Advanced (Action) Economics 102

[martixy]

Tl;Dr: See end.

Welcome ladies and gentleman, folk of all races and species to this course in Advanced Action Economy.

In this course will be covered topics such as

Fricking with the action economy
Making the action economy your b**ch.
The obscure rules interactions that arise when doing any of the above.


Naturally, you will be required to have passed Actions 101 before engaging in the activities and exercises covered herein.
Furthermore familiarity with Psionics will be highly beneficial as the above listed topics are their specialty.

And now, for the first homework assignment.

1. Does availability of a move action and a standard action automatically grant the ability to take a full-round action?
a) Consider the following situation. A psion starts his turn. He takes his move action to move next to an enemy. He then uses his swift to manifest Hustle. Can he now make a full attack on that enemy?
2. Provided the answer to the above is yes consider the following situation:
b) A melee psion manages to surprise his enemy. However he is 30 ft. from that enemy. His speed is also 30 ft. He wants to make a full attack on his enemy in the surprise round. How does he pull it off.

Full breakdown of each solution and all relevant rules is required when turning in assignments.


If you don't appreciate me trying to be funny, the basic idea is this: The game offers a lot of ways to mess with the action economy and smash it into tiny itty bitty little pieces(psions specifically being the masters of doing just that). However when you get down to it, it is not always clear (at least to me) how certain sequences of events should be resolved. I'd like this boards help in resolving the edge cases detailed above.
Specifically for the second situation I have a certain sequence of actions in mind, but I am also fairly certain that edge cases like this fall through the cracks of the rules and while it seems logical to be able to pull it off, but is actually not possible on a strict reading of the RAW.

[Starkeeper]

Not a fan of the title, came in here expecting some money-making cheese, anyway:

1. No (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#fullRoundActions), there's nothing much to explain, Move+Standard does not equate a Full.
a) What he could do would be to use Hustle first, move in, then full attack.
b) If you have Pounce, you could still charge him, or use a Belt of Battle, or some other similar things.

[martixy]

Not a fan of the title, came in here expecting some money-making cheese, anyway:

1. No (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#fullRoundActions), there's nothing much to explain, Move+Standard does not equate a Full.
a) What he could do would be to use Hustle first, move in, then full attack.
b) If you have Pounce, you could still charge him, or use a Belt of Battle, or some other similar things.

So if it say specifically "it can’t be coupled with a standard or a move action", doesn't that also eliminate option a), since hustle specifically grants a move action, not just the ability to move?

Also, yea, I changed the title.

[Muggins]

1. Does availability of a move action and a standard action automatically grant the ability to take a full-round action?
a) Consider the following situation. A psion starts his turn. He takes his move action to move next to an enemy. He then uses his swift to manifest Hustle. Can he now make a full attack on that enemy?
2. Provided the answer to the above is yes consider the following situation:
b) A melee psion manages to surprise his enemy. However he is 30 ft. from that enemy. His speed is also 30 ft. He wants to make a full attack on his enemy in the surprise round. How does he pull it off.
1a
Yes. You actually manifest Hustle before moving into combat range, because this removes any rules ambiguity as to the "Standard + Move = Full-Round?" question and lets you avoid an attack of opportunity for manifesting while threatened. Even if he does, I don't see any reason why expending his innate move action would leave the psion unable to perform a full attack using a move action gained from Hustle.

1b
I don't believe so. You're restricted to a standard action and any number of free actions in a surprise round, and we can't use Hustle without a swift action. It would be possible to use Anticipatory Strike to attack immediately after the surprise round ends, though.

[Starkeeper]

So if it say specifically "it can’t be coupled with a standard or a move action", doesn't that also eliminate option a), since hustle specifically grants a move action, not just the ability to move?

Also, yea, I changed the title.

That's a general rule, not a specific one, which is what Hustle falls under.

[martixy]

Here's the thing.

I have a certain mental model of how actions work in D&D that I'm not sure corresponds to the rules. You see, I imagine a stack, or bar of actions, where you get your Swift, your Move and Standard. And the latter can me taken at the same time to perform a full-round action. And I imagine hustle adding a move action to the stack.

Then there's the fact that PHB says casting a Quickened spell is a Free action that you can only take once a round, while SRD says that it is a Swift action specifically.

Also, I'm not sure where Swift action was introduced, but I can point to at least one source that says that casting a spell as a swift action does not provoke(Miniatures handbook). And XPH specifically re-iterates that for psionics(on p.59) even in the absence of a magic-psionic transparency.

@Muggins
1b

You can take a swift action any time you would normally be allowed to take a free action.

[Muggins]

That's a general rule, not a specific one, which is what Hustle falls under.
Don't the mechanics of a full attack work something like this?

Make a standard attack at full BAB. Uses your standard action.
Choose between either using your move action to move, or using it to perform a full attack. Expends your move action.

Using hustle to move up beforehand doesn't interfere with this process. Using it after moving shouldn't matter either, since you still have a move action to use.

Edit:

@Muggins
1b

You can take a swift action any time you would normally be allowed to take a free action.
Oh. Well, in that case, it's actually pretty simple.

Spend your Swift action to Hustle.
Spend your Standard action to manifest Twinned Synchronicity.
Spend the first Standard action from Synchronicity to move* 30ft up to your enemy.
Spend the second Standard action from Synchronicity and the Move action from Hustle to perform a full attack.

This will cost you 10 power points and your psionic focus, but is achievable from level 7 onwards (expending about 1/7th of an average level 7 psion's power point reserve).

* As per the SRD.

You can take a move action in place of a standard action.

[martixy]

Don't the mechanics of a full attack work something like this?

Make a standard attack at full BAB. Uses your standard action.
Choose between either using your move action to move, or using it to perform a full attack. Expends your move action.

Using hustle to move up beforehand doesn't interfere with this process. Using it after moving shouldn't matter either, since you still have a move action to use.

And lets say you do use hustle before. And that you can make your full attack after.
You make your move to get next to your opponent. Which move action have you used? The one from hustle or your regular? There's no rule to resolve this. You could say "player decides". But then this leads to the situation that the move action granted from hustle is somehow special and different from the other move, that you still have theoretically at your disposal.

Edit: See, the entire problem revolves over whether that "mental model" I presented is accurate, whether you can stack actions in your round like blocks on a stick.
Edit2: Muggins, for your twinned sinchronicity trick to work, situation a) from the OP would have to work as well.

[Starkeeper]

Here's the thing.

I have a certain mental model of how actions work in D&D that I'm not sure corresponds to the rules. You see, I imagine a stack, or bar of actions, where you get your Swift, your Move and Standard. And the latter can me taken at the same time to perform a full-round action. And I imagine hustle adding a move action to the stack.

Then there's the fact that PHB says casting a Quickened spell is a Free action that you can only take once a round, while SRD says that it is a Swift action specifically.

Also, I'm not sure where Swift action was introduced, but I can point to at least one source that says that casting a spell as a swift action does not provoke(Miniatures handbook). And XPH specifically re-iterates that for psionics(on p.59) even in the absence of a magic-psionic transparency.

@Muggins
1b

Well your mental model isn't how it works by RAW so I can't offer anything on that.

Quicken Spell got an errata and it's not longer a Free Action but a Swift one, as you can see on the SRD, which uses the most recent rulings.

I'm not sure why we're suddenly talking about Swift Actions provoking, but as far as I'm aware, the large majority of them don't, there might be a few exceptions specifically called out but I can't really think of any.


Don't the mechanics of a full attack work something like this?

Make a standard attack at full BAB. Uses your standard action.
Choose between either using your move action to move, or using it to perform a full attack. Expends your move action.

Using hustle to move up beforehand doesn't interfere with this process. Using it after moving shouldn't matter either, since you still have a move action to use.

While you can initiate a Full Attack and "cancel" it to have it count as a Standard and then take your Move, that still doesn't mean Standard+Move=Full. Committing to a Full-round Action is more like giving up your Move Action rather than using it up as part of the process.

[Muggins]

And lets say you do use hustle before. And that you can make your full attack after.
You make your move to get next to your opponent. Which move action have you used? The one from hustle or your regular? There's no rule to resolve this. You could say "player decides". But then this leads to the situation that the move action granted from hustle is somehow special and different from the other move, that you still have theoretically at your disposal.
What does it matter? We have two move actions; one is spent to move, the other is spent to fuel the full attack. There's no difference between the innate move action and the move action gained from Hustle, so they should be identical as far as mechanics are concerned. There's no rule that says otherwise, and if nothing else the Hustle power explicitly mentions using it to move away from a foe after a full attack.

Edit2: Muggins, for your twinned sinchronicity trick to work, situation a) from the OP would have to work as well.
Obviously. Question 2 is already inherently reliant on the answer to Question 1, so this is to be assumed. Your response seems oddly defensive for a discussion about RAW.


While you can initiate a Full Attack and "cancel" it to have it count as a Standard and then take your Move, that still doesn't mean Standard+Move=Full. Committing to a Full-round Action is more like giving up your Move Action rather than using it up as part of the process.
That's how it's stated to work, though. You declare a full attack, then after the first attack hits you can either take your move action or make your remaining attacks.

If it wasn't possible to do this due to the "can't be coupled with a standard or move action" rule, then the Hustle power would be incorrect (as it explicitly suggests using its move action to leave the threatened space of an opponent after making a full attack).

[nyjastul69]

What does it matter? We have two move actions; one is spent to move, the other is spent to fuel the full attack. There's no difference between the innate move action and the move action gained from Hustle, so they should be identical as far as mechanics are concerned. There's no rule that says otherwise, and if nothing else the Hustle power explicitly mentions using it to move away from a foe after a full attack.

Obviously. Question 2 is already inherently reliant on the answer to Question 1, so this is to be assumed. Your response seems oddly defensive for a discussion about RAW.


That's how it's stated to work, though. You declare a full attack, then after the first attack hits you can either take your move action or make your remaining attacks.

If it wasn't possible to do this due to the "can't be coupled with a standard or move action" rule, then the Hustle power would be incorrect (as it explicitly suggests using its move action to leave the threatened space of an opponent after making a full attack).

The only thing I can address here is: where does any rule state that any action has to be declared? This is where, at least part of, your mental construct is incorrect.

[Red Fel]

The only thing I can address here is: where does any rule state that any action has to be declared? This is where, at least part of, your mental construct is incorrect.

No. No.

Don't do this. Please don't do this.

Your fellow gamers are not psychic. They do not know what you are thinking, and given what I know of myself and a number of other gamers, that's probably for the best. You can't just roll the dice and announce you were successful unless you tell people what you were doing.

Similarly, you can't just bank dice rolls. You can't roll until you get a 20, then say, "Hey, so that was an attack. Guaranteed hit." That's what some people call cheating. It's the equivalent of sitting down to a game of poker, going through the deck to get the 10, Jack, Queen, King, and Ace of Spades, and then announcing that you've been dealt a royal straight flush.

Please don't do this.

[martixy]

No. No.

Don't do this. Please don't do this.

Your fellow gamers are not psychic. They do not know what you are thinking, and given what I know of myself and a number of other gamers, that's probably for the best. You can't just roll the dice and announce you were successful unless you tell people what you were doing.

Similarly, you can't just bank dice rolls. You can't roll until you get a 20, then say, "Hey, so that was an attack. Guaranteed hit." That's what some people call cheating. It's the equivalent of sitting down to a game of poker, going through the deck to get the 10, Jack, Queen, King, and Ace of Spades, and then announcing that you've been dealt a royal straight flush.

Please don't do this.

I must admit I've done this occasionally. It took me a while to realize just how silly it is.

Now, semi-back on topic.
If you were wielding 2 weapons, could you take your full attack without actually TWFing, so you don't receive the penalties?
Because I'm detecting a potential dysfunction(or at least I think I do).

[Muggins]

Now, semi-back on topic.
If you were wielding 2 weapons, could you take your full attack without actually TWFing, so you don't receive the penalties?
Because I'm detecting a potential dysfunction(or at least I think I do).
Yup.

Let's say you have a shortsword in one hand and a dagger in the other. When full attacking, you have three options;

Full attack with the dagger.
Full attack with the shortsword.
Full attack with the dagger and shortsword (two-weapon fighting).

You don't take two-weapon fighting penalties just for having a weapon in your off-hand - you need to actually use it.

[nyjastul69]

No. No.

Don't do this. Please don't do this.

Your fellow gamers are not psychic. They do not know what you are thinking, and given what I know of myself and a number of other gamers, that's probably for the best. You can't just roll the dice and announce you were successful unless you tell people what you were doing.

Similarly, you can't just bank dice rolls. You can't roll until you get a 20, then say, "Hey, so that was an attack. Guaranteed hit." That's what some people call cheating. It's the equivalent of sitting down to a game of poker, going through the deck to get the 10, Jack, Queen, King, and Ace of Spades, and then announcing that you've been dealt a royal straight flush.

Please don't do this.

Yes, yes, yes. You missed the point. Telling your fellow gamers what you plan to do is find and should always be done. This has nothing to do with declaring actions. There is no part of the initiative order where actions need to be declared. I don't understand what you mean by 'banked' dice. That has nothing to do with what I said and no part of a declarative phase of initiative. As for the poker bits, I don't play poker, or care to learn it. Why would a poker game matter in regards to D&D?

[martixy]

Yup.

Let's say you have a shortsword in one hand and a dagger in the other. When full attacking, you have three options;

Full attack with the dagger.
Full attack with the shortsword.
Full attack with the dagger and shortsword (two-weapon fighting).

You don't take two-weapon fighting penalties just for having a weapon in your off-hand - you need to actually use it.

Okay, so here's a thing that can happen, which can either be considered a dysfunction or it can be played as a consequence of the player's indecision:
Say you're wielding 2 weapons. You start your full attack routine, incurring the appropriate TWF penalties.
Then you decide to break off your attack and move.
Now, if you had declared your attack as a standard action attack you would not have gained the TWF penalties.

Thus we get the situation where you effectively take the same set of actions, but you end up with different results.
(Your attack is transformed by necessity a standard action attack because otherwise it is still considered a full round action and you would not be able to take your move action because full round actions "can’t be coupled with a standard or a move action" as we've seen the SRD say.)

[Segev]

If you hustle, move, and then full attack, then obviously you used the free move from hustle and your full round action (which you still have, because you hadn't yet broken it down into a move and standard) for your full attack. It really isn't that complicated.

[Muggins]

If you hustle, move, and then full attack, then obviously you used the free move from hustle and your full round action (which you still have, because you hadn't yet broken it down into a move and standard) for your full attack. It really isn't that complicated.
Pretty much.

Okay, so here's a thing that can happen, which can either be considered a dysfunction or it can be played as a consequence of the player's indecision:
Say you're wielding 2 weapons. You start your full attack routine, incurring the appropriate TWF penalties.
Then you decide to break off your attack and move.
Now, if you had declared your attack as a standard action attack you would not have gained the TWF penalties.

Thus we get the situation where you effectively take the same set of actions, but you end up with different results.
(Your attack is transformed by necessity a standard action attack because otherwise it is still considered a full round action and you would not be able to take your move action because full round actions "can’t be coupled with a standard or a move action" as we've seen the SRD say.)
The alternative is that you make a full attack with two-weapon fighting, kill the enemy in one hit, and can't take any other actions in the round. It's the price that you pay for declaring a full attack action rather than a standard attack action, and it applies to things like Flurry of Blows too.

[Red Fel]

Yes, yes, yes. You missed the point. Telling your fellow gamers what you plan to do is find and should always be done. This has nothing to do with declaring actions.

This has everything to do with declaring actions. This is the definition of declaring actions.

When I pick up the dice and say, "I'm attacking the hobgoblin," and then roll the dice, I have declared my action. I have told everyone what my action will be, in advance of performing it. That's what declaring an action is.

There is a part of the initiative order where actions must be declared. It is called your turn. On your turn, you have to tell the other players (and DM) what your character is doing that turn. That is called declaring your action.

Occasionally, you may also declare your actions on another person's turn. For example, the Instantaneous Rage feat allows you to go into a rage in response to another character's actions, when it is not your turn. You have to tell the other players you're using this. That is an example of declaring your action. That is literally what that is.

Please don't hurt my brain. I have work to do that for me. I don't need additional help.

[Gallowglass]

play with the "does it hurt the other players" rule.

player one is a big bad fighter who, routinely fights with two scimitars TWF and has iterative attacks because he's high enough level.

Four three rounds, player one has been slicing and dicing some mega hobgoblin enemy using full round attacks, four attacks a turn.

On turn four, it comes around to his initiative.

declaration: "okay I'm attacking the hobgoblin again." *rolls all four dice at once*
"Okay, I hit twice for 40 points of damage"

dm: okay the Hobbo is dead.

Now if player one had just slowed down and rolled his first two attacks, holding off on rolling all four, then he would have known he killed the orc without having to use his iterative attacks. Heck, if he had slowed down and rolled his attacks one at a time, he MAY have dropped it with his first attack...

*rewind*

declaration: "okay I'm attacking the hobgoblin again." *rolls all four dice at once."
"Okay, my first hit hits him and does 20 points."

dm: okay, the hobbo is dead.

player one: "uh, okay... so I move across to flank the other thing with player two."

now the dm can do many things here:

"no, you rolled all your dice. so you were full attacking. so you can't do anything else."

or, realizing that the other dice are just wasted throws, and he only hampered himself with that -2 attack penalty.

"sure."

- which one should he do? - I don't think it hurts the other players to let him move, so I'd let him move.

now let's look at a different take on the scenario.

*rewind*

declaration: "Okay, I'm attacking the hobgoblin again." *rolls all four dice at once.*
"well, I miss with my first hits, but I got a 20 with the first iterative for... 10 points."

dm: "okay, its dead"

player one: "wait a sec... if I hadn't taken the penalty for two weapon fighting I WOULD have hit with my first hit. So I just won't two weapon fight. Then I drop him with the first hit and take my move to flank with player two:

Now, to ME, I wouldn't let him do this. fundamentally, it maths out the same as the first scenario but it is ACTUAL meta gaming rather than coincidental metagaming. So no balls.

But now you are going to breed some player who is going to do this.

"uh okay... I am going to attack the hobgoblin."
*rolls one dice*
"does 24 hit?"
"no."
"oh... does 26 hit?"
"yes."
"uh okay, then I'm not two weapon fighting this round and I hit him for 20 points of damage"
"okay, he's still up."
"oh... well never mind. I'm two weapon fighting. So I miss with my first hit."
*rolls the other three dice."
"okay, I hit twice for... 40 points"

and that's even worse. because it SLOWS DOWN the game. And that hurts the other players. So you don't let him do that. After he does his 20 you say, "no, you made your choice. You want to do something with your move action?"