What breaks if you let a monster have multiple actions?
What breaks if you let a monster have multiple actions?
This is for D&D 5e.
I'm currently making a reoccurring antagonist NPC that is a master thief. It's CR 6 and I want it to be capable of making three attacks per round like multiattack but also have their thief subclass's enhanced cunning action with fast hands.
This would normally mean they'd get 3 attacks and a varying options for bonus actions, however I'd want them to be able to trade up to three if these attacks to have more uses of cunning action (this would of course stack the ability to dash 4 times per round but I'd just not do that while running the monster). They also have a special once per day ability that I'd want them to be able to swap a single attack for.
It got me thinking, instead of trying to make an unwieldy combination of multiattack, a special action and cunning action, could I just give them three actions?
The simple way this NPC works that I want them to pick 3 options from:
- Dagger
- Crossbow
- Special action
- Dash
- Disengage
- Hide
- Make an ability check
- Use an object
- Use a set of tools
At this point, what do I actually lose from letting them take 3 actions? They aren't a Spellcaster so I'm not worried about them throwing out three fireballs or the like.
You're viewing a single thread.
I don't think giving them a feature that says "Multiattack: Master Thief makes 3 attacks. Alternatively it can replace any number of those attacks with Cunning Action or Special Action." comes too long or cumbersome. Assuming I understood you right and that is what you are looking to do.
Legendary Actions, as has already been suggested is also a good call.
Or you can just give them 3 actions, that works. Because you are the DM you just have to notice and make a call when an unintended interaction comes up and avoid abusing it. Only thing I can think of is abilities where "as an action" is supposed to translate to "as their turn". Things like breaking out of an Entangle spell. You should probably avoid just doing that multiple times to not make the person who cast the spell feel like it was useless due to this unconventional situation.
The cumbersome element comes fromcthe combination of Multiattack: Master Thief makes 3 attacks. Alternatively it can replace any number of those attacks with Cunning Action or Special Action and *Cunning action. The master thief makes may take the dash, disengage or hide action, or make a sleight of hand check, use an object or use thieves tools.
I'm not totally against breaking it into legendary actions, I suppose the dilemma is less about "should it be legendary actions" and more "should it be any action or limited to specific choices" i.e. If I made the theif have two legendary actions per round and its option was "the tbief takes an action", I cant imagine it breaking anything that adding cunning action, and multiattack separately wouldn't do too, and I'm worried I'm overlooking something here.