Topic: do you use declaration of actions?

[Druss_the_Legend]

for a combat round, do you use declaration of actions?

[MisterK]

No.

Except for intention to melee (any melee action - full melee, guarding, disengage, but not dodge/evade is "intention to melee"), because of OB/DB allocation.

I've tried using declaration of actions the first time I used RMSS rules (a four-year campaign, overall). It was an overcomplicated mess, twice that when people were using any kind of haste, and multiplied by the number of NPCs that had to be managed on the GM side.

Personal advice : don't do it.

[Hurin]

I agree wholeheartedly with MisterK.

Declarations were necessary when you had different types of phases (magic, missile, movement, melee) and when the game treated different types of actions differently. But they significantly complicated the game and led to extra steps to the turn. Having played without them now for decades, I feel strongly that they are more trouble than they are worth and just slow and complicate the game.

[intothatdarkness]

I do, but I'm also using a home-brew combat round that uses action points. AP cost relates directly to what someone's doing, and the round also uses an AP count in place of phases.

Prior to that I really didn't consistently use action declaration.

[Spectre771]

We use a very simple initiative/action round so the declarations are simple as well.  Declare parry, prepping a spell, trying to do something out of the ordinary like emptying flasks of oil around the room or preparing to throw a handful of powder in someone's face.

[jdale]

Like Hurin, no declarations of any kind.

[Ecthelion]

Yes, we're using declaration of actions as per the rules. And once you got used to it, it doesn't take too much time or make things complicated (IMHO).

[Grinnen Baeritt]

I did, but in order to do so, I used cards as a memory aid. Each player has a "deck" with their proposed actions for the round playable in the respective phases they intend to act. The selected cards are all laid face-down, and revealed in order of initiative.   

[MisterK]

I did, but in order to do so, I used cards as a memory aid. Each player has a "deck" with their proposed actions for the round playable in the respective phases they intend to act. The selected cards are all laid face-down, and revealed in order of initiative.   

How did you do, as a GM, when you have 20+ NPCs to manage ?

[EltonJ]

Sounds like I should run a game per the RAW.

[Grinnen Baeritt]

I did, but in order to do so, I used cards as a memory aid. Each player has a "deck" with their proposed actions for the round playable in the respective phases they intend to act. The selected cards are all laid face-down, and revealed in order of initiative.   

How did you do, as a GM, when you have 20+ NPCs to manage ?

The trick is, NEVER have that many independent NPCS...    Seriously though, I've only ever really needed to track, maybe 3-4 groups of "mooks" and 1-2 "BBG's" per encounter.
 

[Thot]

for a combat round, do you use declaration of actions?

No. It just slows down combat, in my experience.

[PiXeL01]

All we declare is OB/DB split then roll initiative.

[Green Manalishi]

I don't use declared actions. Not even declaring OB/DB split. Combat should be much more fluid, and people can react pretty easily for the most part within a 10 second round.

Imagine how crummy a basketball game would be having to declare actions for 10 seconds, then cancel action because a second player came to defend, in a split second you can choose to dribble a different direction or pass the ball, or even shoot, then get ready for a rebound if you miss, or a number of other things, all happening in a few seconds.

Declaring even OB/DB split isn't realistic to me, so I play it much more freely and open.

[talsharien]

No declarations, as with some others here my group tried it for awhile but combat simply absorbed massive chunks of the session.

[Druss_the_Legend]

No declarations, as with some others here my group tried it for awhile but combat simply absorbed massive chunks of the session.

as did ours. the only issue i have with not declaring actions is sometimes a combatant can move and attack late in the initiative order and actually gain an advatange on someone who has already attacked. its workable tho becuase combtatants who attack early in the round still need to leave some DB for possible late round attacks.

[luzbel]

Declarations never ever....
Rolling initiative every round? No way
Lately I dont even like individual initiative. Side INI and lets finish this in less than 3 hours......