I think it's biggest flaw is that anything you can do with a bonus action you should also be able to do with a standard action instead. Standard actions are supposed to be more 'valuable' so there should be no problem sacrificing it to perform what is normally a 'bonus' action.

Originally posted by Pan Darius Cassandra:

I think it's biggest flaw is that anything you can do with a bonus action you should also be able to do with a standard action instead. Standard actions are supposed to be more 'valuable' so there should be no problem sacrificing it to perform what is normally a 'bonus' action.

I agree.

One action, one bonus action, one reaction, movement up to base speed, one object interaction. *shrug*. I prefer the three-action system of PF2e, but that's not something easily swapped in without seriously altering balance.

Bonus actions are meant to be mutually exclusive and not possible 2x per turn, which means that it's easier to gate certain things (e.g. not triggering Heat Metal twice per turn).

The action economy is honestly one of the many reasons my table top group rarely plays 5e anymore.

Pathfinder 2e, DC20 and a few other systems just handle it better by giving you multiple action points to spend instead of an action, move & bonus action.

The two I mentioned also allow you to empower spells with multiple actions (pathfinder 2e even has a few you can charge up for multiple turns if you want, Ala in game version of spirit bomb and Kamahmaha wave https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=927 & https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=934 , DC 20 does it with a ton of their spells)

Originally posted by TG zac:

The action economy is honestly one of the many reasons my table top group rarely plays 5e anymore.

Pathfinder 2e, DC20 and a few other systems just handle it better by giving you multiple action points to spend instead of an action, move & bonus action.

The two I mentioned also allow you to empower spells with multiple actions (pathfinder 2e even has a few you can charge up for multiple turns if you want, Ala in game version of spirit bomb and Kamahmaha wave https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=927 & https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=934 , DC 20 does it with a ton of their spells)

I prefer the 5e system, it just makes sense on an intuitive level, but it needs a few tweaks to iron out edge cases.

Originally posted by Pan Darius Cassandra:

Originally posted by TG zac:

The action economy is honestly one of the many reasons my table top group rarely plays 5e anymore.

Pathfinder 2e, DC20 and a few other systems just handle it better by giving you multiple action points to spend instead of an action, move & bonus action.

The two I mentioned also allow you to empower spells with multiple actions (pathfinder 2e even has a few you can charge up for multiple turns if you want, Ala in game version of spirit bomb and Kamahmaha wave https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=927 & https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=934 , DC 20 does it with a ton of their spells)

I prefer the 5e system, it just makes sense on an intuitive level, but it needs a few tweaks to iron out edge cases.

IDK once I tried other systems I grew to love them because of how tight the math was (its actually very hard to break something in pf2e meaning I don't have to worry about being useless when sitting next to a min maxer) and how much more creative freedom they offered when building a character.

The fact it rewards teamwork so much more is also great as it makes people at the table want to work together.

Especially since a lot of your non combat skills can have in combat uses (intimidate, deception, performance, all the knowledge skills etc.. all can be used to either get some sort of status bonus or apply a penalty to an enemy)

Also as a GM I find the challenge rating calculator & how you build encounters so much easier & better designed in PF2.

The fact the rules are so much more completely & can be looked up for free is also a big boon and cuts down on variance from table to table which has helped for the adventurer's league I belong to as you can build mostly whatever you want regardless of the table and it will be allowed (makes taking characters from one campaign to another easy)

Originally posted by TG zac:

Originally posted by Pan Darius Cassandra:

I prefer the 5e system, it just makes sense on an intuitive level, but it needs a few tweaks to iron out edge cases.

IDK once I tried other systems I grew to love them because of how tight the math was (its actually very hard to break something in pf2e meaning I don't have to worry about being useless when sitting next to a min maxer) and how much more creative freedom they offered when building a character.

The fact it rewards teamwork so much more is also great as it makes people at the table want to work together.

Especially since a lot of your non combat skills can have in combat uses (intimidate, deception, performance, all the knowledge skills etc.. all can be used to either get some sort of status bonus or apply a penalty to an enemy)

Also as a GM I find the challenge rating calculator & how you build encounters so much easier & better designed in PF2.

The fact the rules are so much more completely & can be looked up for free is also a big boon and cuts down on variance from table to table which has helped for the adventurer's league I belong to as you can build mostly whatever you want regardless of the table and it will be allowed (makes taking characters from one campaign to another easy)

From a purely mechanical perspective, I actually prefer Ars Magica. It's better than any other fantasy rpg in existence.

However, I don't always want to play in 12th century Europe.

A high fantasy Ars Magica based system set in a completely novel setting would be gold.

That said, of all thr D&D based or adjacent games I've seen or played, 5e is by far the best.

It's greatest strength is Bounded Accuracy.

Originally posted by Pan Darius Cassandra:

Originally posted by TG zac:

IDK once I tried other systems I grew to love them because of how tight the math was (its actually very hard to break something in pf2e meaning I don't have to worry about being useless when sitting next to a min maxer) and how much more creative freedom they offered when building a character.

The fact it rewards teamwork so much more is also great as it makes people at the table want to work together.

Especially since a lot of your non combat skills can have in combat uses (intimidate, deception, performance, all the knowledge skills etc.. all can be used to either get some sort of status bonus or apply a penalty to an enemy)

Also as a GM I find the challenge rating calculator & how you build encounters so much easier & better designed in PF2.

The fact the rules are so much more completely & can be looked up for free is also a big boon and cuts down on variance from table to table which has helped for the adventurer's league I belong to as you can build mostly whatever you want regardless of the table and it will be allowed (makes taking characters from one campaign to another easy)

From a purely mechanical perspective, I actually prefer Ars Magica. It's better than any other fantasy rpg in existence.

However, I don't always want to play in 12th century Europe.

A high fantasy Ars Magica based system set in a completely novel setting would be gold.

That said, of all thr D&D based or adjacent games I've seen or played, 5e is by far the best.

It's greatest strength is Bounded Accuracy.

Have played that, there was actually a 3rd party module that added some magic to it.
Cant remember what it was called though.

As for bounded accuracy pathfinder 2e does it to and arguably better as the various levels of training make things scale very well weather it be armor, attacks or skills.

You have untrained which only adds your character stats to the check.
Then you have trained which adds your stats + level +2.
Then expert which adds an additional +2
Then master then legendary each adding an additional +2.

And thanks to how the system uses solid + or - for buffs & debuffs teamwork really makes a lot of difference because you auto crit on a check if you surpass the number by 10 or more or on a nat 20.

It really adds a sense of power and feeling/scale of growth when you look back at your character from several levels ago and see more then just a health & difference in spell slots.
Also makes you feel a lot better if you go back and fight something that before would have kicked your @s$

DC 20 also does it fairly well.

Originally posted by Yhwach:

I know it's one per turn via the dnd setup, but I missed being able to combo more with more action points available (4 was the default for DOS2 iirc) and BG3 just felt a bit restrictive.

You could just take advantage of bonus actions and just wait until you get to the next party member, but I guess the flow just seems a bit less constructive coming from Divinity.

However, that's how it was at first, and even if I feel that way a bit, after going through a playthrough modless in BG3, I do appreciate the dnd ruleset and it made you think about each move you made since you had to be constructive about what skills you took and what you did each turn.

It's definitely not perfect, but it's one of the more well constructed turn based systems I've played.

5E Action economy is most dumb system i ever played. After DOS2 and pathfinder, each of which have system which makes sense, this game combat is such a dumpster fire. It prob made for smoth brain tabletop players, to not complicate and confuse the combat. But for CRPG the fact that some cosmic force preventing you from using your MAIN action for bonus action operations is so dumb it has to be a prank.