I like the attack die is instead called an action die. Makes me think that it can relate to other thigns other than just attacking or casting spells. For example, if a 5th level fighter wanted to bash down a door, then run into a room and attack a monster, I would let him use one action die (his choice) for the roll to bash down the door, then make his move, and then roll the other action die for the attack. I think that is kind of a cool way to let high level characters do more in a round than just get extra attacks. Since an elf can attack with one action die and cast a spell with the other, I don't see why the action dice cant be used in this other way as well.
I think this sounds cool and cinematic but couldn't this be handled by the MDoA die?
It would almost have to be applied backwards. Maybe the PC rolls to bash down the door as normal and rolls, but doesn't apply, the MDoA. If the door is bashed down and the MDoA is 3+ the door flings open and the player rolls his attack and applies the already rolled MDoA to hit. If the MDoA is less than 3, the door flings open but the warrior is slow to recover and the monster attacks first.
Your way is definitely cool and gives me pause to think if I should continue to house rule out multiple attacks/round like I plan (I don't like how they can slow the pace between player turns).
I think my MDoA example could work and accomplish the same thing but I'm not sure. With the multi-attack system you would simply roll d14 for the door, enter the room attack with D20 + MDoA and still do something neat like disarm the monster, all in one round. I like that! My way isn't quite as cinematic I guess but it's pretty close as the warrior could still disarm it when it gets to the next
Just a few things about using the MDoA instead of the second action die to bash down a door, not all characters get to make MDoA's, so that would limit basing down a door and attacking in the same round for high level pcs would be limited to fighters and dwarves, not sure that makes sense when a mage can still cast two spells in one round at high level, but then couldnt kick down a door and cast a spell becuase they don't have MDoA.
When I ran it, we had an Elf. He had a d20 and a d14. He assigned one to one action and one to another beforehand. And then resolved them in whatever order made sense. So, sometimes the d14 happened first. Sometimes the d20 did. I didn't stop him or coach him on "doing it the wrong way". I was more interested in watching how he approached the mechanic organically.
He read it and THAT'S how he understood it to work.
I thought that was pretty interesting.
I actually would have thought it was done his way too lol. Did it slow things much using two actions?
My main issue with 2 attacks is that I want my player's engaged at all times. I want their turns to come back around so fast they can't disengage or end up lost as to what just happened. With all the chart checking that can go on at this game I am very hesitant on this issue.
I am not to worried about it slowing down the game, especially since different die typs are used. The tricky part is if the attack bonus die is rolled once for both attacks, or rolled for each attack. The first way would mean you could roll your attack bonus and action dice all at once, and calculate what hits pretty quick. If you roll your bonus die with each one that could end up being a little slow but it will still be way faster then 4th ed and pretty qucik compared to 3.x rules for multible attakcs. I also get the feeling that pcs are not really going to get more than 2 or maybe 3 action dice ever. Instead, those other action dice will just get better. I don't know if that is how it will work, just my suspicion.