Economy of actions

When 4e first came out I immediately noticed that they had upped the importance of managing the economy of actions during combat. This would be the "second economy" with regards to my last discussion on the topic. First, actions themselves were more formalized. In hindsight the "full round action" was sort of odd and the late introduction of the swift action made the mechanics surrounding it often unbalanced. Having a standard, move, minor from the outset provided greater clarity and balance, but also introduced more power to each action. This is the second impact--with more power embedded in an action comes greater importance to use that power prudently.

I designed a character sheet for my very first 4e character to help facilitate the process of maximizing actions. It worked awesomely and helped me quickly select my actions and be effective. My table-mates, though, weren't quite as quick and bogged the game down in trying to find the combination of actions that would be most effective. It was really slow.

I am working on a hypothesis that the game would operate more quickly if actions did more reliable things. Naturally, something will always break the mold and exceptions are part of the fun of D&D, but if most actions fall into reliable routines, it might help people choose by smoothing out the selection process.

Here's the outline:

• Standard actions. This is the most important of the actions. The majority of the round's output is tied up in the standard action. It is the attack or spell or whatever that *defines* the round and it is enhanced by the other actions. Most standard actions require a check to resolve.
• Move actions. Move actions provide access and effects. By access, I mean that they often allow you to move, bringing a target into range. Effects can be a bit more broad and is stuff like providing flank, ending the Prone condition, or similar. Because move actions serve a less important function than standard actions, move actions shouldn't jeopardize standard actions.
• Minor actions. Minor actions should be declarative, but still be a source of power. Minor actions could be powers ("I use Warlock's Curse"), usages of items ("I apply Viper Venom to my blade."), interactive with the environment ("I cut the rope on the chandelier"), or interactive with characters ("I pick his pocket").

This outline is different from the current rules in two key respects. First, 3e and 4e routinely had move actions jeopardize the standard action by making it easy to fail at moving and lose the rest of your turn. That is silly and just encourages people not to move. Second, they try and empower all actions. Someone sometime got the impression that making movement complex would reward skill-based characters in combat. Instead, it just pushed combat towards stand and swing. I think design would be improved and streamlined by acknowledging that the standard action is the main action, and designing options for the other actions to fuel the standard action.

Alright, so that's the general direction I'm headed. What do you think?