Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 bawylie Jul 13, 2014 22:10:16	I have a quick idea about combining attacks and ability checks and wanted to present it for review.    Basically, the player declares what they're trying to do And which of those things they're spending the most effort on. Then they roll 2d20 - the higher number represents their top priority while the lower number represents the second priority.    So a character that wants to attack while intimidating (and he wants the attack to take priority) would roll 2d20. The high result is the attack & the low result is the intimidate.    Does this change the probability on the priority action?
#2 emwasick Jul 13, 2014 22:21:09	bawylie wrote:
#3 MechaPilot Jul 13, 2014 22:29:09	I would just consolidate the two actions and require the character to hit the harder DC of the two actions.
#4 Nicodaudel Jul 14, 2014 0:02:46	Yep, emwasick is spot on. The rolls will show the same variance (+/-4.75%) as Dis/Advantage. If you're comfortable with that, then no worries. MechaPilot's suggestion is workable, but that would mean both the attack and the Intimidate fail if the harder DC is missed. In some cases, though maybe not your specific example, that would feel unduly harsh to me. If you forced me to choose, I'd opt for the variance of 2d20 over risking failure for both because of a single roll.
#5 Lawolf Jul 14, 2014 0:35:35	What about this instead;   Multi-Actions As your action, you may attempt two different actions. To resolve your action, make a single roll with disadvantage and use that result for both actions. You cannot perform a multi-action while you have disadvantage nor can you cast spells with a multi-action. Each action you take as part of a multi-action must be a different kind of action.    For example, you might attempt to perform an acrobatic stunt and attack your foe with the same action. Make a single d20 roll with disadvantage and use the same roll for both the attack and the Dexterity (Acrobatics) check.
(Reply to #2) Daganev	emwasick wrote:
#7 Noon Jul 14, 2014 0:54:18	It does change the probability - if you assigned the dice to each action first, that wouldn't change the probability. But when you're picking out the highest of two dice for your attack, that's advantage. It's not the exact same - rolling one die at a time assigns one die to an action.
(Reply to #7) Daganev	Noon wrote:
#9 Ramzour Jul 14, 2014 1:10:48	I'm not sure I understand the point of this, honestly. Why not just let the player take the action and attack in any order? I guess I don't see what adding the dice roll adds to the mix, aside from an extra mechanical step. Could you give us an example of where this would come into play?
#10 emwasick Jul 14, 2014 1:59:55	Ramzour wrote:
#11 Ramzour Jul 14, 2014 2:51:22	Hmm, I guess so. It seems like it would just be easier to let the PCs do these things as a Bonus Action. Now it's balanced. Done!
#12 iserith Jul 14, 2014 6:08:54	Good idea in theory but I think when you break it down to math and how it interacts with the rules it gets a little wobbly.   Since hit points aren't meat, I think it's reasonable to just do this as an improvised action (page 72) via an Intimidation check against a DC equal to the target's remaining hit points (maybe?). On a success, the hit points are dropped to 0 and the creature is defeated/demoralized but not dead or unconscious. It would just be a matter of negotiating the stakes for failing that check at that point and playing to see what happens.   Of course, I'm sure you had more ability checks in mind than just Intimidation.