|
I have a bunch of little observations (none of which probably merit their own threads) that I'll post together here. PLEASE add and/or comment:
Standard Actions
• Casting on the Defensive (p137) says it doesn't provoke an AoO, that you have to make a Spellcraft check, etc. What it doesn't say is what you get. I assume you get the same +2 to AC you get with fighting defensively, but - as written - the text doesn't actually say this.
EDIT - I just read another thread all about defensive casting; I guess you don't get the +2 AC. Count me with those who think you probably should.
• Touch Spells in Combat (p137) - If you cast a spell with range = touch (usually 1 standard action), you can't actually touch someone to discharge it (also 1 standard action) until the next round. Seems weird. Maybe a) 'Discharging a touch spell' ought to be a move-equivalent action so you can both cast and touch in the same round, or b) make it so you can both cast a touch spell and discharge it as a Full-Round Action.
My only real new idea was the whole Second Strike thing I suggested in this thread, but that didn't seem to interest anyone... se la vi.
Move Actions
• Move (p138)
- A little table with the non-standard modes (climbing and swimming = 1/4 speed) might make it easier to reference than just reading the text.
- I see Accelerated Climbing - 1/2 speed rather than 1/4 speed at -5 to skill check. What about an Accelerated Swimming that works the same way?
- Crawling - Is one considered Prone while crawling? If so, this would be a good place to explicitly say so.
• Direct or Redirect a Spell (p138)
If concentrating to maintain a spell is a standard action, why is directing or redirecting it just a move action? Seems like this ought to be a standard action too.
• Draw or Sheathe a Weapon (p138)
If with a +1 BAB one can draw a weapon as part of move action, why not allow someone with a +1 BAB to sheathe a weapon as part of a move action? Less need to drop weapons and you could situations where the bad a** dude takes a double move to walk toward an enemy, sheathing his bow with the first move and drawing his sword with the second, never stopping and never taking his eyes off the enemy's face the whole time. The Quick Draw feat would allow you to sheathe a weapon as a free action and hide a weapon as a move action (very handy when you are walking into a crowd after stabbing someone in the back).
• How in the world do Open/Close a Door and Mount/Dismount a Horse not provoke AoOs if you do that in combat? If you change these to 'yes' they draw AoOs and move Direct/Redirect Spells to standard actions as suggested above, that pretty much means that all move-equivalent actions other than drawing a weapon and readying a shield provoke AoOs; pretty clean and easy to remember.
Full-Round Actions
All good. I'd actually like to see more spells that have a casting time of 1 round rather than just 1 standard action. It would give other folks a chance to disrupt them with a regular attack (rather than just with readied actions and AoOs as it stands now).
- Why doesn't Extinguishing Flames provoke an AoOs?
Swift Actions
Totally make sense, although the sentence "You can take a swift action any time you would normally be allowed to take a free action," (p141) confuses me. I don't see what the two have to do with each other.
Immediate Actions
Again, clear. A swift action you can take any time, not just on your initiative. Cool.
Free Actions
"Free actions don't take any time at all, though there may be limits to the number of free actions you can perform in a turn," (p140). Then why not just make them swift or immediate actions? Cease Concentration on a Spell, Drop an Item, Drop Prone all have to happen on your turn anyway. Are you really going to do more than one of these things in a 6-second span? And if you are, shouldn't it start to eat into you movement? Speaking is the only any-time free action; why not just make it immediate? I searched for "free action" in the Beta and here's more or less what I came up with:
- barbarians entering or leaving rage
- druids handling their animal companion
- paladins granting their aura of justice/smite evil
- rangers choosing quarry
- rogues standing up from prone
- directing a warhorse in combat
- fast mount/dismount
- Quick Drawing a weapon or Rapid Reloading a light/hand crossbow
- drawing ammunition
- drawing spell components
- assuming another shape with the Shapechange spell
- activation Boots of Speed
- storing or retrieving items from Gloves of Storing
I don't see making any of these swift actions a problem. Seriously, we're talking about something you are doing in under 6 seconds in addition to moving 30 feet and attacking someone. The only one I can see causing a problem is drawing ammo/spell components because someone shooting 4 arrows per turn can't have 4 swift actions to draw them all, but on p134 the text describes "Not an Action" as things that "are considered an inherent part of doing something else." Standing up from prone and guiding a warhorse are additional things you're trying to pull off. Drawing and arrow or a spell component is just part of the process and doesn't need an action of it's own. Seriously, what would be the problem (other than backwards compatibility) with getting rid of free actions? Free is cool, but you don't get nothin' for nothin' in this life.
I see Accelerated Climbing - 1/2 speed rather than 1/4 speed at -5 to skill check. What about an Accelerated Swimming that works the same way?
I think you can explain accelerated climbing as someone climbing as fast as they can, paying less attention to safe handholds and footholds etc, but in the case of swimming, its not like you can trade safety for speed, as there really isn't much of a risk to swimming faster, other than a risk of tiring yourself out sooner.
Crawling - Is one considered Prone while crawling? If so, this would be a good place to explicitly say so.
Agreed.
Direct or Redirect a Spell (p138)
If concentrating to maintain a spell is a standard action, why is directing or redirecting it just a move action? Seems like this ought to be a standard action too.
Meh.
Draw or Sheathe a Weapon (p138)
If with a +1 BAB one can draw a weapon as part of move action, why not allow someone with a +1 BAB to sheathe a weapon as part of a move action? Less need to drop weapons and you could situations where the bad a** dude takes a double move to walk toward an enemy, sheathing his bow with the first move and drawing his sword with the second, never stopping and never taking his eyes off the enemy's face the whole time. The Quick Draw feat would allow you to sheathe a weapon as a free action and hide a weapon as a move action (very handy when you are walking into a crowd after stabbing someone in the back).
Having to spend actions to draw and sheathe a weapon is kinda anti-climactic if you ask me anyway. Seems like it should just happen as a result of combat and maybe we sometimes make up rules were they don't need to be.
How in the world do Open/Close a Door and Mount/Dismount a Horse not provoke AoOs if you do that in combat? If you change these to 'yes' they draw AoOs and move Direct/Redirect Spells to standard actions as suggested above, that pretty much means that all move-equivalent actions other than drawing a weapon and readying a shield provoke AoOs; pretty clean and easy to remember.
I have changed opening and closing doors to Swift (or in 4E terms, "Minor") actions that can be done in the middle of normal movement. Therefore, you don't get the situation where the barbarian with 60' move runs 10' to a door, opens it, and stops, because he has used 2 move actions. In my rules, the barbarian runs 10', spends a Swift (minor) action to open the door, then moves an additional 50' as the remainder of his normal single move. Had he stopped to close the door that would have required an additional Swift (minor) action, which he only has one per round unless he burns his second move action to close the door.
I'd actually like to see more spells that have a casting time of 1 round rather than just 1 standard action. It would give other folks a chance to disrupt them with a regular attack (rather than just with readied actions and AoOs as it stands now).
I couldn't agree more. I'd like everyone who still has access to a 1E Player's Handbook to open up to the spells section and take a gander at the casting time of the spells. You will see that probably at least 50% took at least a round to cast. This by itself would go a long way to increasing the frequency that spellcasters would find their spells disrupted.
So, as a popular radio DJ here in Detroit is fond of saying "Those are my thoughts, not yours!"
|
|
Thanks.
I see Accelerated Climbing - 1/2 speed rather than 1/4 speed at -5 to skill check. What about an Accelerated Swimming that works the same way?I think you can explain accelerated climbing as someone climbing as fast as they can, paying less attention to safe handholds and footholds etc, but in the case of swimming, its not like you can trade safety for speed, as there really isn't much of a risk to swimming faster, other than a risk of tiring yourself out sooner.
Fair enough. I often look for mistakes and missing stuff by asking "If it happens in one case, why not in the other." Sometime I find holes, sometimes not.
Crawling - Is one considered Prone while crawling? If so, this would be a good place to explicitly say so.Agreed.
I'll post this in the errata thread.
Meh.Direct or Redirect a Spell (p138)
If concentrating to maintain a spell is a standard action, why is directing or redirecting it just a move action? Seems like this ought to be a standard action too.
Really? Not particularly exciting, but I was looking to standardize a few things.
Having to spend actions to draw and sheathe a weapon is kinda anti-climactic if you ask me anyway. Seems like it should just happen as a result of combat and maybe we sometimes make up rules were they don't need to be.Draw or Sheathe a Weapon (p138)
If with a +1 BAB one can draw a weapon as part of move action, why not allow someone with a +1 BAB to sheathe a weapon as part of a move action? ...
Drawing a weapon comes into play when characters first enter combat, especial unexpectedly, and when characters want to change weapons during combat. Similarly, sheathing a weapon matters when the choice is between that (a move action) or dropping it (a free action). But dropping it makes it MUCH harder to use it again in the same combat. Or you could lose it completely if fighting in water or mud or something. So, a bit anti-climactic, maybe, but also part of a tactical decision that matters when time is short.
|
|
I have changed opening and closing doors to Swift (or in 4E terms, "Minor") actions that can be done in the middle of normal movement. Therefore, you don't get the situation where the barbarian with 60' move runs 10' to a door, opens it, and stops, because he has used 2 move actions. In my rules, the barbarian runs 10', spends a Swift (minor) action to open the door, then moves an additional 50' as the remainder of his normal single move. Had he stopped to close the door that would have required an additional Swift (minor) action, which he only has one per round unless he burns his second move action to close the door.
Seems like a reasonable change. I can see opening a door as a move or a swift action, but I like the way that making a swift action allows you to do it once, or twice if you convert a move to a second swift action. (Can you do that - down-grade a move to a swift - in 3.5/Pathfinder? It's one of the rules I like a lot from 4E.)
Second question: Can swift actions normally occur in the middle of move actions? I'm not disagreeing with it - it make perfect sense - but I'm curious if it's a regular part of the rules and if other swifts can do the same thing? Hmmm ... something to look into ...
I just wanted to support your way of thinking for all you comments. My stronger feels are contained below.
Move Actions
• Move (p138)
- A little table with the non-standard modes (climbing and swimming = 1/4 speed) might make it easier to reference than just reading the text.
I second this. I like tables.
Free Actions
"Free actions don't take any time at all, though there may be limits to the number of free actions you can perform in a turn," ....I don't see making any of these swift actions a problem.
In general, I think we need to figure out how Swift Actions fit in. They fill the 'hole' between Move and Free. People talk about it, even the designers, like it is a full fledge part of the system yet we still only have one example in the rules. It seems obvious to me that all Move and Free Actions should be evaluated to become Swift Actions instead.
I have changed opening and closing doors to Swift (or in 4E terms, "Minor") actions that can be done in the middle of normal movement.
Seems like a reasonable change. I can see opening a door as a move or a swift action, but I like the way that making a swift action allows you to do it once, or twice if you convert a move to a second swift action. (Can you do that - down-grade a move to a swift - in 3.5/Pathfinder? It's one of the rules I like a lot from 4E.)
Second question: Can swift actions normally occur in the middle of move actions? I'm not disagreeing with it - it make perfect sense - but I'm curious if it's a regular part of the rules and if other swifts can do the same thing? Hmmm ... something to look into ...
Technically, you can only do one Swift Action per round. So you can not down-grade a Move to get another Swift Action. I think people use common sense to believe that Swift Actions can be substituted for a Move Action and only Quickened Spells have the one per round limitation. The problem is that a Quickened Spell is our only example of a Swift Action.
You also can not use a Swift Action 'in the middle' of a Move Action. However, the Draw Weapon Action leads people to think that 'some things' can be done simultaneously as a Move. And I argue that all Swift Actions should be considered for having that characteristic.
People are probably house ruling all sorts of stuff when it comes to Swift Actions. I wish they would refine the PfRPG Actions in Combat rules.
|
|
Readying an action is a standard action, but some people are loathe to do it because, if your enemy doesn't do what you've readied for, your action is wasted. Is there any way offer a consolation prize something you can do if you don't get to use your readied action?
Maybe one swift action if nobody triggers you?
Maybe you have the option of coming out of readiness at any time, changing your place in the initiative order [Wait, can't you already be do this?].
Maybe you can ready yourself for two conditions to make it more likely one of them will happen. Or a number of triggers = Wis or Dex modifier.
Maybe you can ready for a trigger but say "And if that doesn't happen ..." (within logical limits, of course). Ex: I cover the door with my crossbow and shoot the first person who comes through. And if no one comes does, I turn and shoot the nearest kobold." I guess you'd need an "until," as in "I cover the door with my crossbow and shoot the first person who comes through until Mongo here attacks. Then I turn and shoot the nearest kobold."
Actually, that might work well. Merge Ready with Delay. Ready becomes what you do while you delay.
[The reason why I'm concerned with Ready right now is it seems to be a major impediment to Counterspelling, which has come up several times in the Magic forum. The 'nobody wants to Ready an Action and waste their turn' problems keeps coming up, but I see that as more a problem with Reading Actions than COunterspelling.]
That sounds great, Mosaic.
I agree it's overly penalizing to lose out completely.
One should be able to get in a different Standard Action if the Trigger doesn't occur.
And re: the Swift Action thing, I would think Barbarians for one would prefer as few things as possible are classed as Swift Actions: Otherwise, they would tend to interfere with Rage Power usage.
|
|
Okay, after working in the Magic forum on Counterspelling, I came up with an idea...
Right now, Readying an action is a standard action. You Ready and if your conditions are met, your action is triggered. If not, your whole standard action is wasted.
What if Readying an action were just a swift action? "Readying" would describe the process of getting ready, not the getting ready and doing it, as it does now. If your conditions are met, you get to perform your standard action at that time, most likely interrupting your opponents action. But the benefit of making Readying just a swift action are that 1) if your conditions are never met, you can still take your standard action and have only wasted a swift action, and 2) you could actually choose to abandon the readied action if it is no longer appropriate and still get a standard action.
That's where it ties back into Counterspelling. You ready an action to identify an opponent's spell if she casts one. So she does and you identify it [free action]. If Readying were just a swift action, you would still have an available standard action and could still make the decision to use one of your spells to counterspell, or to just cast a spell (or attack).
Under this model, Readying an action is a lot like Delaying. With Delaying you voluntarily bump yourself later in the initiative order (for free; it's like a free action or a non-action). With Readying you would have the opportunity to interrupt an opponent at the cost of your swift action. It would probably be more clear to call it "Readying an Interrupt Action" than just "Readying an Action." Once the interrupt occurs, you can still make a choice about what to do; the Readying and the swift action cost are for the opportunity to interrupt, not to pre-declare any particular action at that point. And if you decide not to take advantage of it at that point, or you can't because the opponent never triggers, then you basically paid a swift action to Delay - a fair cost-to-benefit gamble and not a horrible penalty even if it doesn't work for you.
This would make Readying actions MUCH more viable, especially Counterspelling, which should cost more than an immediate action but less than a standard action, and shouldn't be a total loss if your opponent decides not to cast a spell.
...It sounds nice, but I think the point of Readied Actions' Standard Action was so that Full Attacks COULDN'T be used as "Interrupts". Also, it would seriously interfere with Barbarian Rage Powers, and ANY Class who depends on Swift Actions. (Most Classes DON'T have much use for them, certainly not as a Core Ability. Doing so just picks on the Classes who DO use them alot.)
Honestly, I really prefer the Standard Action cost for Ready:
It prevents Full Attack Interrupts/ It allows Standard Attack/Charges;
It disallows Top-2 Spell Levels/ It allows lower level Spells (if that adopted);
Over-all, in exchange for the "precision" of Interruptability, you give up being able to go "all out".
And it applies reasonably equally to all Classes (with the Casting Time change). Seems OK to me.
I'd honestly like it better if it were clarified, so that when the Readied Action is triggered (or doesn't happen),
you can use the remaining Swift and Standard Actions (either as Move or Attack or Casting) AT THAT TIME.
The current set-up forces you to use them IMMEDIATELY or also declare them as Readied (meaning you lose them if trigger doesn't occur). I think you should be able to use them later (when trigger occurs/ or after it doesn't occur), of course these actions DO NOT Interrupt other characters'. There's still a penalty from the loss of the Full-Round Action, precluding Full Attack or Full-Round Casting Time Spells.
That seems balanced IMHO: it doesn't completely use up your entire Rounds' Actions,
but it does affect what you can do, because you were focused on being "Readied" vs. another Opponent.
Let's say you Ready a Charge, but the trigger doesn't occur. You should still have a Standard Action and a Swift Action left. Since you didn't actually Charge (& Attack), it seems like you SHOULD be able to make a Standard ATTACK Action (assuming you have opponents in Reach). This actually requires a small conceptual change, in that each Round has two potential Standard Actions, & you are limited to one Standard Attack Action per round (or Full-Round Attack), but since the Ready Action didn't actually become an Attack Action (untyped Standard Action->Standard Attack), you should still be able to make a Standard Attack.
|
|
...It sounds nice, but I think the point of Readied Actions' Standard Action was so that Full Attacks COULDN'T be used as "Interrupts". Also, it would seriously interfere with Barbarian Rage Powers, and ANY Class who depends on Swift Actions. (Most Classes DON'T have much use for them, certainly not as a Core Ability. Doing so just picks on the Classes who DO use them alot.)
Damn, you are absolutely correct on both of these.
What about counting it as a move action? Getting ready for something is kinda' like moving. That way you couldn't take any full-round actions but could still attack [standard] or move [swapping a move for a standard, a little 4E, but think of it as 1/2 a double move].
I'd honestly like it better if it were clarified, so that when the Readied Action is triggered (or doesn't happen), you can use the remaining Swift and Standard Actions (either as Move or Attack or Casting) AT THAT TIME. The current set-up forces you to use them IMMEDIATELY or also declare them as Readied (meaning you lose them if trigger doesn't occur).
Please clarify. What's the difference between using a Readied Action at the time it's triggered and "immediately"?
Let's say you Ready a Charge, but the trigger doesn't occur. You should still have a Standard Action and a Swift Action left. Since you didn't actually Charge (& Attack), it seems like you SHOULD be able to make a Standard ATTACK Action. This actually requires a small conceptual change, in that each Round has two potential Standard Actions...
I agree with everything except the last sentence. That framework would make a lot of sense - two moves, two attacks, or one of each - but would really screw with a lot of basic assumptions of the game (principally one attack per round until you get iterative attacks.)
What about counting it as a move action? Getting ready for something is kinda' like moving. That way you couldn't take any full-round actions but could still attack [standard] or move [swapping a move for a standard, a little 4E, but think of it as 1/2 a double move].
I think you're a bit too hung up on making it count as it's own distinct Action within the Action Economy, rather than just see it as FORCING a "least efficient" scenario (2 Standard Actions) which removes options (Full Attack/ Full Round Spells).
Please clarify. What's the difference between using a Readied Action at the time it's triggered and "immediately"?
I'd honestly like it better if it were clarified, so that when the Readied Action is triggered (or doesn't happen),
you can use the remaining Swift and Standard Actions (either as Move or Attack or Casting) AT THAT TIME.
The current set-up forces you to use them IMMEDIATELY or also declare them as Readied (meaning you lose them if trigger doesn't occur). I think you should be able to use them later (when trigger occurs/ or after it doesn't occur), of course these actions DO NOT Interrupt other characters'.
The rules allow you to Ready Standard Actions, Move Actions, or Swift Actions, and presumably you could do all 3 if you want. What I'm proposing is that if a Character doesn't want to use the their NON-READIED ACTIONS on their regular Init, they can in effect DELAY those Actions, to a time when they would be better to use.
I agree with everything except the last sentence. That framework would make a lot of sense - two moves, two attacks, or one of each - but would really screw with a lot of basic assumptions of the game (principally one attack per round until you get iterative attacks.)
Re-read that sentence :-)
This actually requires a small conceptual change, in that each Round has two potential Standard Actfions, & you are limited to one Standard Attack Action per round (or Full-Round Attack), but since the Ready Action didn't actually become an Attack Action (untyped Standard Action->Standard Attack), you should still be able to make a Standard Attack.
Yeah, I'm not really proposing such a big change as two Standard Attacks.
There is the possibility that you could Ready Action vs. TWO different Spellcasters, except that once one triggers your Attack Action, you no longer have any more Attack Actions (though you could "Partial Charge" w/o Attack) ...???(this might be a ramification from having "2 Standard Actions" which are "converted" to Attack/Move/Cast Actions when taken, which enables unique usages like my "Dual Trigger" scenario, while still subject to the "1 Standard Attack" limit.)
My group has posed these questions on readied actions, and this is what I asked them: "How long are you going to wait?" Keep in mind that the round/init turns is an abstraction put in to give everyone a "turn". If I give up my "turn" to wait for someone to come through a door, how long is too long before I lost my chance act in that (abstract) round?
When counting intiative turns, a player can argue that, well, no one came through the door, so now I should be able to do something, right? My counter is no you shouldnt, you waited for something to happen, it didnt happen, and the flow of combat passed you by for this round.
|
Actually, a Readied Action as a Swift Action doesn't seem too bad; just make it tactically different in that a character that has a Readied action that is not "triggered" can only take a single standard action if the Readied Action is not used.
As for the Barabarian issue. I run a lot of Barbarians. I have never readied an action in the same round as I have raged. Making Roused Anger into a Free Action would help move that along though.
Good point Old Guy, it's always important the ultimate reference be what the CHARACTERS' perspective is, not the Players'.
That said, I'd prefer if it were a bit clearer that you could DELAY some actions while READYING others. (Since there happens to be two specific kinds of "Waiting" in D&D) That basically gives characters an 'insurance policy' if their Ready Trigger doesn't occur. The current wording is NOT clear whether this is allowed or disallowed (I would allow it, myself.)
I was re-reading the wording of Ready Action,
Readying is a standard action. It does not provoke an attack of opportunity (though the action that you ready might do so). You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action.
The wording there could be cleared up, since there's really two readings possible there:
In either case, I'd prefer "2 Standard Actions per Round" (or Full Round Action), with the Caviat that you can make only one Standard Attack/Standard Spellcasting per round - the same 'normal' functionality as currently... But it seems more rational than the current "1 Standard Action and 1 Move Action per Round, but you can substitute a Move Action for a Standard Action".
Like I said, it doesn't diverge from the current "normal" functioning (1 Standard Attack/Casting + 1 Move/Round),
But here's an example where it actually makes a difference:
If a PC Readies an Attack and Delays the rest of their actions, and the Trigger doesn't happen,
they could still take a Standard Attack, since they haven't taken a Standard Attack yet in their Turn (just an untyped Standard ACTION). This just seems more consistent with the 3.x convention of NOT "declaring" actions before you take them.
A fair enough analysis Quandary. Perhaps the readying action can be a swift action? Allowing a player to move into position, then ready an attack (using the "when it comes through the door" example). I am still of the opinion that if you wait too long, you miss out, but I'm not set on that. More or less, I'd make a call based on what exactly the situation is.
|
|
As for the Barabarian issue. I run a lot of Barbarians. I have never readied an action in the same round as I have raged. Making Roused Anger into a Free Action would help move that along though.
Holding an action until just the right moment doesn't exactly seem like something a person who is raging would do anyway. Berserk and patient are kinda' going in opposite directions.
|
|
What about counting it as a move action? Getting ready for something is kinda' like moving. That way you couldn't take any full-round actions but could still attack [standard] or move [swapping a move for a standard, a little 4E, but think of it as 1/2 a double move].I think you're a bit too hung up on making it count as it's own distinct Action within the Action Economy, rather than just see it as FORCING a "least efficient" scenario (2 Standard Actions) which removes options (Full Attack/ Full Round Spells).
:) I think making Ready it's own distinct action would clean up the options a lot. I get you're meaning now about the quasi 2 standards actions but it still seems like kind of a difficult thing to explain, especially to someone who's not a rules expert.
If Ready were a move action, it would fit cleanly into the Action economy (great term, btw). You Ready your action [a move action] and ... wait. When your 'ready' triggers, you can decide what standard action to take. Maybe you attack or cast a spell. Maybe you move out of there. You can't full attack, you can't run, but you can still do something meaningful and you've still got choices. You've also still got your swift action, and if you didn't move, you can still take a 5' step (unless you took it before you Readied). If your action never triggers, you can bail out at any time and have just wasted a move action to get a Delay (which is normally free). A penalty for the opportunity to interrupt someone, but not a horrible one.
You've convinced be that it shouldn't be a swift action (because there needs to be some penalty if your 'ready' doesn't trigger, and the loss of a swift action probably isn't steep enough), but I still think making Ready it's own action is a cleaner model.
|
|
I like the perspective given by Mosaic on the 'why' that it should be a Move action. A character can use a Readied action to use any of the other types of actions, including Move. But Move is the only action allowed to be used twice in any given round, and without penalty. Extra attacks granted by BAB all occur as part of the Attack action, with the penalty being movement (aside the 5 foot step).
I won't argue it any further, and agree the Move Action model is as viable as my suggestion.
(They pretty much are very equivalent, and maybe the Move Action cost is simpler to explain,
or at least fits into the current wonkiness of D&D/3.5 the best :-) )
That said, I'm glad along the way I discovered the problematic wording of Ready Action itself:
Readying is a standard action. It does not provoke an attack of opportunity (though the action that you ready might do so). You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action.The wording there could be cleared up, since there's really two readings possible there:
The Readied action (Standard/Move/Swift/Free) is "part" of the Ready Action, i.e. it doesn't count towards your remaining Action Economy.
The Readied Action (Standard/Move/Swift/Free) must be 'paid for' from your normal Action Economy, not as "part" of the Ready Action, which consumes it's own Standard Action. The only problem with that is... A Readied Standard Action uses TWO Standard Actions!
Changing Ready Action to a Move Action removes the Second Interpretation's problem (2 Standard Actions).
Probably the simplest change.I WOULD still like to see DELAY Action clarified.
(the current rules aren't clear as to whether you can Delay individual actions)
I think allowing it is fine, given your Initiative would be delayed, removing Ready (Interrupt) opportunities.
It's really not such a big part of the game,
but the current rules are so vague as to not provide guidance one way or the other.
I have a bunch of little observations (none of which probably merit their own threads) that I'll post together here. PLEASE add and/or comment:
Standard Actions
• Casting on the Defensive (p137) says it doesn't provoke an AoO, that you have to make a Spellcraft check, etc. What it doesn't say is what you get. I assume you get the same +2 to AC you get with fighting defensively, but - as written - the text doesn't actually say this.EDIT - I just read another thread all about defensive casting; I guess you don't get the +2 AC. Count me with those who think you probably should.
• Touch Spells in Combat (p137) - If you cast a spell with range = touch (usually 1 standard action), you can't actually touch someone to discharge it (also 1 standard action) until the next round. Seems weird. Maybe a) 'Discharging a touch spell' ought to be a move-equivalent action so you can both cast and touch in the same round, or b) make it so you can both cast a touch spell and discharge it as a Full-Round Action.
My only real new idea was the whole Second Strike thing I suggested in this thread, but that didn't seem to interest anyone... se la vi.
Move Actions
• Move (p138)
- A little table with the non-standard modes (climbing and swimming = 1/4 speed) might make it easier to reference than just reading the text.
- I see Accelerated Climbing - 1/2 speed rather than 1/4 speed at -5 to skill check. What about an Accelerated Swimming that works the same way?
- Crawling - Is one considered Prone while crawling? If so, this would be a good place to explicitly say so.• Direct or Redirect a Spell (p138)
If concentrating to maintain a spell is a standard action, why is directing or redirecting it just a move action? Seems like this ought to be a standard action too.• Draw or Sheathe a Weapon (p138)
If with a +1 BAB one can draw a weapon as part of move...
To respond to Mosaic’s first two points:
1) Casting on the Defensive. This lets you cast the spell with no attack of opportunity, it has nothing to do with AC. The cost of this is the concentration check.
2) Touch Spells in Combat. You can use it in the same round that you cast the spell. The touch attack is included in the standard action required to cast the spell. You get to cast and attack. What’s more, you can cast then move then do the touch attack. Its in PFRPG under Combat, Actions in Combat, Cast a Spell, Touch Spells in Combat (page 137).