Quote:
|
Why should this be a pain *solely* because the Knight has a better DX *and wants to give it up*?
|
You're assuming that "going first" is some immense advantage that you have to "give up". That's not the case. Sometimes going earlier is good; sometimes not so good.
Quote:
|
And it's worth giving him a round to make that happen, if he wants it.
|
You're not "giving him a round". You're going later, which is exactly what you asked for. You're still thinking in terms of a global D&D turn, rather than an endless cycle. You go both before everyone else and after them, depending on which of their maneuvers you want to consider.
Quote:
|
You can't cast a spell using Wait.
|
Perhaps. I haven't checked the formal errata list. And "Concentrate" isn't in Basic's list of maneuvers you can use with Wait. Still, consider an oft-expressed principle that's one of the basic 4e changes:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kromm
We feel that if you can't interrupt an Attack or Ready without a Wait, you shouldn't be able to interrupt a Concentrate. Concentrate is to mental actions what Ready is to physical ones -- nothing more. We want Attack, Concentrate, and Ready to be equals: you Attack to use Innate Attack, Concentrate to use Mind Control, or Ready to turn on Invisibility, but each is one maneuver, its results happening the turn you choose it.
http://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.p...0&postcount=30 |
Attack and Ready can both be used with Wait; seems like Concentrate should also qualify under this philosophy (however odd as "wait to concentrate" may sound in English -- we're talking game mechanics).