Two-Weapon Fighting. See Draw or Sheathe a weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm). Your rule prevents this, even without considering Quick Draw.

Overall, I'm surprised someone would limit Quick Draw. I'd understand better if your house rule allowed Quick Draw as an exception.

supermonkeyjoe

2012-07-23, 09:01 AM

In my games I usually go with the rule of "Does it look stupid" aka rules as common sense dictates

A rogue quick-drawing daggers to throw- acceptable

A rogue rolling around on the floor repeatedly dropping his weapon then picking it up and shouting "IAI!" -just plain stupid, stop trying to abuse rules.

Godskook

2012-07-23, 09:15 AM

You have a maximum of six free actions per round (certain action economy hax may break this).

This is way too few imho.

No free action in a single round can be a repeat of a previous free action in that round. (eg. you can't quick draw, attack, quick draw).

Can't use feats as intended? Just why? So much for building a knife thrower in your game.

No free action in a single round can be the polar opposite of a previous free action in that round.

So the gnomish quick razor is right-out, eh? Its really not unbalanced.

Are there any realistic/reasonable tasks that would be prevented by these rules?

What, practically speaking, are you trying to deal with when making these?

Is there any free action cheese that would still be allowed under this rule?

I highly doubt it, as most forms of free action cheese that I'm familiar with require a lot of free actions to be noticeably above normal play.

Ernir

2012-07-23, 09:53 AM

Why don't you fix the things that you break via "too many free actions"? (Iaijutsu Focus, from the sound of it.)

Sounds like this is going to end up as a bookkeeping hassle, and a bother for some legitimate builds.

whibla

2012-07-23, 09:54 AM

You can, however, drop prone as a free action at the end of every turn, and stand up as a free action at the beginning of your next one.

Thanks for lamp-shading that. It's a prime example of the kind of cheese I wanted to exclude.

I've kinda thread shifted these, to respond, as this thread seemed more appropriate.

The action sequence sonofzeal describes is not broken, nor is it cheese, imo. The cheese element is purely the shield that was the subject of several preceeding posts. If the shield is not obtainable in your game then where's the issue.

However, there's a similar situation that does fall foul of your house rules. Imagine an archer lying prone behind a 3' wall. Normally he could make a move action to stand up, fire 1 shot, then drop prone. No issue, because of the move action. Now imagine that he's a high level heroic character with tumble through the roof, who can reliably make his free action stand tumble checks. He stands up, makes a full attack, but by your house rules can no longer drop prone, because that action is the exact opposite of the free action he took at the start of the round.

Of course, this may be exactly the type of situation you wish to disallow, but I'm not sure why you would. A haste spell would allow him to perform the same action (move to stand up, full round attack, free to drop), and that's only a 3rd level spell. Yet a 15th level acrobat, having devoted a significant portion of his skill points and wealth (+tumble item) to it, cannot?

Another problem with your rules as stands, as someone has already pointed out, though perhaps not clearly, is that it's a free action to retrieve a spell component for use that round. What happens now to the mage who wants to cast his allocation of one (quickened) swift action spell, and one standard action spell? Must one of them have no 'M' requirement?

In truth, I like the idea of limiting free actions, but I'm not sure anything beyond the first rule is necessary*.

*If you're worried about Iaijutsu Focus abuse there are other ways to limit it. For example, specify that it only works for the first attack or pair of attacks in any combat (which makes perfect sense for the suprise aspect of it). Alternatively, after the first attack, and for each subsequent dropped weapon, have the abuser make balance checks, to avoid the increasing number of obstacles in his square. And, remember to remember whether they stated that they picked up all their weapons (a move action for each one) at the end of the fight...

Godskook

2012-07-23, 02:06 PM

The action sequence sonofzeal describes is not broken, nor is it cheese, imo.

It is, however, illegal, barring the use of magic or other exception, since the standard is that standing up is a move action.

Tyndmyr

2012-07-23, 02:21 PM

This will break thrower builds. Even the non-cheesy require multiple quick draws.

This.

I just use a "reasonable limit" thing. Speaking, for instance, is a free action. Screaming three words(all of which are command words for different contingencies) is extremely reasonable in six seconds, as is drawing multiple weapons.

Infinite/NI recursion is banned outright in my char creation rules, so it does not arise as a concern.

Urpriest

2012-07-23, 03:10 PM

This simply isn't how free actions are used in the rules. There is no consistent distinction between Free Action and No Action, so your rules will inevitably accrue contradictions.

The issue of Spell Components has already been mentioned: you're making casting a Quickened Spell and a normal spell in the same round impossible if they both have material components.

demigodus

2012-07-23, 03:28 PM

Lets see:

breathing
Checking locations of your enemies
Checking locations of your allies
Identifying your enemies (so you can keep attacking the same one)
Deciding what to do
Noting how your actions effected the battlefield/allies/enemies
Standing

I could go on, but the point is, there are a TON of free actions that your character is doing constantly, all the time. This could very well result in a character having to juggle whether they take a breath/hold their breath this round (so they don't start randomly drowning), whether they are going to be standing this round, whether they know where their enemies are or randomly guess with their attacks, etc. Those are all free actions. You need to be able to do all of those, all the damn time.

Also, this nerfs crossbow users. Since now the feat that lets you reload as a free action, has a cap on reloads, that is pretty low. Crossbows don't need the nerf.

I'm not going to say it is a bad idea, but it might need a bit more work/clarification.

Ashtagon

2012-07-23, 03:29 PM

The issue of Spell Components has already been mentioned: you're making casting a Quickened Spell and a normal spell in the same round impossible if they both have material components.

Eschew Materials.

GenghisDon

2012-07-23, 03:31 PM

Tyndmyr

2012-07-23, 03:36 PM

Lets see:

breathing
Checking locations of your enemies
Checking locations of your allies
Identifying your enemies (so you can keep attacking the same one)
Deciding what to do
Noting how your actions effected the battlefield/allies/enemies
Standing

This is true, and hilarious. Also, five foot step.

Seems needlessly complicated to me. What's the goal in terms of "remove cheese"? What exactly does that mean?

Ravens_cry

2012-07-23, 03:36 PM

How about this is a way over complicated system than it needs to be.
There might be edge cases where the original system is abusable, but this negates an entire style of play (Throwers) and doesn't really accomplish much.
Sorry, but pass.

eggs

2012-07-23, 03:38 PM

Eschew Materials.
Is that supposed to be a feat tax? It doesn't look like it, and it does look like a problem. Especially for spells with multiple components (Hideous Laughter &co.) And it looks like there are clear problems with taking a free action to talk, doing something, then using another free action to talk - even if it would be feasible in a 6-second timeframe. Throwers' problems have been mentioned. And Rapid Shot stops doing anything.

If the point is nerfing Iajitsu abuse, pandemonic weapons, etc., nerf those directly. This is like performing surgery with a jackhammer.

EDIT:
Whoa, there are more responses now. Contextualized.

Tyndmyr

2012-07-23, 03:38 PM

When your rule system results in people choosing if they want to stand, have their heart beat, or breathe in a given round, you might be micromanaging a bit much.

SowZ

2012-07-23, 03:46 PM

I do see what this adds to the game. Taking away things should have a purpose, too, for balance or something else. It seems to mostly take away. It makes certain builds impossible now, including some dual crossbow or thrower builds among others. The builds it cripples aren't really OP ones for the most part. And free actions are often less useful for casters, so it gives me another reason to roll up a wizard.

Kelb_Panthera

2012-07-23, 03:48 PM

Eschew Materials.

Feat tax anyone?

In any case, the iaijutsu master rolling around on the ground is irrelevant anyway. It's no more powerful than a rogues sneak attack and requires heavier investment. I'm not even sure it's raw legal since I think OA said something about the weapon being drawn from a sheath.

Bottom line, you shouldn't change a general rule to fix a corner case problem. It seems like your problem is more with iaijutsu focus than free actions. If you don't like that skill, don't allow it in your game. There's only 3 base classes that get it anyway, and two of those are generally poorly regarded.

:smalleek: I think I just got sextuple ninja'd..... There are shurikens everywhere......

Doug Lampert

2012-07-23, 04:01 PM

Of course, this may be exactly the type of situation you wish to disallow, but I'm not sure why you would. A haste spell would allow him to perform the same action (move to stand up, full round attack, free to drop), and that's only a 3rd level spell.

Oh? You're playing 3.0? Because 3.5 haste will definitely NOT allow this. It doesn't give any extra actions, it adds to your movement rate, gives one extra attack of a full attack, and gives a bunch of minor numerical bonuses, but it doesn't allow a full attack in any circumstance where you couldn't have done it without haste.

And 3.0 haste, which WOULD allow this was nerfed, and this was considered one of the MOST significant changes in the entire edition change because 3.0 haste was so crazy powerful for a level 3 spell.

lsfreak

2012-07-23, 04:58 PM

I think you're going about this the wrong direction. Fix what's broken, rather than bandaid fixes that prevent it from being viable and take out perfectly legitimate things at the same time (and cause serious/hilarious problems, like being both unable to breath and unable to hold your breath because you've already used your 6 free actions per round). Cap iaijutsu focus to once per round (twice with TWF), cap free-action movement to 5 feet per round no matter the source (horse-teleporting), etc.

Ashtagon

2012-07-23, 05:07 PM

Feat tax anyone?

In any case, the iaijutsu master rolling around on the ground is irrelevant anyway. It's no more powerful than a rogues sneak attack and requires heavier investment. I'm not even sure it's raw legal since I think OA said something about the weapon being drawn from a sheath.

Bottom line, you shouldn't change a general rule to fix a corner case problem. It seems like your problem is more with iaijutsu focus than free actions. If you don't like that skill, don't allow it in your game. There's only 3 base classes that get it anyway, and two of those are generally poorly regarded.

:smalleek: I think I just got sextuple ninja'd..... There are shurikens everywhere......

wizards and the "feat tax" for casting two spells in one round that both require material components: First, that's a bit of a corner case situation. There are 15 spells total that WotC published that are both swift action and require material components (and only 8 of these are castable by any of the three core full casters). Okay, more if you allow for Quicken Spell, but then that's you guys are the ones complaining about feats being required to do the two-spell-one-round thing. Second, if this nerfs full casters slightly (and I don't think it does), has anyone ever accused a full caster class of being underpowered yet?

Iaijutsu Focus: I never suggested they were quick-drawing their weapons from the floor (I have doubts that's raw legal anyway). But there's no raw reason you can't have a dozen sheathed swords tucked into your belt. That is perfectly legal by the skill description, although yes, it does look quite silly.

Ravens_cry

2012-07-23, 05:12 PM

And, with pistols, it was exactly what people often did in the days of single shot firearms.

Kelb_Panthera

2012-07-23, 05:22 PM

For that matter, why swords? Why not daggers? Your damage isn't coming from str or charge multipliers anyway. Characters strapped to the gills with knives are commonplace in fantasy. Heck, you see one every once in a while IRL.

eggs

2012-07-23, 05:25 PM

wizards and the "feat tax" for casting two spells in one round that both require material components: First, that's a bit of a corner case situation. There are 15 spells total that WotC published that are both swift action and require material components (and only 8 of these are castable by any of the three core full casters). Okay, more if you allow for Quicken Spell, but then that's you guys are the ones complaining about feats being required to do the two-spell-one-round thing. Second, if this nerfs full casters slightly (and I don't think it does), has anyone ever accused a full caster class of being underpowered yet?
The feat tax is stupid, but it's not the point. The point is that this is loaded with presumably unintended consequences like rapid shot ceasing to function with longbows or communication having to follow obnoxious rules. Spell components are just one example.

If you want to nerf Iajitsu focus, do it. It's not even something most games assume exists. But reaching into the system's default assumptions and twiddling with things to stop an edge case of clear system abuse is just about the least effective way of addressing the problem.

Terazul

2012-07-23, 05:33 PM

I'm... really not seeing the issue. If the player wants to spend all their funds having 6 (or however many) level appropriate magic weapons that they're just going to draw and then drop all over the battlefield for lord knows what will happen to them, to use with an obscure skill that they're probably only getting at half ranks that also takes a fair bit of investment for mediocre returns, let them have their piddly d6s of damage against a flat-footed opponent that they will probably only get to do in the first round and then have to find a way to pick them all back up. It's really not that big of a deal. Hilarious and silly? Yes. Effective? Not particularly. And at the end of the day, if your issue is with said skill, just point out that you don't want people to use it. Don't try to stealth nerf it while actually blowing the system to pieces just because of how many things are actually considered free actions. Most of which aren't even consciously recognized as actions because they're just that minor.

Lord Il Palazzo

2012-07-23, 05:40 PM

Okay, more if you allow for Quicken Spell, but then that's you guys are the ones complaining about feats being required to do the two-spell-one-round thing.I think the complaint was that it keeps quicken spell from working without the extra feat, not about needing a feat at all to cast twice in a round (which is pretty standard). More generally, the quicken spell thing was pointed out to demonstrate the unintended consequences. Yes, many will have work-arounds, but you and your players will have to waste time looking for work-arounds.

In general, the house-rule seems like a long way to go to fix one or two problems. If a player's abusing Iajutsu Focus and Quick Draw, nerf those (though as Terazul said, it sounds like the guy's nerfing himself) but don't overhaul free actions so they aren't actually free. Messing with a core mechanic of the game to solve one or two specific problems is like swatting a fly with a flamethrower; you'll probably kill the fly, but you'll mess up a lot of other things besides.

Slipperychicken

2012-07-23, 06:33 PM

it sounds simple, kills Iajutsu focus cheese AND teleport-via-horses.

Still doesn't kill the Commoner Railgun though :P

Iaijutsu Focus is not cheese. I played a Quickrazor-Factotum once, and even with massive skill-buffs (houserule that max ranks = [2 x level] instead of [level+3]), the damage was on-par with Sneak Attack, and is even harder to qualify for. Without an Item Familiar or a similar houserule, our Iaijutsu-fighter is going to lag two or more dice behind the Rogue. The game isn't being broken, no-one's stepping on anyone else's toes, just a Factotum being relevant in combat.

This houserule is stopping several balanced and legitimate tactics (including throwing, Iaijutsu, and a few others), making people's lives difficult in corner-cases (do I draw my weapon or make a Knowledge check?), and doing little else. You will be better served by banning infinite and near-infinite loops, and asking your players to tone it down when they start dealing too much damage. That should cover pretty much all possible abuse.

whibla

2012-07-23, 09:31 PM

Oh? You're playing 3.0? Because 3.5 haste will definitely NOT allow this. It doesn't give any extra actions, it adds to your movement rate, gives one extra attack of a full attack, and gives a bunch of minor numerical bonuses, but it doesn't allow a full attack in any circumstance where you couldn't have done it without haste.

And 3.0 haste, which WOULD allow this was nerfed, and this was considered one of the MOST significant changes in the entire edition change because 3.0 haste was so crazy powerful for a level 3 spell.

Nope.

That was a classic example of version lag. Was passed the time for my afternoon nap when I posted...:smallredface:

On balance, it's fortunate I only went back as far as 3.0, else my example archer would have been getting two full attack actions, and a year older, instead.

Back on topic, slightly, has anyone ever seen a 'wild west show'? I'm thinking specifically of the bit where an expert rider jumps on and off his horse, as it gallops along. I'd guess that within a 6 second period a good rider manages at least the equivalent number of mount and dismount actions. I don't want to belabour the point, but any game rule that disallows something that is possible in real life (absent any unavailable technology) is probably not a 'good' rule.

Doug Lampert

2012-07-23, 10:12 PM

Nope.

That was a classic example of version lag. Was passed the time for my afternoon nap when I posted...:smallredface:

On balance, it's fortunate I only went back as far as 3.0, else my example archer would have been getting two full attack actions, and a year older, instead.

Back on topic, slightly, has anyone ever seen a 'wild west show'? I'm thinking specifically of the bit where an expert rider jumps on and off his horse, as it gallops along. I'd guess that within a 6 second period a good rider manages at least the equivalent number of mount and dismount actions. I don't want to belabour the point, but any game rule that disallows something that is possible in real life (absent any unavailable technology) is probably not a 'good' rule.

This strikes me as a silly rule, the PHB and DMG already let the DM regulate free actions, just disallow what's unreasonable on a case by case basis.

But most of the objections being offered are just silly.

The rider jumping on and off his horse is clearly spending a full round action to do this. He's NOT doing this while also taking 2+ accurate shots with a bow or casting a spell or attacking with two knives or... For that matter he rarely fully dismounts, but rather is maintaining contact with the horse throughout the series of movements (he needs to since when I've seen this done the horse is at a gallop).

D&D actions in combat are intended to be effective actions in actual combat. You can throw more things in a round than a non-epic character is likely to be able to, but that's fine because D&D isn't about tossing balls or whatever, it's about adventurers in life and death combat and is abstracting most of what they do. If it's an action at all, even a free action, then it's a significant game action. Breathing is NOT a free action. We know this, because you can't even take free actions when affected by a number of conditions (helpless, stunned, unconcious, or for physical actions paralyzed), if breathing requires a free action then all those conditions cause death by suffocation. But you don't need to state that you're breathing because that's abstracted away unless you are actively holding your breath or underwater. It is not an action.

Free actions are things stated in the rules to be free actions, and there aren't many of them and it won't break anything important to allow only a limited number, it's just silly overkill to what should be a non-problem for the most part and the DM already has the tools to deal with it.

Kelb_Panthera

2012-07-23, 11:07 PM

erikun

2012-07-23, 11:28 PM

Now imagine that he's a high level heroic character with tumble through the roof, who can reliably make his free action stand tumble checks. He stands up, makes a full attack, but by your house rules can no longer drop prone, because that action is the exact opposite of the free action he took at the start of the round.
Actually, it's worse than that. Drawing ammunition for a bow is a free action, meaning no archers (including crossbowmen who took Rapid Reload (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#rapidReload)) can reload more than once per round.

Ashtagon

2012-07-24, 12:07 AM

In spite of some of the more frivolous examples of abuse, the consesus seems to be that you're trying to perform surgery with a handaxe. Disallow the abuses and leave the mechanics of the free-action itself alone.

I think this is the right answer. I'm just going to disallow the areas i see as blatant abuse directly, rather than cover them by changing the free action rules.

SowZ

2012-07-24, 12:12 AM

I think this is the right answer. I'm just going to disallow the areas i see as blatant abuse directly, rather than cover them by changing the free action rules.

I would only consider what you are talking about as an abuse in a really low op game. If the party is running around with a wizard and a psionic warrior I wouldn't consider that cheesy. However, if your party consists of a TWF Fighter, a Paladin with the weapon focus feat line, and a Samurai this might be too much, yeah.

Fitz10019

2012-07-24, 05:43 AM

The rider jumping on and off his horse is clearly spending a full round action to do this.

Actually, with a Ride check of DC20, each (and therefore both) of those can be done as a free action. This is the only example of 'opposite actions' I seen so far.

A character could mount, ride 50ft, attack, and dismount in a normal turn if he can make the DC20 Ride Check twice. The OP seems to think that these opposite actions should not be allowed in the same turn.

Doug Lampert

2012-07-24, 12:42 PM

Actually, with a Ride check of DC20, each (and therefore both) of those can be done as a free action. This is the only example of 'opposite actions' I seen so far.

A character could mount, ride 50ft, attack, and dismount in a normal turn if he can make the DC20 Ride Check twice. The OP seems to think that these opposite actions should not be allowed in the same turn.

True, and I'm well aware of the D&D rules in this case. But the part that I quoted of the post I was replying to was discussing a real world example where ALL the character is doing is mounting and dismounting repeatedly.

The REAL WORLD character is NOT attacking in that six second interval, or doing anything else, hence his ability doesn't tell us ANYTHING about the realism of allowing this as a repeated free action in D&D. Which was the argument.