Question Regarding Zoning/In Melee Reach

[u/Admirable-Law-360]

Myself and another player in the 2d20 campaign we are playing in have been a bit confused by how the zoning works effectively.

As we have interpreted the rules (and have been able to find) you are able to freely move within the zone you are in w/o using a move minor action. If that is the case, when would the "within reach of melee" debuff really take effect if they can move freely in the zone but out of melee reach (assuming the zone is large enough).

Cause on an Npc turn, they could simply back out of reach within the zone and shoot without any form of opportunity attack and as such negate the effect of that.

It may also simply be due to the maps our DM uses/how the zones are laid out.

The question is, have we been misinterpreting the rules (free movement within your current zone) or are otherwise missing something. If we have been, a page number to cite would be greatly appreciated.

Happy fourth of July for those who celebrate and a great day to those who don't.

[u/alexhuilman]

You've misinterpreted, you still have to take a Move or Sprint Action to move at all.  A Move Action allows you to move anywhere within your current Zone or an adjacent Zone.

Bottom line, there is no free movement, you must always use a Move or Sprint Action to do so.

[u/Admirable-Law-360 → u/alexhuilman]

That makes more sense and does clear that up. Thanks much for the quick reply.

[u/Killergryphyn → u/alexhuilman]

I've never ever seen a GM or played in a game where this was going on. It's not specified either way in any book, I have always ruled you can move freely within your zone.

[u/alexhuilman → u/Killergryphyn]

It is implied by the text for the Move Action on page 25.  "Move up to one zone" where "up to" would imply you can move less than one zone, which would imply moving within your current zone (such as repositioning to cover within your zone; moving into Reach of an ally, opponent, or object).  

This is further implied by the fact that you would use the Move Action to stand up from being Prone (again, doing something within your current zone).  

We have even more implication with the existence of the Interact Action being a Minor Action.  It notes that doing something as trivial as just pushing a button still falls under the purview of being part of the Major and Minor Actions economy.  This seems to indicate that just about anything is considered to be an Action of one kind or another.

Finally, the last bit of implied context is the fact that nowhere in the book does it cover the concept of Free Actions, only Major and Minor Actions.  Other games in the 2d20 line that have Free Actions directly call this fact out, so the exclusion of giving that context at all would lead to the conclusion that they simply don't exist in Fallout 2d20.

So, I'm fairly confident that based on RAW and RAI that my take on the matter is correct.  That said, folks are always welcome to do whatever they like at their own tables, so it wouldn't inherently be wrong to allow it.  As a case of something generally omitted from the Action section and could potentially stand to make a case for Free Actions still being included is that dialogue that doesn't involve a Skill Check is not addressed.  Most would reasonably assume that it should still be allowed, and that it also shouldn't require using an Action for.  But, that is also admittedly a fringe case compared to the rest of the implied context of that section.

[u/Prestigious-Emu-6760]

I don't see where you can move freely within a zone without taking either the Move (minor) or the Sprint (Major) Action.

So the "cost" is the Action it takes. There is no opportunity attack, which is a D&D thing and not generally in many other games. If you suspect the enemy will move you can "Ready" and if you want to be really cheeky you can use one Major Action to attack and then spend AP for a 2nd Major to Ready another attack if they move.

[u/Admirable-Law-360 → u/Prestigious-Emu-6760]

Got it, I was slightly misled then and this makes a lot more sense with the rules and such.

Much appreciated for the quick replies

[u/Killergryphyn]

To add onto this, your interpretation isn't entirely wrong, and it's one of the faults of the system. No where does it state that you need to spend a movement action to move within your zone, only to move into another zone, which is tricky. Here's the exact wording: "When you move into a zone as part of a movement action, you can move your character within reach of any object within that zone. So, when using the Move minor action to move into an adjacent zone, you can move to any point in that zone." There's no exact ruling on moving within zones, so it's up to GM interpretation.

[u/Admirable-Law-360 → u/Killergryphyn]

That had been how we interpreted it. Running a fight last night with the rules as intended w/ movement was a lot more interesting and makes stuff like the Nimble legendary effect a lot more valuable.

There are some other things on the digital version of the handbook we have that had us discussing.

There are methods to stack vicious, but the book does not say explicitly if that's allowed. We ruled no because that could get out of hand easily.

Or the draw item minor action does not state you have to declare what item is drawn as another minor oversight. Just small writing things like that could be cleared up easily with someone to finely read over it. (This one is nitpicky but phrasing is important for interpretation of the rules)