Questions #3646 and #3647


Rules Questions

51 to 100 of 165 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Elbedor wrote:
kestral287 wrote:

To try to summarize it:

1. Rules say you get one swift action per round
2. Readying an action does not override that general rule
3. Readying does not change what type of action something is, though it might change the action economy cost (you are still using a swift action, even though it's costing a standard)
4. Hence, you can never Ready to take a second swift action, because that would be breaking rule #1

1. True.

2. True.
3. False. Readying DOES change the action. It has to. I'm allowed ONE Standard and ONE Move per turn. If I move and then Ready to Move again, I can't do so according to your interpretation. I've already Moved and I've already used my Standard to Ready, so I have no Move left to me (because you're saying my readied Move still counts as a Move and I'm only allowed 1 unless I burn my Standard to do so...which I don't have because it's tied up Readied). But if Readying changes the action into a Standard, then I can Move, Ready to Move again, and then actually Move when the trigger happens.
4. False. Readying does not use another Swift action. It uses your Standard.

As I said earlier, Ready action is poorly written, for the reasons you listed above.

As I also said earlier, I don't believe the writers intended for actions that are listed as Swift to be used more than once a round, no matter how you achieve it (in this case, using the poorly written 'Ready' action).

I guess I'm not arguing that the writing explicitly disallows it, per se, simply that it is a)unclear and b)most people agree swift actions are swift, and cannot be used more than once or converted to other actions.

If you don't LIKE what I'm saying, that's fine, but I do think it has been shown pretty conclusively in the past that trying to get two or more swift actions a round (which is what the ready action would allow you to do) is not cool.

Repeating that it "isn't a swift action anymore" doesn't change a darn thing, we all know that using a Standard to grant a Swift is what is going on here.


@Numarak
I reread that part of the rules again, I suggest you do the same, this time pay close attention to where it says "round" and where it says "turn". A full round is what takes place from an initiative count to the next time that same count comes around. A turn is what happens on your particular initiative count, not after it. If after rereading you still believe you are right, please quote exact the exact piece of text that says that.

Grand Lodge

Elbedor, a better phrasing is readying an action has a cost minimum of a Standard action (it replaces nothing). Admittedly, it is RAI, but is the only interpretation that meets all aspects of RAW in your various scenarios without violating other aspects (for the reasons you outlined).

Can you ready a standard action? Yes, it costs you your standard action during your "normal" initiative.

Can you move and ready a standard to attack? Yes. Your Standard is on hold, it didn't "cost" anything to ready other than you may lose the action if the precursor to the action never happen.

Can you move, and ready an action to move again? Yes. You spent a move, and readying your standard to move again (if needed).

Can you attack and ready a standard action? No, your standard has already been used.

Can you ready a swift action? Yes, but only if you haven't used your swift action previously and have a standard available. (You can't get around the prohibition that states 1 swift per turn. Readying shifts your place in initiative so isn't a "new" turn (you are just finishing your earlier one).

The ability specifically states you are allowed to ready a standard action which is impossible under your options/interpretation. It doesn't replace your Standard, you just at least need a Standard left to activate your action, because rather than attacking, you are waiting and focusing on a specific action to occur.


Grey_Mage wrote:

Elbedor, a better phrasing is readying an action has a cost minimum of a Standard action (it replaces nothing). Admittedly, it is RAI, but is the only interpretation that meets all aspects of RAW in your various scenarios without violating other aspects (for the reasons you outlined).

Can you ready a standard action? Yes, it costs you your standard action during your "normal" initiative.

Can you move and ready a standard to attack? Yes. Your Standard is on hold, it didn't "cost" anything to ready other than you may lose the action if the precursor to the action never happen.

Can you move, and ready an action to move again? Yes. You spent a move, and readying your standard to move again (if needed).

Can you attack and ready a standard action? No, your standard has already been used.

Can you ready a swift action? Yes, but only if you haven't used your swift action previously and have a standard available. (You can't get around the prohibition that states 1 swift per turn. Readying shifts your place in initiative so isn't a "new" turn (you are just finishing your earlier one).

The ability specifically states you are allowed to ready a standard action which is impossible under your options/interpretation. It doesn't replace your Standard, you just at least need a Standard to activate your action, because rather than attacking, you are waiting and focusing on a specific action to occur.

This is what I was trying to get at. Thank you for reading my mind and posting this.


Numarak wrote:

@OldSkoolRPG:

Point 1, last time I checked, Haste granting an extra Standard was 3.5, in Pathfinder grants an extra attack with Full BAB only if you are taking the Full-Attack Action.

On your example: I ready an attack, which costs me a Standard Action -see Readying an Action- and is a Standard Action, which is included in the action types you can ready. I do not see why we should explain that this is possible. A different case will be if I wanted to ready a Fill-Attack, my GM would say I lost my mind, but readying an attack? No problem.

Point 2, you only take a Standard -the attack-, at the cost of a Standard action -the ready action-. You do not take two standards.

Actually, and this is important, we are not saying you can not Ready a Swift, what we are saying is that you can not make a swift action if you already have done one in the given turn. Can you ready a Swift? Yes. Can you do it? Depends. Depends on what? Depends on if you already have used it this turn.

If your counterargument was right, then I would be able to ready 6 Readied actions on a given turn: I would say "I ready a Standard, I ready 3 Frees, I ready a Move and I ready a Swift", but no, you can only ready one of those? Why? Because that is the cost of Readying an action: a Standard. The cost. You ready a Free Action? Sure, it costs you your Standard action. You ready a Move? Sure, it costs you your Standard. You ready a Swift? Sure, it costs you a Standard. Are their action type changed? No, it isn't, but they cost you a Standard nevertheless.

Point 1: You are correct about Haste which makes your position even worse

Point 2: Wrong. Read the rules:

PRD wrote:
The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun. Readying is a standard action. It does not provoke an attack of opportunity (though the action that you ready might do so.

Readying IS a standard action all on its own. The rules explicitly state that it is. That is where your entire argument is falling apart. You are directly contradicting unambiguous RAW. So the flaw in your argument remains that if it is true it is almost impossible to actually take a readied Standard action though the rules explicitly say you can ready Standard actions.

Whatever action you happen to perform when readying whether it is an attack, moving, or using a warpriest's fervor it is now a "readied action" and is performed as part of the Ready action which is a standard action. So if you ready to attack if an enemy comes in range when the action is triggered you are no longer making an attack you are making a "readied attack" which is performed as part of the standard action "Ready". Same with move and swift actions.

Dark Archive

I believe that we're arguing about unclear rules at this point.

If we were able to convert actions down, we wouldn't have a problem. I will state that I believe the rules defy logic here, but every interpretation I have seen and discussed reflects the order below:

Ready a Standard -
Costs a standard, lets you perform a standard

Ready a Move -
Costs a standard, lets you perform a standard, which can instead be a move (like every other round in combat)

Ready a Swift -
Costs a standard, would let you perform a standard, but you cannot perform a swift as a standard, so it will also cost you a swift

I believe it is first off badly written and second off a flaw in combat - why shouldn't you be able to use up a Standard action to perform a Swift? Don't know, but it's abundantly clear that you can't.


Keith Apperson wrote:

I believe that we're arguing about unclear rules at this point.

If we were able to convert actions down, we wouldn't have a problem. I will state that I believe the rules defy logic here, but every interpretation I have seen and discussed reflects the order below:

Ready a Standard -
Costs a standard, lets you perform a standard

Ready a Move -
Costs a standard, lets you perform a standard, which can instead be a move (like every other round in combat)

Ready a Swift -
Costs a standard, would let you perform a standard, but you cannot perform a swift as a standard, so it will also cost you a swift

I believe it is first off badly written and second off a flaw in combat - why shouldn't you be able to use up a Standard action to perform a Swift? Don't know, but it's abundantly clear that you can't.

It isn't unclear at all and your explanation is not anywhere stated or implied in the text of the Ready action.

It works just like a touch spell where you are allowed a free touch attack as part of the casting the spell. Normally casting a spell or making a touch attack are two separate standard actions. However, when casting a touch spell the attack now gets included in the spell and ceases to be its own action.

When you use the Ready action the "readied action" ceases to be its own action and is now just included in the Ready which isn't completed until it either triggers or your turn comes around again without a trigger.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

As a suggestion, why don't you treat the swift action that you readied as an immediate action (decribed as a Swift action you take outside your turn). So sure, you can do this, but it means you can't use a Swift next turn. That's probably far closer to RAI than permitting or forbidding Swift readies in their entirety.


Grey_Mage wrote:
Elbedor, a better phrasing is readying an action has a cost minimum of a Standard action (it replaces nothing). Admittedly, it is RAI, but is the only interpretation that meets all aspects of RAW in your various scenarios without violating other aspects (for the reasons you outlined).

I'm not sure this solves the issue. When we use the term "Standard Action" we are just using a short-hand reference to categorize a group of actions that the rules describe as generally needing a Standard Action (out of the Economy) to perform. Those actions don't have any inherent, immutable value of "Standard" to them, because we know specific rules can change them.

Take the Light Crossbow as an example. I need a Move Action to reload it. You can even say "Loading a Light Crossbow is a Move Action". But the "Move" part can be changed once you add in something like Rapid Reload. Now the action of reloading the crossbow no longer has anything to do with "Move". Loading a light crossbow isn't a Move action that I perform with a Free action. It IS for all intents and purposes now a Free action for me.

Ready works the same way. Its specific rules say that I can take any Standard, Move, Swift, or Free action that I want, state a condition under which it will take place, and perform it at a later time as a Standard action. It doesn't matter if it was a Standard or Move or Swift or Free action before I got hold of it with a Ready. The rules of Ready now change it. It is now a Standard Action.

My argument has been that this has to be true. Otherwise to say "An action retains its inherent original value" (aka Readying a Swift still counts as performing a Swift even though it costs a Standard...thereby spending both my Standard and my Swift) invites problems when we try to Ready a Standard (because Readying a Standard then counts as performing a Standard...which I can't do because my Standard is tied up in Readying already and I don't get 2 Standards on my turn).

This also makes "Moving, then Readying to Move again" an impossible activity. I generally only get 1 Move action unless I burn my Standard for a 2nd one. By Readying a Move I am tying up my Standard. But if the action still inherently counts as a "Move action" I can't do it if I've already moved since I don't have a Move action free (I've hit my limit of 1) and I don't have a Standard available to burn (since it's tied up in the Ready).

Contrary to this, I think everyone realizes that you can, in fact, Move and then Ready to Move again or you can Ready to attack. This means that Readying an action divorces that action from its previous short-hand reference of Standard, Move, Swift, or Free and turns it now into a Standard Action.

Now what would change this entirely would be if the RAW clearly stated something akin to "Performing a Readied Swift Action counts as having performed an Immediate Action."

If it said that, then no argument from me. :)


I'm gonna focus on intention:

Do you think the designers of the game wanted to allow a way to take multiple actions that are originally swift actions?

There is a reason they limit them, why would something in the FIRST book published negate something that has been consistently reinforced as a unique action you only get one of in a round?

Again, I understand that, as written, you appear to be able to convert a swift action into a standard action by employing 'Ready'... but I do not think this is any more correct than the Weapon Proficiency feat not actually granting proficiency. (it's true, it merely negates the -4 penalty, it does not serve as a prerequisite for Weapon Focus and similar feats! It does not actually grant you proficiency, as written!)

Literal readings of the rules can make for very strange games. My Weapon Proficiency feat example is the clearest one I can think of... Read up on it, I'm totally right about it.


alexd1976 wrote:

I'm gonna focus on intention:

Do you think the designers of the game wanted to allow a way to take multiple actions that are originally swift actions?

There is a reason they limit them, why would something in the FIRST book published negate something that has been consistently reinforced as a unique action you only get one of in a round?

Again, I understand that, as written, you appear to be able to convert a swift action into a standard action by employing 'Ready'... but I do not think this is any more correct than the Weapon Proficiency feat not actually granting proficiency. (it's true, it merely negates the -4 penalty, it does not serve as a prerequisite for Weapon Focus and similar feats! It does not actually grant you proficiency, as written!)

Literal readings of the rules can make for very strange games. My Weapon Proficiency feat example is the clearest one I can think of... Read up on it, I'm totally right about it.

Readying an action to perform a swift is very different from simplys swapping a standard for a swift which is definitely not allowed and understandably so. In readying an action you are changing your initiative and risking that the trigger never occurs thus wasting your standard action. These disadvantages and risks offset the benefits that would normally occur if you were able to just swap a standard for another swift action.

As for your Weapon Proficiency exmaple you are actually not right about it you apparently just have a very odd method of interpreting the text.

PRD wrote:

Martial Weapon Proficiency (Combat)

Choose a type of martial weapon. You understand how to use that type of martial weapon in combat.

Benefit: You make attack rolls with the selected weapon normally (without the non-proficient penalty).
Normal: When using a weapon with which you are not proficient, you take a –4 penalty on attack rolls.
Special: Barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers are proficient with all martial weapons. They need not select this feat.
You can gain Martial Weapon Proficiency multiple times. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new type of weapon.

The feat itself IS proficiency with the chosen weapon, its in the name. What is the benefit of being proficient? The benefit of being proficient is that you don't suffer the penalties of not being proficient.


Being a fighter grants proficiency, taking the feat does not. You quoted it, read it again.

Also, being dead doesn't have any penalties.

If you wanna go by rules as written, do it. See how the game plays. It gets weird.


alexd1976 wrote:

Being a fighter grants proficiency, taking the feat does not. You quoted it, read it again.

Also, being dead doesn't have any penalties.

If you wanna go by rules as written, do it. See how the game plays. It gets weird.

Your argument is logically incoherent and therefore ludicrous. Being a fighter grants proficiency thus not requiring you to take the feat to possess it. However, if you don't already have proficiency you can take the feat Martial Weapon Proficiency (Longsword) and tada your character now has Martial Weapon Proficiency (Longsword). So what does having Martial Weapon Proficiency with longswords do for you? Oh it means you no longer suffer non-profiency penalties.

Your claim is that having Martial Weapon Proficiency with longswords doesn't give you Martial Weapon Proficiency with longswords, i.e. the feat doesn't actually give you the feat, which as I said is logically incoherent.

Grand Lodge

OldSkoolRPG wrote:
Readying an action to perform a swift is very different from simplys swapping a standard for a swift which is definitely not allowed and understandably so. In readying an action you are changing your initiative and risking that the trigger never occurs thus wasting your standard action. These disadvantages and risks offset the benefits that would normally occur if you were able to just swap a standard for another swift action.

GM: "Lets see, we are on initiative 20. So Player 1, you are 20+, go ahead"

Player 1: "As a swift action I Fervor buff spell [Y]. For my standard I ready an action to swift buff spell [Z] whenever anyone else acts."

GM: "Okay...."

Player 1: "It's okay because my delayed action may never come to pass, and I drop in initiative anyway."

GM: "Whatever, lets see, Initiative 20-. BBEG starts moving towards the Fighter."

Player 1: "My readied action goes off. I buff (with my second swift action this turn)"

GM: "So you interrupt BBEG at 20-, and your new initiative is 20+... ?"

This scenario is not only laughable its CLEARLY against RAW prohibiting 2 swift actions in a turn, readied actions or not. This is not a cute or clever way to get around the swift action restriction which is exactly the intent.

Grand Lodge

Elbedor wrote:
Take the Light Crossbow as an example. I need a Move Action to reload it. You can even say "Loading a Light Crossbow is a Move Action". But the "Move" part can be changed once you add in something like Rapid Reload. Now the action of reloading the crossbow no longer has anything to do with "Move". Loading a light crossbow isn't a Move action that I perform with a Free action. It IS for all intents and purposes now a Free action for me.

This action economy is directly granted via a feat, so no worries about the interaction with the change of action economy.

Elbedor wrote:
Ready works the same way. Its specific rules say that I can take any Standard, Move, Swift, or Free action that I want, state a condition under which it will take place, and perform it at a later time as a Standard action. It doesn't matter if it was a Standard or Move or Swift or Free action before I got hold of it with a Ready. The rules of Ready now change it. It is now a Standard Action.

No where is this stated. CRB: "You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition." It doesn't say you spend your standard action, you simply save it for later, same as a swift action, but your standard is needed to activate it.

Elbedor wrote:
My argument has been that this has to be true. Otherwise to say "An action retains its inherent original value" (aka Readying a Swift still counts as performing a Swift even though it costs a Standard...thereby spending both my Standard and my Swift) invites problems when we try to Ready a Standard (because Readying a Standard then counts as performing a Standard...which I can't do because my Standard is tied up in Readying already and I don't get 2 Standards on my turn).

This is the crux of your problem, you are saying, it can't be A, and it therefore it must be B (even though B is prohibited). You need another alternative that is not contrary to any rule as written. I believe I have done exactly that.


It is perfectly within the rules to use a swift action, then ready an action to use another swift action. Here is why:

You get one swift action per turn.
When does your swift action reset? It resets at the end of your turn. We know this because if you use an immediate action, that immediate action takes your swift on your coming turn. And at the end of your coming turn you've reset, allowing you to take another immediate, or wait till the turn after that one to use a swift.

So on my turn, I use a swift action.
I may (or may not) use a move action.
I use my standard action to ready a swift action (I'm not using a swift action yet, I'm just declaring I'd like to use one). This does NOT make my swift action a standard action.
My turn is now over.
Because my turn is over my swift action count resets.
If my ready condition triggers my swift action goes off (though in this case it is acting more like an immediate action because I'm doing it outside of my turn).
My next turn comes up, I do not have a swift action available to me because I just used one.

Extra notes, if something happens to me before my ready action goes off that takes away my ability to use swift actions then my ready action becomes invalidated. It was still legal to declare it, and prepare for it, but I can no longer act on it.

Likewise, at the time I declared my ready action I did not have a swift available to me, but that doesn't mean I won't have one in the future, so it is perfectly valid to state I will try to do something.


OldSkoolRPG wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:

Being a fighter grants proficiency, taking the feat does not. You quoted it, read it again.

Also, being dead doesn't have any penalties.

If you wanna go by rules as written, do it. See how the game plays. It gets weird.

Your argument is logically incoherent and therefore ludicrous. Being a fighter grants proficiency thus not requiring you to take the feat to possess it. However, if you don't already have proficiency you can take the feat Martial Weapon Proficiency (Longsword) and tada your character now has Martial Weapon Proficiency (Longsword). So what does having Martial Weapon Proficiency with longswords do for you? Oh it means you no longer suffer non-profiency penalties.

Your claim is that having Martial Weapon Proficiency with longswords doesn't give you Martial Weapon Proficiency with longswords, i.e. the feat doesn't actually give you the feat, which as I said is logically incoherent.

Doesn't matter if you AGREE with it or not, as written, the feat does not actually grant proficiency.

I'm not arguing that anyone in their right mind should ENFORCE that, simply that as written, that's what it says.

Also, being dead has no penalties.

I'm trying to show that blind adherence to the rules causes issues, in regards to Ready and having it allow Swift actions more than once a round... I don't think you should be allowed to have more than one Swift per round (whether it's converted by Ready or not).

Grand Lodge

bbangerter wrote:

It is perfectly within the rules to use a swift action, then ready an action to use another swift action. Here is why:

You get one swift action per turn.
When does your swift action reset? It resets at the end of your turn. We know this because if you use an immediate action, that immediate action takes your swift on your coming turn. And at the end of your coming turn you've reset, allowing you to take another immediate, or wait till the turn after that one to use a swift.

So on my turn, I use a swift action.
I may (or may not) use a move action.
I use my standard action to ready a swift action (I'm not using a swift action yet, I'm just declaring I'd like to use one). This does NOT make my swift action a standard action.
My turn is now over.
Because my turn is over my swift action count resets.
If my ready condition triggers my swift action goes off (though in this case it is acting more like an immediate action because I'm doing it outside of my turn).
My next turn comes up, I do not have a swift action available to me because I just used one.

Extra notes, if something happens to me before my ready action goes off that takes away my ability to use swift actions then my ready action becomes invalidated. It was still legal to declare it, and prepare for it, but I can no longer act on it.

Likewise, at the time I declared my ready action I did not have a swift available to me, but that doesn't mean I won't have one in the future, so it is perfectly valid to state I will try to do something.

SO you are advocating I can use all my 5 AOO's with Combat reflexes. Then on my turn I use a free action to taunt my enemy. Since it is my turn I have recharged all my expended AOO's. I then ready a standard action to "Do whatever" later on, so then when the action comes about, I can "Do whatever" and all my AOO's are recharged again?

A readied action isn't a new turn, it's a continuation of the old one. The interpretation I have laid out prevents these, and your shenanigans which are clearly against the intent of the Paizo community, who do not want multiple swift actions per round and have said so multiple times as a way to balance power through action economy.


Grey_Mage wrote:

GM: "Lets see, we are on initiative 20. So Player 1, you are 20+, go ahead"

Player 1: "As a swift action I Fervor buff spell [Y]. For my standard I ready an action to swift buff spell [Z] whenever anyone else acts."

GM: "Okay...."

Player 1: "It's okay because my delayed action may never come to pass, and I drop in initiative anyway."

GM: "Whatever, lets see, Initiative 20-. BBEG starts moving towards the Fighter."

Player 1: "My readied action goes off. I buff (with my second swift action this turn)"

GM: "So you interrupt BBEG at 20-, and your new initiative is 20+... ?"

This scenario is not only laughable its CLEARLY against RAW prohibiting 2 swift actions in a turn, readied actions or not. This is not a cute or clever way to get around the swift action restriction which is exactly the intent.

You can put clearly in bold all you want but it doesn't make it the case. Yes such an action is an abuse of the RAW but it is RAW legal. Just because there are abuses, however, doesn't mean you throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are times that using a readied action in this way is not abusing the system.

Example:
DM: "The four bearded devils see you and prepare to charge"
Warpriest: "Okay I enhance my weapon with the Holy property so that I can damage them if I get an AoO. Then I ready an action to use fervor to touch the fighter and heal him if he gets hit by one of the bearded devils."
DM: "Okay if that triggers your initiative will change and some of the devils may then be going before you."
Warpriest: "That's fine"
DM: (At the end of the turn) "All four devils missed the fighter so your readied action never triggers. What are you doing this turn?"

The fact that a rule can be abused does not make it not the rule. In your example the GM definitely should say no for that instance but that doesn't change the rules the rest of the time.

Grand Lodge

bbangerter wrote:

Extra notes, if something happens to me before my ready action goes off that takes away my ability to use swift actions then my ready action becomes invalidated. It was still legal to declare it, and prepare for it, but I can no longer act on it.

Likewise, at the time I declared my ready action I did not have a swift available to me, but that doesn't mean I won't have one in the future, so it is perfectly valid to state I will try to do something.

For the 1st part, you are correct, you say you a readying a swift action, say "Quickened Fireball" if a certain enemy moves into range. Then your Fighter got caught in a Create Pit. You Immediate action cast a Feather Fall spell on him but have spent your next swift action (i.e. the one you had readied).

No new rules are created, and my interpretation works fine with it. On your initiative next round (your readied can't go off) you have your new swift action still even though you cast an immediate.

For the second part, you lost me...

How can you ready something you don't have?


Grey_Mage wrote:


SO you are advocating I can use all my 5 AOO's with Combat reflexes. Then on my turn I use a free action to taunt my enemy. Since it is my turn I have recharged all my expended AOO's. I then ready a standard action to "Do whatever" later on, so then when the action comes about, I can "Do whatever" and all my AOO's are recharged again?

A readied action isn't a new turn, it's a continuation of the old one. The interpretation I have laid out prevents these, and your...

No, I'm not advocating that at all, I haven't explained it well enough if that is what you got from that.

AoO's reset on your turn (either at the start or end of your turn, seen GM's run it both ways). Neither has impact in this simple case scenario though.

If I use all my AoO's before my turn, then it is my turn - either at the beginning or the end of my turn my AoO's reset. Just because I ready doesn't mean that reset suddenly gets delayed (if I delay, that is a different story). And if/when my ready action goes off that doesn't reset them a second time. I need to have a normal regular turn to get the reset.

Note that in neither case am I getting extra AoO's. Before my turn, I get my AoO's, we both agree here. After I take a turn I get a new set of AoO's, we both agree here. If a readied action goes off later - nothing happens to my AoO state. They will reset during my next regular turn.

Readying an action ends your turn - it is not a continuation.

PRD wrote:


The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun.

Your turn is over, but the ready action now lets you interrupt someones else's actions outside of your turn. If your turn is over your 1 immediate/swift action per turn resets.

Note that this isn't letting you get 3 swift actions in two turns. It's still 2 for 2, readying just lets you take your second one a little bit sooner IF the trigger condition comes up. This is no different mechanically then taking a swift, then before my next turn, taking an immediate. The immediate (or readied swift) consumes my swift for my coming turn.

Grand Lodge

OldSkoolRPG wrote:


Example:
DM: "The four bearded devils see you and prepare to charge"
Warpriest: "Okay I enhance my weapon with the Holy property so that I can damage them if I get an AoO. Then I ready an action to use fervor to touch the fighter and heal him if he gets hit by one of the bearded devils."
DM: "Okay if that triggers your initiative will change and some of the devils may then be going before you."
Warpriest: "That's fine"
DM: (At the end of the turn) "All four devils missed the fighter so your readied action never triggers. What are you doing this turn?"

The fact that a rule can be abused does not make it not the rule. In your example the GM definitely should say no for that instance but that doesn't change the rules the rest of the time.

No problems. Fervor to heal another is a standard action, which is perfectly permissible.


alexd1976 wrote:

Doesn't matter if you AGREE with it or not, as written, the feat does not actually grant proficiency.

I'm not arguing that anyone in their right mind should ENFORCE that, simply that as written, that's what it says.

Also, being dead has no penalties.

I'm trying to show that blind adherence to the rules causes issues, in regards to Ready and having it allow Swift actions more than once a round... I don't think you should be allowed to have more than one Swift per round (whether it's converted by Ready or not).

The feat itself IS proficiency. You are saying that having proficiency doesn't give you proficiency. There is nothing to enforce because things are what they are.

"The being dead has no penalties" issue has been covered again and again and should never be used to support an argument. Basically the argument is that because one rule, i.e. the dead condition, is poorly written and can't be run as written that therefore no rules should be run as written.

Basically you are admitting that the rules allow for you to ready a swift action after you have already performed a swift action normally but you don't like that and insist it must be an oversight and so you trot out the lame argument "we shouldn't follow the rules as written because of how they wrote the rules for the dead condition and because I read the weapon proficiency feat wierd"


A Paladin using Lay on Hands on himself is normally a swift action while using it on somebody else is normally a standard action. I'm not sure if it is intended that a Paladin should be able to use LoH on himself twice in one round. I'm also not sure if it isn't. Id' expect a lot of DMs to deny such a tactic though.

I've wondered sometimes about self triggered readied actions like your PC readying an action to cast Fireball when he (or another PC) says, "Burn!" Since talking is a free action you can perform outside of your turn it seems like that could potentially work (like "everybody on 3!")

Grand Lodge

bbangerter wrote:


Readying an action ends your turn - it is not a continuation.

PRD wrote:


The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun.

Your turn is over, but the ready action now lets you interrupt someones else's actions outside of your turn. If your turn is over your 1 immediate/swift action per turn resets.

Note that this isn't letting you get 3 swift actions in two turns. It's still 2 for 2, readying just lets you take your second one a little bit sooner IF the trigger condition comes up. This is no different mechanically then...

During "your turn" you used a swift action. You are then readying an action "this turn" to do something later. Then your turn ends. Your readied action, by your own admission, is not a new turn (otherwise the AOO shenanigans I introduced come into play). You don't have a swift to spend until your next turn and is not reset by a readied action.


Grey_Mage wrote:

For the second part, you lost me...

How can you ready something you don't have?

Let me give an alternate example. Let's say I'm caught in a web spell. Is it feasible for me to ready a move action when the web is burned away? (I guess an ally is going to hit me with a burning hands and remove the webbing). I cannot currently move due to the webbing - movement is not something I have. I can still ready an action to move though if the opportunity arises. If my trigger was move away from the orc if it moves next to me, I can still attempt to move whether the webbing has been removed or not. If it hasn't then of course my move will fail, even though my condition triggered.

From another perspective, because it takes a standard to ready, I don't have a standard to use in my ready - how do I ready a standard action I no longer have? We both understand thats not how it actually works. Though in this case there are no special rules like with swift where I lose my standard on my next normal turn.


Grey_Mage wrote:
OldSkoolRPG wrote:


Example:
DM: "The four bearded devils see you and prepare to charge"
Warpriest: "Okay I enhance my weapon with the Holy property so that I can damage them if I get an AoO. Then I ready an action to use fervor to touch the fighter and heal him if he gets hit by one of the bearded devils."
DM: "Okay if that triggers your initiative will change and some of the devils may then be going before you."
Warpriest: "That's fine"
DM: (At the end of the turn) "All four devils missed the fighter so your readied action never triggers. What are you doing this turn?"

The fact that a rule can be abused does not make it not the rule. In your example the GM definitely should say no for that instance but that doesn't change the rules the rest of the time.

No problems. Fervor to heal another is a standard action, which is perfectly permissible.

I misread the text of fervor when looking for a good example but the intent was clear as you well know. The fact that you instead chose to answer an obvious misconception of how fervor works instead of answering the point of the post shows you are not even arguing in good faith. Kind of like no one has answered how you would ever actually get to perform a readied standard action when the Ready action itself is a standard action. Instead those on your side of the argument just keep throwing out more ridiculous assertions like "you don't get proficiency from having proficiency" and obvious rules abuses rather than honestly answering the questions.

In the above example simply have the war priest ready an action to heal himself with fervor if he takes a hit instead of the fighter and it is still perfectly legitimate.

Grand Lodge

Devilkiller wrote:

A Paladin using Lay on Hands on himself is normally a swift action while using it on somebody else is normally a standard action. I'm not sure if it is intended that a Paladin should be able to use LoH on himself twice in one round. I'm also not sure if it isn't. Id' expect a lot of DMs to deny such a tactic though.

I've wondered sometimes about self triggered readied actions like your PC readying an action to cast Fireball when he (or another PC) says, "Burn!" Since talking is a free action you can perform outside of your turn it seems like that could potentially work (like "everybody on 3!")

Point 1. I don't know either. Seen variation on it myself so I wouldn't bet my life on it, which ironically is when its needed most.

Point 2. Delay would be a better representation of that. Once the count ends, everyone comes out of delay without interupting anything.

Side note though: Free actions are still limited by "your turn" only.


OldSkoolRPG wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:

Doesn't matter if you AGREE with it or not, as written, the feat does not actually grant proficiency.

I'm not arguing that anyone in their right mind should ENFORCE that, simply that as written, that's what it says.

Also, being dead has no penalties.

I'm trying to show that blind adherence to the rules causes issues, in regards to Ready and having it allow Swift actions more than once a round... I don't think you should be allowed to have more than one Swift per round (whether it's converted by Ready or not).

The feat itself IS proficiency. You are saying that having proficiency doesn't give you proficiency. There is nothing to enforce because things are what they are.

"The being dead has no penalties" issue has been covered again and again and should never be used to support an argument. Basically the argument is that because one rule, i.e. the dead condition, is poorly written and can't be run as written that therefore no rules should be run as written.

Basically you are admitting that the rules allow for you to ready a swift action after you have already performed a swift action normally but you don't like that and insist it must be an oversight and so you trot out the lame argument "we shouldn't follow the rules as written because of how they wrote the rules for the dead condition and because I read the weapon proficiency feat wierd"

Yep, I admit that as written it looks like the Ready action allows you to take a second swift action. I don't AGREE with it though, I also think there is room to interpret it differently, as in, you must have the free action available...

As for weapon proficiency, the whole point I'm making is that nowhere in the feat does it actually say you gain proficiency.

The name of the feat is just the name. What it does is listed under that.

We, as players and GMs, need to think critically.

Do the rules say being dead has a penalty? Nope. Do the rules say Weapon Proficiency is granted by Weapon Proficiency feat? nope.
Clearly, despite what is written, they don't work like that.

They may have been discussed at length, but the book says what it says.

My assertion is that you should not have 2 or more swift actions a round, Ready seems to allow for this, thus, I believe it to be incorrect/written poorly/should be changed.

That is all. Attempt to twist my words as much as you like, I will never believe, nor encourage others to believe, that you can have more than one swift action per round because of Ready.

Despite what the book might appear to say.


Grey_Mage wrote:


During "your turn" you used a swift action. You are then readying an action "this turn" to do something later. Then your turn ends. Your readied action, by your own admission, is not a new turn (otherwise the AOO shenanigans I introduced come into play). You don't have a swift to spend until your next turn and is not rest by a readied action.

When does your swift action reset? End of your turn or beginning of your turn? End of turn as shown from the immediate consuming upcoming turns swift.

This is the important part, so I'll state it again for emphasis. Your swift/immediate action resets at the end of your turn.

If you ready an action is your turn over? Yes, as shown in the PRD text - you cannot take your readied action during your turn, the text calls out that you get your readied action after your current turn is over, but before the next has begun - you are between turns when your readied goes off.

E.g, if I spend a swift on my turn, can I use an immediate between my turns - before my next turn starts. Yes, I can. The reason is because my swift/immediate resets when my turn ends. If I do I will not get the option to use a swift DURING my next turn. Using a swift, then readying a swift, mechanically functions identically to this with the added caveat that there is a triggering condition that must occur.


alexd1976 wrote:


My assertion is that you should not have 2 or more swift actions a round, Ready seems to allow for this, thus, I believe it to be incorrect/written poorly/should be changed.

I'd be interested in your response to my break down of the mechanical flow of it. And if you would object to a swift on your turn, followed by an immediate right after your turn (immediates are just swifts after all with the ability to take them outside of your turn).

Grand Lodge

bbangerter wrote:
Grey_Mage wrote:

For the second part, you lost me...

How can you ready something you don't have?

Let me give an alternate example. Let's say I'm caught in a web spell. Is it feasible for me to ready a move action when the web is burned away? (I guess an ally is going to hit me with a burning hands and remove the webbing). I cannot currently move due to the webbing - movement is not something I have. I can still ready an action to move though if the opportunity arises. If my trigger was move away from the orc if it moves next to me, I can still attempt to move whether the webbing has been removed or not. If it hasn't then of course my move will fail, even though my condition triggered.

From another perspective, because it takes a standard to ready, I don't have a standard to use in my ready - how do I ready a standard action I no longer have? We both understand thats not how it actually works. Though in this case there are no special rules like with swift where I lose my standard on my next normal turn.

For your 1st question: Yes. You could ready a move once freed. Could you attempt to break out (unsuccessfully) and then ready a move? No, as the standard is spent.

Could a Slayer study a target with his move. and still ready a standard to move away from the webbing if freed? Yes.

Could a Slayer/Warpriest study as a move and Swift action a buff via fevor, and ready to move if freed? Yes.

Could a Slayer/Warpriest study as a move, buff with fervor as a swift, then ready another swift if freed? No. The swift is used. You can't prepare something you don't have.

The ready action doesn't spend the standard action, it prepares an action for a specific event, but the event must be declared, and the action legal. Otherwise you are readying an action to swing a sword that's not in hand, or casting a spell when you don't have enough concentration left.


alexd1976 wrote:


As for weapon proficiency, the whole point I'm making is that nowhere in the feat does it actually say you gain proficiency.

It doesn't have to because it IS proficiency. If I have the cleave feat I have cleave. If I have agile maneuvers I have agile maneuvers. Agile Maneuvers doesn't say Benefit: you now have agile maneuvers. It tells you what having agile maneuvers allows you to do. So of course the Martial Weapon Proficiency feat doesn't say "You now have martial weapon proficiency". Instead it tells you what having it does.

Out of curiosity I just had my 10 year old niece read the text of Martial Weapon Proficiency(in case I was being overly harsh and it really isn't clear) and she understood it perfectly. You are reading something into, or out of it maybe I honestly don't know how anyone could have difficulty, that just is not there.


bbangerter wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:


My assertion is that you should not have 2 or more swift actions a round, Ready seems to allow for this, thus, I believe it to be incorrect/written poorly/should be changed.
I'd be interested in your response to my break down of the mechanical flow of it. And if you would object to a swift on your turn, followed by an immediate right after your turn (immediates are just swifts after all with the ability to take them outside of your turn).

THAT I would be okay with actually, as you can't use a swift in the turn after an immediate.

So really, just change 'swift' to 'immediate' in ready, and I no longer have an issue. It's the idea of converting a standard to a swift that bugs me.


OldSkoolRPG wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:


As for weapon proficiency, the whole point I'm making is that nowhere in the feat does it actually say you gain proficiency.

It doesn't have to because it IS proficiency. If I have the cleave feat I have cleave. If I have agile maneuvers I have agile maneuvers. Agile Maneuvers doesn't say Benefit: you now have agile maneuvers. It tells you what having agile maneuvers allows you to do. So of course the Martial Weapon Proficiency feat doesn't say "You now have martial weapon proficiency". Instead it tells you what having it does.

Out of curiosity I just had my 10 year old niece read the text of Martial Weapon Proficiency(in case I was being overly harsh and it really isn't clear) and she understood it perfectly. You are reading something into, or out of it maybe I honestly don't know how anyone could have difficulty, that just is not there.

You should teach her more about the game and get her to GM, she seems to have an intuitive understanding of how things SHOULD work. Most of us get too tripped up on linguistic tricks that allow us to do things the designers never intended.


Grey_Mage wrote:


The ready action doesn't spend the standard action, it prepares an action for a specific event, but the event must be declared, and the action legal. Otherwise you are readying an action to swing a sword that's not in hand, or casting a spell when you don't have enough concentration left.

Wrong, I already quote the text earlier with the appropriate part in bold. The text for Ready explicitly says it is a standard action. Here it is AGAIN for like the 10th time.

PRD wrote:

Ready

The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun. Readying is a standard action. It does not provoke an attack of opportunity (though the action that you ready might do so).


alexd1976 wrote:
OldSkoolRPG wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:


As for weapon proficiency, the whole point I'm making is that nowhere in the feat does it actually say you gain proficiency.

It doesn't have to because it IS proficiency. If I have the cleave feat I have cleave. If I have agile maneuvers I have agile maneuvers. Agile Maneuvers doesn't say Benefit: you now have agile maneuvers. It tells you what having agile maneuvers allows you to do. So of course the Martial Weapon Proficiency feat doesn't say "You now have martial weapon proficiency". Instead it tells you what having it does.

Out of curiosity I just had my 10 year old niece read the text of Martial Weapon Proficiency(in case I was being overly harsh and it really isn't clear) and she understood it perfectly. You are reading something into, or out of it maybe I honestly don't know how anyone could have difficulty, that just is not there.

You should teach her more about the game and get her to GM, she seems to have an intuitive understanding of how things SHOULD work. Most of us get too tripped up on linguistic tricks that allow us to do things the designers never intended.

Not on your life! I run a game for my kids and nieces and nephews and she is the most blood thirsty one of the lot! She would laugh in glee as she TPKed us all lol.


alexd1976 wrote:
bbangerter wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:


My assertion is that you should not have 2 or more swift actions a round, Ready seems to allow for this, thus, I believe it to be incorrect/written poorly/should be changed.
I'd be interested in your response to my break down of the mechanical flow of it. And if you would object to a swift on your turn, followed by an immediate right after your turn (immediates are just swifts after all with the ability to take them outside of your turn).

THAT I would be okay with actually, as you can't use a swift in the turn after an immediate.

So really, just change 'swift' to 'immediate' in ready, and I no longer have an issue. It's the idea of converting a standard to a swift that bugs me.

Mechanically this is all a readied swift is.

Although there would never be a reason to ready an immediate - since you can take the immediate anyway without any need to ready it.


We are both just yelling at each other without changing what we are saying.

I don't agree with the idea that you can have more than one swift action per round.

People that feel otherwise are entitled to. Take it up with your GM, clearly it isn't that clear.

Trying to insult someones intelligence by comparing them to a ten year old only reveals weaknesses in your own character, not someone else's.


alexd1976 wrote:

We are both just yelling at each other without changing what we are saying.

I don't agree with the idea that you can have more than one swift action per round.

People that feel otherwise are entitled to. Take it up with your GM, clearly it isn't that clear.

Trying to insult someones intelligence by comparing them to a ten year old only reveals weaknesses in your own character, not someone else's.

Did I ever compare your intelligence to a 10 year old? She is the youngest player that I GM. She does play the game. So I asked the youngest person I know who actually plays to explain the Martial Weapon Proficiency feat to me.

If the youngest player can clearly understand the feat then it is reasonable to think that others can as well. My point was not that you are not smarter than a 10 year old but that you are deliberately misreading the text to try and make a point. I'm also pretty sure you misinterpreted my post to mean I was saying you weren't as smart as a 10 year old deliberately as well.

Also all of that was said in relation to your arguments concerning the Weapon Proficiency feats NOT in regards to readying swift actions but now you are trying to conflate the two in order to portray yourself as victimized.

Grand Lodge

GM: "Surprise round!"

Player 1: "Yay! I got a 32!"

GM: "Umm, Player 1 goes 1st and your perception roll allows you to act in surprise round"

Player 1: "I fervor spell [Y] as a swift..."

GM: "Have you been reading the boards, there is a pending FAQ whether Swift actions apply on the surprise round..."

Player 1: "Oh, in that case, I use my standard action to ready a swift action, since some people on the forums says after I end my turn, my readied action is a new turn for me!"

GM: "You mean your swapping a standard action for a swift...

/sigh

You don't get a new swift action until the beginning of your NEXT turn, something a readied action is not.

Regardless of the actual outcome of the swift action in the Surprise round, the end result is the same by calling, the readied action its own turn with all the privileges of the normal turn.


Grey_Mage wrote:

GM: "Surprise round!"

Player 1: "Yay! I got a 32!"

GM: "Umm, Player 1 goes 1st and your perception roll allows you to act in surprise round"

Player 1: "I fervor spell [Y] as a swift..."

GM: "Have you been reading the boards, there is a pending FAQ whether Swift actions apply on the surprise round..."

Player 1: "Oh, in that case, I use my standard action to ready a swift action, since some people on the forums says after I end my turn, my readied action is a new turn for me!"

GM: "You mean your swapping a standard action for a swift...

/sigh

You don't get a new swift action until the beginning of your NEXT turn, something a readied action is not.

You have not answered how you can take a readied standard action when Ready itself is a swift action. I quoted specific rules text showing that your assertion that Ready itself is not a standard action is false.

Grand Lodge

Quote:

You have not answered how you can take a readied standard action when Ready itself is a swift action. I quoted specific rules text showing that your assertion that Ready itself is not a standard action is false.

Because readying a standard action is EXPLICITLY allowed/stated in "Da Rules". No interpretation required.

Multiple swift actions within the span of a turn are also explicitly restricted.

You are using RAI to justify this, by stating a readied action is "another turn" because your own turn ended after the readied action is prepared. This converts a swift action into the equivalent of an immediate one, but relies on the interpretation that you can ready something you don't have yet(a swift action).

Using the same logic, readying a move or standard action should take up the next rounds equivalent action as well, or at least have the option of being able to, except this isn't mentioned in the rule set at all, so I am led to believe this was not the intent.

I ask you to direct me to any threads before that swung in your favor, because all the ones I found end with no 2 swift actions within a round even though I'm searching for outliers.


@Grey_Mage - You can talk as a free action even when it isn't your turn. Whether you can choose to talk at a specific time which interrupts other actions or use that speech to trigger readied actions could be a matter of some debate though.

Grand Lodge

In every instance a readied action reflects something you could do now, but are choosing to do it later.

Cleric: "I ready a cure X wounds spell if the fighter is hurt."

Rogue (after moving): "I ready a standard attack if my opponent winds up in flank".

Warpriest (after Fervor): "I ready a swift action that I can't do right now, because I already used it, but will be able to do in .5 seconds as my turn ends."

Seriously, one of these is different than the others. You obviously have a lot invested in your interpretation so I am bowing out. You have brought up some valid points, but you haven't convinced me to change my table rulings, and I'm sure the opposite is true.

"A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still" -Dale Carnegie

My only wish is a moderator would change the title so the discussion would be relevant to others with the same questions in the future. "Readying Swift Actions

Grand Lodge

Devilkiller wrote:
@Grey_Mage - You can talk as a free action even when it isn't your turn. Whether you can choose to talk at a specific time which interrupts other actions or use that speech to trigger readied actions could be a matter of some debate though.

Source please? We allow table talk but actual characters aren't allowed to speak outside their turn.

Nevermind, found it. Free actions are restricted to individual turns which is what I was thinking, but short statements like you provided in your example are good.


Grey_Mage wrote:
Quote:

You have not answered how you can take a readied standard action when Ready itself is a swift action. I quoted specific rules text showing that your assertion that Ready itself is not a standard action is false.

Because readying a standard action is EXPLICITLY allowed/stated in "Da Rules". No interpretation required.

Multiple swift actions within the span of a turn are also explicitly restricted.

The exact same text in the Ready action description applies to both standard and swift actions. You appear to be making a "specific trumps general" argument here. Generally you can only take one standard action in a turn but ready specifically says you can ready and, therefore perform, another standard action. The same text applies to swift action so generally you can only take one swift action per turn regardless of what other actions you take but ready specifically says you can ready, and therefore perform, another swift action. So whatever logic you apply to standard actions to allow two you must also apply to ready because the same text applies to both.

Grey_Mage wrote:
You are using RAI to justify this, by stating a readied action is "another turn" because your own turn ended after the readied action is prepared. This converts a swift action into the equivalent of an immediate one, but relies on the interpretation that you can ready something you don't have yet(a swift action).

I'm not saying that. I have never said that. I have not in any of my posts made any reference to "another turn" that is bbgangerter and I disagree with his argument

Grey_Mage wrote:
Using the same logic, readying a move or standard action should take up the next rounds equivalent action as well, or at least have the option of being able to, except this isn't mentioned in the rule set at all, so I am let to believe this was not the intent.

You are responding to someone else's arguments and attributing them to me. My argument is that when you ready a standard, move, swift or free action that action is performed as part of the Ready standard action and ceases to become its own action. I used the example that normally casting a spell is a standard and attacking is a standard but with a touch spell the touch attack becomes part of the spell and ceases to be a separate standard action. In the same way if I ready a swift action when the Ready triggers I am able to perform the "readied action" which is now part of Ready and not an action of its own.

Grey_Mage wrote:

I ask you to direct me to any threads before that swung in your favor, because all the ones I found end with no 2 swift actions within a round even though I'm searching for outliers.

Because previous arguments have been about whether you should be able to swap a move or a standard for a swift. You cannot and should not be able to just swap out your move, or even standard action, for a swift freely.

I've already explained, however, that Readying and just swapping are entirely different things. Your response was to argue that a player could attempt to use that to abuse the rules. To which I responded that abuses of the rules don't disprove or change the rules. Many things that are perfectly legal can be exploited with undesirable results.


Grey_Mage wrote:


Player 1: "Oh, in that case, I use my standard action to ready a swift action, since some people on the forums says after I end my turn, my readied action is a new turn for me!"

I have not stated that. This is a misunderstanding of what I'm saying.

I have stated when you ready an action your CURRENT turn is over. Swift actions reset at the end of your CURRENT turn. It does not mean the readied action is its own distinct individual turn. It also means I won't get a swift action on my NEXT turn because I already used mine after the reset.

Grey_Mage wrote:


You don't get a new swift action until the beginning of your NEXT turn, something a readied action is not.

Also still wrong. You get a new readied action when your turn ENDS, not at the beginning of a turn. Otherwise you could immediate action, then on your turn still swift action, which is specifically disallowed by the rules, showing that swift actions reset at the end of your turn.

Grey_Mage wrote:


In every instance a readied action reflects something you could do now, but are choosing to do it later.

This is a fair point. It is an inferred relation so is not as strong as it could be if it were explicitly called out, but still a fair point.

Grey_Mage wrote:


I ask you to direct me to any threads before that swung in your favor, because all the ones I found end with no 2 swift actions within a round even though I'm searching for outliers.

The question then is what constitutes a round? In almost all cases (there are a couple exceptions) when talking about rounds the rules mean from a players turn to his/her next turn. That can be from the start of a turn to the start of the next turn. OR it can be from the end of a turn to the end of the next turn. In the case of swifts, because of when they reset, it has to be end of turn to end of turn.

Grand Lodge

Numarak wrote:

There are two groups debating here.

First group claim that they can ready, after performing a swift action on a given turn, another swift action, and perform it before their next turn.

The second group claims they can't perform more than a swift action on a given turn.

There is a rule that supports group 2 -under Swift Actions rules- and reads "You can, however, perform only one single swift action per turn, regardless of what other actions you take. "

I would like to see any written rule that opposes -as an exception- this mentioned rule above and give group 1 some credibility. Do not bring interpretations and opinions, we all have some of those.

EDIT: and again, although many others and myself tried to explain to you before; readying is a standard, but the readied action does not change its type; if you readied a free, is still a free when you take it, if you ready a move, is still a move when you take it, if you readied a standard, is still a standard when you take it, and last but not least, if you readied a swift, is still a swift when you take it. Nowhere in the rules says the action taken changes its type, only that you need a standard action to prepare it, which, I believe, we all here agree.

Again, sorry if this has been pointed out in the last 50 or so posts, but I keep ignoring this thread..

As you pointed out, it says turn. Not round.


I agree that RAW seems to open up the possibility of getting additional swift actions through ready, but I doubt this is RAI.

Also, I will take the opportunity to point out, that contrary to what was suggested before, AoO's do not reset on your turn, they reset per round. (Rounds are defined as a full set of the combatants turns.)
This means that, RAW, a creature can potentially take up to twice its "per round" value of AoO's between the end of its turn and the beginning of its next (provided it is not the last to act in a round).

The reason I bring this up is to demonstrate the overall fluidity of thought regarding "turn" vs "round".
RAW is very clear (in general) toward this point, but RAI very often equates the two terms which leads to certain confusions when the distinction actually matters.

51 to 100 of 165 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Questions #3646 and #3647 All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.