Actions per turn

[Rin_Hunter]

For a while I've been crafting my own system based on D&D 3.5 and PF (as can be seen in my signature) and I have been wondering about whether or not to change the actions you can perform in one turn.

Current system: Move + Standard, or one Full-Round
Proposed system: 2 actions

In this system, you can move then attack, move twice, attack twice or perform some other combination of actions (Such as pick up an item then move). Full-Round actions will use up both actions.

This removes the distinction between move and standard actions, allowing some more choice in a turn. Characters would still be limited to one spell per turn.

Note that free, swift and immediate actions still function the same and if a player decides to 5ft-step they cannot move that turn and cannot have already moved.

There have been many other changes within the system already made but I was wondering what people thought of this since it changes something quite fundamental.

[Psyborg]

The only obvious issue that comes to mind is for martial characters, using one or more of the many, many ways to get additional move actions (which presumably now simply grant additional actions) and using them to initiate multiple martial strikes in one turn.

[Rin_Hunter]

I'm building the game from the ground up for my new system, so I don't think the many ways will really count.

The remade Haste spell grants an extra action, but that will be about it.

I can see your concern though.

[Wannabehero]

Another complication comes from the many spells that require only a standard action.

Casters suddenly being able to cast multiple spells in a single turn (up to three with haste involved as you outlined it, or four with a quickened spell as well) can break many encounters.

Web+Cloudkill (or any area damage spell that won't damage the web) comes to mind. 1 turn, combat is over as the party sits back and watches the enemies die. If it wasn't enough, follow up the next round with another area damage spell + Black Tentacles, just to make sure no one gets out of the death zone.

Or cast Ray of Enfeeblement + Ray of Exhaustion (+ Blindness if hasted) to turn the BBEG into a pussycat in one round if you win initiative.

8th level wizard, with haste on himself, could fire off three Fireballs in one turn. 24d6 damage, equivalent to the 9th level spell Meteor Swarm.

Sure, you would eat through spells this way, but the major limiting factor in the strength of magic is the availability of actions. If you instituted your new action system, you would also need to completely rebalance the # of actions required for each spell, or simple hard-code a rule about only 1 spell per turn.

Reading comprehension failure, nothing to see here.

[Rin_Hunter]

Um... I think I already covered this...

This removes the distinction between move and standard actions, allowing some more choice in a turn. Characters would still be limited to one spell per turn.

[Wannabehero]

Doh! My mistake, good thinking ahead then

Edit: Are you removing the ability to quicken spells then? If not, but maintaining that rule, the spell level adjustment of the feat could probably be lessened, say to only +2 or +3 instead of four full levels.

[Rin_Hunter]

There will be a Quicken, but the system will use spell points rather than fire and forget, so it will have a cost increase.

[BarroomBard]

Why limit spell casters to only one spell per turn, but allow every other character to take two attack actions in one turn? And why can't they take a 5 ft step (representing a cautious, guarded movement) and then take their other action to move normally?

To me, this change seems to be needless. The current set-up (or 4e's Standard, Move, Minor, set up) works very well, and allows tactical flexibility.

[KillianHawkeye]

And why can't they take a 5 ft step (representing a cautious, guarded movement) and then take their other action to move normally?

That is how 5-ft. steps work in D&D. You can only take one if you take no other movement on your turn.

[Gelscressor]

Why limit spell casters to only one spell per turn, but allow every other character to take two attack actions in one turn?

Likely because of balance. Of course, balance is subjective...but as a general rule, there are quite a few spells that are (much) better than a single attack.

[Rin_Hunter]

Well, the one spell per turn is because of balance. Of the casters, I'm pretty sure only the Rune Mage (the new Wizard type in my system) will feel left behind, but they could still benefit from movement in the round.

The Elementalist has a built in ray attack, therefore spell + that is its two actions.
The Blade Caster does exactly what it says on the tin, so no surprise there.
The Priest has Turning or Lay on Hands (granted these are situational).
The Druid is pretty much the same, so spell then 5ft step in to attack if needed.

Plus, if you think about the power differences betweem casters and non-casters at later levels, the Rogue getting two lots of Sneak Attack amounts to the same amount roughly as the Elementalist's ray and a fireball.

On the subject of 5ft Steps, I've never played 4E, so I don't know how that works and I don't know if any of 4E is OGL, meaning I may not be able to use it in my new system anyway.

I suppose I could allow a normal movement and a 5ft step as the two actions, but this just screams to me as the withdraw action.