Because a barbarian can rage as a free action, should he be allowed to rage when being made to throw a save?
Because a barbarian can rage as a free action, should he be allowed to rage when being made to throw a save?
A free action is taken during your turn. An ability that can be used responsively on someone else's turn is an immediate action.
In 3.5 there was a feat to allow barbarians to enter rage as an immediate action, but by default, raging is something they can only do on their own turn.
I am specifically referring to Superstition(ex).
Again, a free action is taken during your turn. An ability that can be used responsively on someone else's turn is an immediate action.
According to the rules, a barbarian cannot begin a rage on somebody else's turn.
I am having trouble finding in the PRD where it mentions when you can use free actions.
I am having trouble finding in the PRD where it mentions when you can use free actions.
It doesn't really (At least not that I am aware of), it does however break free actions down into Swift and Intermediate actions, one of which is only usable on your turn the other usable at any point (but generally best used during NOT your turn).
As for allowing a barbarian to rage in response to having to make a saving throw....yeah no, that reeks of nasty, nasty Power/Meta gaming flavored cheese.
I am having trouble finding in the PRD where it mentions when you can use free actions.
It's in the same place where it mentioned when you can use standard, move, full-round, and swift actions. Namely here:
In a normal round, you can perform a standard action and a move action, or you can perform a full-round action. You can also perform one swift action and one or more free actions. You can always take a move action in place of a standard action.
The rules are clear that, by default, you can take one round worth of actions during your turn. Exceptions are called out in the rules -- immediate actions, attacks of opportunity, talking, and certain non-actions. Free actions are listed along with all of the other actions that happen on your turn.
To say it another way, we don't need the rules to spell out every action we CAN'T do when it's not our turn; that's the general rule. Instead, we need the rules to spell out every action we CAN do when it's not our turn. And they do.
I think you just might be right. This is a revelation to me I've been playing wrong for over a decade. Before the introduction of the immediate action(in the miniature handbook I think) the only why in which you could act on someone else's turn was to use a free action: speaking, casting feather fall(Feather fall is now cast as an immediate action.)
It's a shame that you can't dismiss a spell on another turn.
|
I think you just might be right. This is a revelation to me I've been playing wrong for over a decade. Before the introduction of the immediate action(in the miniature handbook I think) the only why in which you could act on someone else's turn was to use a free action: speaking, casting feather fall(Feather fall is now cast as an immediate action.)
It's a shame that you can't dismiss a spell on another turn.
dismissing a spell is a standard action. And you can dismiss on someone elses turn, you just gotta delay/ready your action to do it
dismissing a spell is a standard action. And you can dismiss on someone elses turn, you just gotta delay/ready your action to do it
sorry I meant
Cease Concentration on Spell
Free Action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free, as decided by the GM.
Swift Action: A swift action consumes a very small amount of time, but represents a larger expenditure of effort and energy than a free action. You can perform only a single swift action per turn.
Immediate Action: An immediate action is very similar to a swift action, but can be performed at any time—even if it's not your turn.
Not an Action: Some activities are so minor that they are not even considered free actions. They literally don't take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else, such as nocking an arrow as part of an attack with a bow.
-So unless someone held an action to interupt the barbarians charge with a will save, no, he can't rage in response to a spell without a feat that lets him rage as an immediate action. There were such feats in 3.5 i don't know if any made it into pathfinder.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/combat.html#immediate-action
Thank you all.
I was bestowing a curse on one of my players when he said he rages "in response"(we also play a lot of magic.)
I tried to explain to him that you can't do things "in response" in pathfinder but, I like to make sure, so I told him I would look it up.
It might be surprising that I've been playing for years with free actions being usable on other peoples turns. It was never a problem. its going to take some adjusting.
Things were a little murkier in 3e. Originally the barbarian's class description specifically said you can't rage on someone else's turn, but it appears that that was removed in 3.5 (probably because the implicit limitations on actions had become more clear).
Personally? I don't think letting people rage on other people's turn would be a real problem, provided that you do not allow items or abilities which would make barbarians immune to fatigue (which would let them 'rage on, rage off' with no consequences). Also, it should count as a whole round of rage (i.e, once the player's real turn starts, he/she will have already used up 1 round of rage, even though he never got the bonuses while attacking last turn).
Once your player finds out how things work, he or she will probably just start raging earlier and more often to be safe; letting players rage in response to a spell would just result in them being more frugal, I think, and won't upset the game in any real way.
A lot of stuff may trip him up if he is allowed rage as an immediate action. It would count against his rounds of rage for the day, he would be fatigued afterwards, and don't forget that his AC will also go down when he is raging, and he can't use any INT based skills. Also, how did the barb know the guy was casting a spell on him? I think he'd need spell craft to know for sure. Otherwise, the barb might rage at the wrong times, like when the enemy cleric casts cure light on himself.