Quote from: Opaopajr;859554Nope, it sounds like yours might be better thought out. I was talking about introducing old school spell interrupt from physical combat. But yours is the same with a spoonful of sugar (brilliant add about preserving the spell slot), so it'll make the medicine go down.

Not personally so hot on selecting last init over new, especially for spellcasters, but I chalk that up to extra frosting atop the medicine. Not what I'd want, but I can see how it'll sweeten the pitch. I feel people neglect Ready action as is, but it really is not that big a deal. As for squeezing extra magic juice out of something like Shield? I'm on the "tough titty" faction — for I am cruel and my viking horns are sharp.

If you mess with the Opa you get the horns!

At one point we were all on the same page and on board for not having any initiative choice in the matter.  If you went last in round 2, and then first in round 3, sure it means your "until the start of your next turn" spell is worth less, but hey, you get to go twice back to back, etc.  Sometimes those spells will be worth more (offset by going later, relatively speaking) and sometimes they'll be worth less, and that was just how the cookie crumbled.

Then someone floated the idea of allowing the caster to choose the previous initiative if nobody acted between their last initiative and their next initiatve, and we agreed to give it a try.   I was glad to see Delay go, and this sorta kinda brings it back. If I had my druthers I would ditch that part of it, and we very well may the next time we do a check point on how things are working.  On the other hand, nothing super annoying has come from it, so then again maybe not.

Quote from: Opaopajr;859554Fun part of fog of war is when opponents engage in melee when you're still trying to take advantage of range AoEs. Fireball target is line of sight, first thing it hits. So getting in the way can bring the Fireball AoE dangerously closer. Fog of war screws with tactics big time. Good times, good times.

:Citation:
A Clear Path to the Target
To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover.
If you place an area of effect at a point that you can't see and an obstruction, such as a wall, is between you and that point, the point of origin comes into being on the near side of that obstruction.
(D&D 5e Basic, August 2014. p. 80.)

Best be sure to ignore Speed Factors! DEX needs nary an ounce more love! Gleefully remove its init benefit.

We kept the Dex bonus for initiative checks, but didn't take a single adjustment offered in the Speed Factor options.  Way too fiddly.

Was thinking of allowing any class that has the Two Weapon Fighting Style to be allowed to have normal (non-light) one handed weapon in his/her main hand, but a light in their off hand.  Unless they take the Dual Wielder Feat, of course.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;859549The net of it:
Everybody declares their action.
Roll initiative and keep it to yourself and wait for your number to be called (usually calling out groups of five) - or if we are remote the gm just rolls for everyone online.
On your turn, use your bonus action and move action as you like, and either do your declared action or nothing.

Rinse, wash, repeat.

Declaring before initiative is always popular. Should get our group to do this.

How would you feel about rolling initiative, calling people to declare inverse of intiative order (losers go first, winners go last and get to act on losers' declarations) and then resolving in initiative order? Too complicated?

Quote from: The Butcher;859595How would you feel about rolling initiative, calling people to declare inverse of intiative order (losers go first, winners go last and get to act on losers' declarations) and then resolving in initiative order? Too complicated?

If you are using spell interruption that just means casters who roll low won't commit to a spell.

I would stick to declaration prior to initiative determination. No guts no glory.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;859613If you are using spell interruption that just means casters who roll low won't commit to a spell.

I would stick to declaration prior to initiative determination. No guts no glory.

I tend to agree.

Weird, I could have sworn someone else mentioned these issues earlier and was roundly lambasted that they weren't a problem. Hrm.

It's so weird to see the same people unwilling to concede there's a problem so we can consider fixes now cede the point and...consider fixes.

Quote from: Doom;859644Weird, I could have sworn someone else mentioned these issues earlier and was roundly lambasted that they weren't a problem. Hrm.

It doesn't surprise me that you feel that way. It seemed clear at the time that you couldn't separate criticism on certain points with agreement on others.

Quote from: Doom;859644Weird, I could have sworn someone else mentioned these issues earlier and was roundly lambasted that they weren't a problem. Hrm.

I was one of your few supporters on several points in that topic, and I stated that repeatedly and clearly several times there. I disagreed with some things yet agreed with others, yet instead you were so incensed you were lashing out at everyone indiscriminantly. But please persist on your grudge with your glossed over readings.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;859591Was thinking of allowing any class that has the Two Weapon Fighting Style to be allowed to have normal (non-light) one handed weapon in his/her main hand, but a light in their off hand.  Unless they take the Dual Wielder Feat, of course.

Should be OK, as it mostly opens up 1d8 dmg weapons. As long as you keep an eye on Lances on Mounts (1d12 one-handed as long as on a mount) you should be fine. Just eye cautiously Halflings on Pterodons dual wielding lances and handaxe!

Quote from: Natty Bodak;859645It doesn't surprise me that you feel that way. It seemed clear at the time that you couldn't separate criticism on certain points with agreement on others.

Actually, a trollpile showed up, and I decided it wasn't worth attempting the conversation. Perhaps a few accounts got hacked, or something.

Quote from: Opaopajr;859648I was one of your few supporters on several points in that topic, and I stated that repeatedly and clearly several times there. I disagreed with some things yet agreed with others, yet instead you were so incensed you were lashing out at everyone indiscriminantly. But please persist on your grudge with your glossed over readings.

I didn't realize I lashed out at you, apologies, and I'm sorry you feel the need to attack some more. I'll take the high road, again.

Quote from: Doom;859653Actually, a trollpile showed up, and I decided it wasn't worth attempting the conversation. Perhaps a few accounts got hacked, or something.

I respectfully decline your invitation to resurrect that bit. I'd appreciate the same amount of letting that dog lie I have afforded you.

Quote from: Opaopajr;859651Should be OK, as it mostly opens up 1d8 dmg weapons. As long as you keep an eye on Lances on Mounts (1d12 one-handed as long as on a mount) you should be fine. Just eye cautiously Halflings on Pterodons dual wielding lances and handaxe!

Would assume some combinations wouldn't be allowed.  After all, Dual Wielder in theory allows those types of shenanigans as well.  And if the DM says no to Lance and Handaxe on Pterodon with Dual Wielder, then it wouldn't be as OK as my house rule.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;859666Would assume some combinations wouldn't be allowed.  After all, Dual Wielder in theory allows those types of shenanigans as well.  And if the DM says no to Lance and Handaxe on Pterodon with Dual Wielder, then it wouldn't be as OK as my house rule.

Actually with Dual Wielder you can use two lances on your mount! A human variant fighter with dual wield feat can start 1st lvl mounted and with two lances. Costs money, and many AL adventures are indoors or underground and in the muck, but it can be done. You get to strike twice with reach and then move away usually without OAs (depends on opponent's reach).

Good times, good times.

I personally think it's a typo errata as the lance is 6 lbs, like most heavy weapons. But for that Sir Didymus fan (Labyrinth) who wants to ride a sheep dog into battle, there's the halfling, mastiff, and lance... Besides, I'd worry about the GM introducing trainable pterodon mounts more.

Quote from: Opaopajr;859814Actually with Dual Wielder you can use two lances on your mount! A human variant fighter with dual wield feat can start 1st lvl mounted and with two lances. Costs money, and many AL adventures are indoors or underground and in the muck, but it can be done. You get to strike twice with reach and then move away usually without OAs (depends on opponent's reach).

Good times, good times.

I personally think it's a typo errata as the lance is 6 lbs, like most heavy weapons. But for that Sir Didymus fan (Labyrinth) who wants to ride a sheep dog into battle, there's the halfling, mastiff, and lance... Besides, I'd worry about the GM introducing trainable pterodon mounts more.

If the GM introduces trainable pterodon mounts, then my house rule doesn't change the level of awesome in any major way.