[unchained] How is the new action economy system?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 752 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I haven't received my shipping notice yet so I still don't have the pdf so I was wondering how the new action economy system works since this is of particular interest to me and my players.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Most action types are eliminated, and most swift, move, and standard actions become single acts. Casting a standard action spell is two acts, and most full round actions cost three acts. You get three acts each turn.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Mortagon wrote:
I haven't received my shipping notice yet so I still don't have the pdf so I was wondering how the new action economy system works since this is of particular interest to me and my players.

Well I think it's incredible, and I hope I can get my group to try it out.

Basically, you get 3 "acts" on your turn. A Simple action requires 1 Act, and this includes things like Attack and Move, but also Swift actions. I know, stick with it.

Advanced actions include things like Cast 1 action spell, as well as things like Charge.

So, on average, you get the same amount of action, but it subtly re-balances certain combinations. Like, if you cast a 1 action spell and a swift action spell, you cannot also move. But if you make 2 attacks, you can also move. Or you can take 3 swift actions. Or you can move and then charge.

It favors martial mobility over casters, and I don't think that is bad. Also, note you can take two or three attack actions, regardless of BAB. The first attack on your turn is at full bonus, the second at -5, and the third at -10. Opens up massive combat options for low level and non warriors, while very subtly limiting iteratives to two additional attacks (normally).


How does something like Haste interact with this system?
Does it give an additional act, but limit that act to something like only an additional move or attack?

How does TWF interact with this system? Does it turn two attacks into one act?

Can someone cast 3 swift action spells in a turn now?

I really like the sounds of this.


If how you explained it is correct, I feel sorry for all the classes that are heavy on swift/immediate actions. They thought they had action clog issues before...oh boy.

It also destroys feats like arcane strike. Monks must feel sad that all their new ki powers eat up one of their attacks next turn.

I do like the sound of popping off 3 swift action spell perfected magical lineaged chain lightnings though. I also find it funny that this triple swift nonsense is enabled by the same thing that makes quicken effectively eat a move action. Quicken rods become even more awesome.


Snowblind wrote:

If how you explained it is correct, I feel sorry for all the classes that are heavy on swift/immediate actions. They thought they had action clog issues before...oh boy.

It also destroys feats like arcane strike. Monks must feel sad that all their new ki powers eat up one of their attacks next turn.

I do like the sound of popping off 3 swift action spell perfected magical lineaged chain lightnings though. I also find it funny that this triple swift nonsense is enabled by the same thing that makes quicken effectively eat a move action. Quicken rods become even more awesome.

Spell Combat basically becomes useless, unless it reduces casing time to one act.


How does this work with immediate actions and stuff like vital strike?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
David knott 242 wrote:

Most action types are eliminated, and most swift, move, and standard actions become single acts. Casting a standard action spell is two acts, and most full round actions cost three acts. You get three acts each turn.

Soooo... drastic nerf to Quicken Spell or has it been turned into "no action"?


magnuskn wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:

Most action types are eliminated, and most swift, move, and standard actions become single acts. Casting a standard action spell is two acts, and most full round actions cost three acts. You get three acts each turn.

Soooo... drastic nerf to Quicken Spell or has it been turned into "no action"?

I don't have the book, however my understanding would be an insane buff. If a Swift action doesn't technically exist anymore, in theory, you can have shenanigans such as Snowblind mentioned up thread with 3 swift action spell perfected magical lineaged chain lightnings. Just add a Greater Quicken Metamagic Rod for amusement.


Legowaffles wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:

Most action types are eliminated, and most swift, move, and standard actions become single acts. Casting a standard action spell is two acts, and most full round actions cost three acts. You get three acts each turn.

Soooo... drastic nerf to Quicken Spell or has it been turned into "no action"?
I don't have the book, however my understanding would be an insane buff. If a Swift action doesn't technically exist anymore, in theory, you can have shenanigans such as Snowblind mentioned up thread with 3 swift action spell perfected magical lineaged chain lightnings. Just add a Greater Quicken Metamagic Rod for amusement.

Yes please I would like 3 quickened timestops in a round.

Even opening a boss fight with sleet storm/spiked pit, slow and stinking cloud off of a lesser quicken rod can end the encounter then and there.

The new system basically makes wizards spend a move action to quicken a spell, but lets them quicken 3 as a full round action. Worth it if "abused", not much of a nerf to casters if not abused.

Designer

10 people marked this as a favorite.

I could swear there was a "limit 1 quickened spell per round" clause in there, but I'm certainly not seeing it in there now when I look. Regardless, I would personally recommend it.

EDIT: It's in the mage chapter of the CRB!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So martials that get a third and fourth iterative in the system basically miss out? Not complaining just checking that I am not missing something.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Core page 213 (Magic Chapter) "A spell with a casting time of 1 swift action doesn't count against your normal limit of one spell per round. However, you may cast such a spell only once per round."
Still applies?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Matthew Downie wrote:

Core page 213 (Magic Chapter) "A spell with a casting time of 1 swift action doesn't count against your normal limit of one spell per round. However, you may cast such a spell only once per round."

Still applies?

I don't see why it wouldn't apply, since nothing in the new action economy contradicts or makes an exception to that rule.


Can'tFindthePath wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:

Core page 213 (Magic Chapter) "A spell with a casting time of 1 swift action doesn't count against your normal limit of one spell per round. However, you may cast such a spell only once per round."

Still applies?
I don't see why it wouldn't apply, since nothing in the new action economy contradicts or makes an exception to that rule.

Right, that would stop swift casting spam.

That means that quicken effectively eats a move action.

A nerf to full casters, but not a big one.


Snowblind wrote:

That means that quicken effectively eats a move action.

A nerf to full casters, but not a big one.

I think it's the right kind of nerf. This whole system seems to do some light balancing out to most characters, even across levels. I like it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hm, how does that affect Sorcerers? If they spontaneously use any other metamagic feat, they now can't also use Quicken Spell? That's a harsh nerf to spontaneous casters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:
Hm, how does that affect Sorcerers? If they spontaneously use any other metamagic feat, they now can't also use Quicken Spell? That's a harsh nerf to spontaneous casters.

OTOH, arcane bloodline is now even better.

Just what the best bloodline needed...a power boost (more like dodging a nerf, but relative to other bloodlines it is a boost).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

How Full attacks work in this system? 2WF? So now swift action eats one of your attacks? This system looks like crap.


How does the system deal with Bab progression. is it entirely pointless for a martial to full round attack since she can attack 3 seperate moves or am i interpreting it falsely? Does a two weapon fighter get anything from this (barring the expanded feat difference)? Sounds like archers wont be AS martially superior now....right?

[edit] Ah, Dekalinder beat me to it, sorry for the repetition


master_marshmallow wrote:
Snowblind wrote:

If how you explained it is correct, I feel sorry for all the classes that are heavy on swift/immediate actions. They thought they had action clog issues before...oh boy.

It also destroys feats like arcane strike. Monks must feel sad that all their new ki powers eat up one of their attacks next turn.

I do like the sound of popping off 3 swift action spell perfected magical lineaged chain lightnings though. I also find it funny that this triple swift nonsense is enabled by the same thing that makes quicken effectively eat a move action. Quicken rods become even more awesome.

Spell Combat basically becomes useless, unless it reduces casing time to one act.

Not really?

If a full round action is three acts (as the second post says), then the Magus packs up to five acts into three with Spell Combat. It's useless below level 8 though.

This probably does kill the utility of the Magus as a class though, frankly, because Swift Action + Full Round Action is no longer an option, and they can no longer buff as they move to engage on top of that (swift action arcane pool, standard action Haste... oops, no move for you). It's not the only one either: the Warpriest is not sitting happy. This actually has an amusing turn in the whole mobility question: the classes who could before best leverage all their actions are now the least mobile classes.

*Shrug* I'll judge when I see it in full, but from what's been listed it doesn't seem like it helps anybody, except Barbarians who now have Haste always-on. Charge for two acts, Pounce goes off, you have an act left to attack.

Martials benefit in being able to move and do a partial full attack, but really that's only helpful in the mid-levels. Low-level martials aren't going to experience much of significance since they're unlikely to hit with a -5 attack. High level martials seem like they're losing out on part of a full attack. Admittedly the last strike was never likely to hit anyway. But lo and behold, those with Pounce are still ahead if the piece in the last paragraph works. So it's still those classes for best martial, and full BAB is now worth less since you don't get extra attacks any faster... okay, I take back what I said. Druid got made awesome.

But meanwhile the strongest martial style looks like it got hacked in twain to no offsetting benefit (whether that's good or bad depends on what kind of weapon you like, I suppose). Hopefully TWF survives, or we're just making Two-Handed Weapons the One True Path. Questions arise for Haste and the new Flurry too but presumably those are answered in the book.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So, the new system is not very good, from what I can see. Too bad.


Regular Spell Combat is a 1 act action that provokes under this system, while Spellstrike is 2 acts and provokes.

Spell Combat only specifically prevents the "Cast a Standard action spell" and "Cast a 1 round action Spell"

So Spell Combat followed by Spellstrike is allowable.


... Are you certain of those numbers?

Because Spell Combat is a full round action that includes all of your normal weapon attacks and casting a spell. Based on what you just said, a Magus can deliver three full attacks + three spells in a single round.

Meanwhile, Spellstrike is a non action. It's not even a free action, it's an ability that modifies an already-existent free action. I cannot see Pazio devs screwing up that badly.


Quote:

Spell Combat (Attack, Complex): You make an attack roll

with a light or one-handed melee weapon, then cast a spell
on the magusUM spell list with a casting time of 1 standard
action. You take a –2 penalty on the melee attack, but the
spell is cast regardless of whether the attack hits. If you
cast the spell defensively, you can subtract your Intelligence
bonus from the result of the attack roll to add the same
value as a circumstance bonus on the concentration check.
You must have the spell combatUM class feature to take this
action, and can take this action only once per turn. To take
this action, you must have one hand free. You can’t also
take the following actions this turn: cast a standard-action
spell or cast a 1-round-action spell.

Spellstrike (Complex; 2 Acts): You cast a spell from the
magusUM spell list with a range of touch, but instead of
making a touch attack, you make a melee attack with a
weapon you are wielding. If the attack hits, the attack deals
its normal damage as well as any effects of the spell. You
must have the spellstrikeUM class feature to take this action.

Keep in mind that under this system there isn't a Full Attack action anymore. Instead you take multiple Attacks as your actions (a 1 act action). If you do take multiple actions of the Attack subtype you suffer a -5 on the second and a -10 on the third. The system means that everyone can make 3 attacks a round even at 1st level, provided they do nothing else.

So Spell Combat followed by Spell strike is 1 melee attack + 1 spell (Spell Combat Action) and then a touch spell delivered with a melee attack (Spellstrike action). Also Spellstrike is not listed as an Attack subtype so it doesn't suffer the -5 penalty for being a 2nd attack.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm really surprised and a bit dismayed how this new system nerfs spontaneous casters. Oh, well, I guess since it's optional it doesn't need to be used.


The action cost of a 1 round spell can be split up over two rounds. So a Spontaneous caster could do

Round 1) Quick spell (1 Action) + 2 actions of a Metamagiced Spells
Round 2) 3rd action of the Metamagic spell + Attack + another Quick spell

or
Round 1) Cast a regular spell (2 actions) + 1st action of a Metamagiced spell
Round 2) last 2 actions of the metamagic spells + Attack


So they nerfed the hell out of Spellstrike then. I'm not sure there was any kind of point to that, but okay.

Greylurker wrote:

The action cost of a 1 round spell can be split up over two rounds. So a Spontaneous caster could do

Round 1) Quick spell (1 Action) + 2 actions of a Metamagiced Spells
Round 2) 3rd action of the Metamagic spell + Attack + another Quick spell

or
Round 1) Cast a regular spell (2 actions) + 1st action of a Metamagiced spell
Round 2) last 2 actions of the metamagic spells + Attack

Which is a pretty big nerf.

I'm honestly stumped. Who benefits from this system?


I fail to see how Spellstrike is nerfed.

Spellcombat lets you cast a 1 spell and attack
then Spell strike lets you cast another spells and attack again without the multiple attack penalty or the spell combat penalty.

Magus ends up with 2 spells a round without having to quicken either of them as well as a 2nd attack wihout penalty


Held charges and multi-touch spells no longer work. That hurts a lot of the Magus playbook. And while a small part of me is cheering to see Frostbite die in holy fire, there was no real reason for the change.

It also means that the 'two spells a round' means a lot less in reality than it does on paper. At low levels, only one of them is going to be a useful damage-oriented spell; if you fire off a touch spell with Spell Combat, it's inherently less powerful than if you'd Spellstrike'd it. ~10% difference at first, scaling upward to >20%.

At high levels, either you've invested heavily in Shocking Grasp or you haven't. For the former case, you get one spell that you haven't put much into + one Grasp, or you get one Grasp that's not nearly as strong as it could be + one full power Grasp.

For the latter case, you get one spell + one really weak spell that you may be better off not even casting, because two attack actions will be worth more than Spellstrike.

It polarizes the Magus, weakens their setup time, kills more than a few of their tricks, and the only time it's helpful is a very narrow set of build constraints, a stark contrast from the old Magus that was incredibly open once you got past the first five levels.


Dekalinder wrote:
How Full attacks work in this system? 2WF? So now swift action eats one of your attacks? This system looks like crap.
Quote:

Iterative attacks have been discarded in this action

economy. Instead, any character can make multiple attacks
during her turn simply by taking multiple actions to do so.

So it doesn't matter if you are a 1st level fighter or a 20th level fighter you get 3 attacks a round

TWF lets you get two attacks with the first attack action, Imp TWF gives you two with your 2nd action and Great TWF lets you get two with all three. So Full two weapon fighting means 3 attacks a round with each weapon for a total of 6.

Ditto with Flurry of Blows.

One kind of wierd thing I noticed is that taking a 5' step is a (1 act) action with no limits on how many times you can use it in a round. So you could 5', 5' again and then attack if you wanted. Or even 5' three times if you wanted. Could be handy to get at a creature with a high Reach


What, 5' costs as much as a move action? ........

...no comment.....


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Wait, does this mean you can Vital Strike 3 times in a round? It's 3 separate attack actions instead of a full-attack, isn't it? That would make this a very interesting system indeed...

Designer

magnuskn wrote:
Hm, how does that affect Sorcerers? If they spontaneously use any other metamagic feat, they now can't also use Quicken Spell? That's a harsh nerf to spontaneous casters.

You are assuming that it takes 3 acts for a sorcerer to use metamagic.

Designer

Matthew Downie wrote:

Core page 213 (Magic Chapter) "A spell with a casting time of 1 swift action doesn't count against your normal limit of one spell per round. However, you may cast such a spell only once per round."

Still applies?

That's the one! I looked for it everywhere except there.


magnuskn wrote:
Hm, how does that affect Sorcerers? If they spontaneously use any other metamagic feat, they now can't also use Quicken Spell? That's a harsh nerf to spontaneous casters.

I agree, that is one I hadn't noticed. After PF matter-of-factly says, "yea, of course Sorcerers can use Quicken Spell....duh", now this is a back step.

Easy house rule is no full-round action requirement for spontaneous metamagic. That won't suit many, and it would cause problems with abilities that let you skip it now.


Mark Seifter wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Hm, how does that affect Sorcerers? If they spontaneously use any other metamagic feat, they now can't also use Quicken Spell? That's a harsh nerf to spontaneous casters.
You are assuming that it takes 3 acts for a sorcerer to use metamagic.

Well, yea. It doesn't say otherwise in the Revised Action Economy section.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

This system is not "better for everyone" in regards of getting off all their favorite power combos as before...but better!

It is a reassessment, that tries to value things on their own as much as possible. It breaks the chains (pun intended) of the action economy, and opens up new options to all, while narrowing down some others.

But, a lot of the action power combos are the way they are simply because they are workarounds for the stiff action type structure.

I love the fact that a first level Rogue can take up to three attacks. Yes, he'll likely miss, but with the swing of the d20 and low level numbers, he might get the extra hit that takes down his opponent. And warrior types nearly always getting at least two attacks is great, even with the -5. There are other bennies as well, like three moves, for example.

Some subtle re-balancing is part of the system. There are a few foibles, such as the spontaneous metamagic issue, I am certain others will arise. You can make adjustments if you feel it necessary, as this is totally optional, and extremely intrusive as options go.

If it doesn't suit your style, that does not mean it is crap, or a failure.


Every one seem a bit down on the new action economy system. But has any one tried it. I kind of like the idea and I don't mind making a few more changes if it need it. I would like to hear more about how it actually plays.


LuniasM wrote:
Wait, does this mean you can Vital Strike 3 times in a round? It's 3 separate attack actions instead of a full-attack, isn't it? That would make this a very interesting system indeed...

as written, yeah I think it does


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Greylurker wrote:
LuniasM wrote:
Wait, does this mean you can Vital Strike 3 times in a round? It's 3 separate attack actions instead of a full-attack, isn't it? That would make this a very interesting system indeed...
as written, yeah I think it does

Note that if this is true, feats like Vital Strike, Focused Shot, and Cleave become much better. Not to mention standard-action things like Explosive Missile. Ouch.


I'm not sure if I like the new iterative attacks. I like it for low levels. Taking the negative for iteratives makes sense in the current system, but I think classes who would naturally have those attacks skills be able to take them at no penalty. This is a massive boost to martial characters naturally, allowing movement.

If twf works per action, then twf just got fixed, because you can move and still take 4 attacks. One handed weapons be damned.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

When I get my hands on the book, I'm not going to compare this system to the old one. I'm going to just use it and see how it plays. I think it's important to look at the strengths and weaknesses of the system on its own without trying to compare it to the old system.

The old system wasn't perfect. Spellcasters could waltz around the battlefield firing off full power spells while martials were locked into standing still. At high levels, they could only do 25% damage if they wanted to move. This is a system that actually addresses this big problem in a real way.

All of you people are complaining about casters getting nerfed. Well no duh. They already are better than everyone else. They needed it. They still seem really powerful. And concerning swift action heavy guys? Well, they can still take a swift, a move, and standard. They haven't changed. But they can now take three swifts or two swifts and an attack. They benefit from this system a lot.

So, all I'm saying is that we should look at the system for it's merits apart from the regular pathfinder system.


Albatoonoe wrote:

When I get my hands on the book, I'm not going to compare this system to the old one. I'm going to just use it and see how it plays. I think it's important to look at the strengths and weaknesses of the system on its own without trying to compare it to the old system.

The old system wasn't perfect. Spellcasters could waltz around the battlefield firing off full power spells while martials were locked into standing still. At high levels, they could only do 25% damage if they wanted to move. This is a system that actually addresses this big problem in a real way.

All of you people are complaining about casters getting nerfed. Well no duh. They already are better than everyone else. They needed it. They still seem really powerful. And concerning swift action heavy guys? Well, they can still take a swift, a move, and standard. They haven't changed. But they can now take three swifts or two swifts and an attack. They benefit from this system a lot.

So, all I'm saying is that we should look at the system for it's merits apart from the regular pathfinder system.

What do you mean "you people?"

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
Albatoonoe wrote:

When I get my hands on the book, I'm not going to compare this system to the old one. I'm going to just use it and see how it plays. I think it's important to look at the strengths and weaknesses of the system on its own without trying to compare it to the old system.

The old system wasn't perfect. Spellcasters could waltz around the battlefield firing off full power spells while martials were locked into standing still. At high levels, they could only do 25% damage if they wanted to move. This is a system that actually addresses this big problem in a real way.

All of you people are complaining about casters getting nerfed. Well no duh. They already are better than everyone else. They needed it. They still seem really powerful. And concerning swift action heavy guys? Well, they can still take a swift, a move, and standard. They haven't changed. But they can now take three swifts or two swifts and an attack. They benefit from this system a lot.

So, all I'm saying is that we should look at the system for it's merits apart from the regular pathfinder system.

What do you mean "you people?"

What do you mean "you people?" =p


Albatoonoe wrote:

When I get my hands on the book, I'm not going to compare this system to the old one. I'm going to just use it and see how it plays. I think it's important to look at the strengths and weaknesses of the system on its own without trying to compare it to the old system.

The old system wasn't perfect. Spellcasters could waltz around the battlefield firing off full power spells while martials were locked into standing still. At high levels, they could only do 25% damage if they wanted to move. This is a system that actually addresses this big problem in a real way.

All of you people are complaining about casters getting nerfed. Well no duh. They already are better than everyone else. They needed it. They still seem really powerful. And concerning swift action heavy guys? Well, they can still take a swift, a move, and standard. They haven't changed. But they can now take three swifts or two swifts and an attack. They benefit from this system a lot.

So, all I'm saying is that we should look at the system for it's merits apart from the regular pathfinder system.

I don't think it's bad either but it is going to change a lot of how people approach combat in the games that use it. For one you get Hasted Wizards casting a spell and then making 2 attacks. Rogues 5'ing several times in a round to set up flanking.

I'm not sure but you might beable to control Flaming Sphere 3 times in a round with this using all three actions to bounce it from one end of the room to another. Or three different Flaming spheres if you take the time to get them all on the field.


How does haste work?


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

from what i see it favors martials more and less favors magic classes.

swift action move and attack is still possible due to 3 acts, so you;re at the same as you were before.

TWF almost requires a full round attack it seems however, further making TWF useless.

it also makes full round attacks rather bad on any class that needs to swift in between. but full round attacking still has an effect but only late game.

charges are great action economy because now you can double move and attack, but get them in 2 points instead of 3. you can also attack move and attack and move attack move. seems to really favor martials that don't rely on magic as much.

fun fact, seems to effect enemies as much as players so martials got a good action economy buff universally.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
master_marshmallow wrote:
How does haste work?
Quote:

When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon. The attack is made using the creature's full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This effect is not cumulative with similar effects, such as that provided by a speed weapon, nor does it actually grant an extra action, so you can't use it to cast a second spell or otherwise take an extra action in the round.)

A hasted creature gains a +1 bonus on attack rolls and a +1 dodge bonus to AC and Reflex saves. Any condition that makes you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) also makes you lose dodge bonuses.

All of the hasted creature's modes of movement (including land movement, burrow, climb, fly, and swim) increase by 30 feet, to a maximum of twice the subject's normal speed using that form of movement. This increase counts as an enhancement bonus, and it affects the creature's jumping distance as normal for increased speed. Multiple haste effects don't stack. Haste dispels and counters slow.

looks kinda nerfed to me. other than you can 3x your movement without run penalties now so the +30 movement is insane


Seems like the system wasn't very well-thought... The eagerness to nerf casters mobility brought along a number of unintended and/or unbalanced consequences.

Well...No biggie. Just another optional rule to ignore...

1 to 50 of 752 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / [unchained] How is the new action economy system? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.