ultimate magic, pg 132 - "avoid the temptation to invent spells with a casting time of '1 move action,' '1 swift action,' or '1 immediate action,' as that's just a cheesy way for spell casters to be able to cast two spells in a round, and there's already a mechanism for that: the Quicken Spell feat."
i can agree on the move action. swift action, maybe (though if someone wants to spend the time and resources to design a single spell with that functionality rather than pick up quicken spell, i don't see a problem with that, especially if it's a spontaneous caster who's losing a spell known slot as a result).
but immediate actions? how is that cheesy? immediate action defensive spells add fluidity to combat, and provide an alternative to long duration defensive buffs. also, how does Quicken Spell in ANY way provide a mechanism that allows for immediate actions?
pretentious, inaccurate wording aside, this is just bad design advice. physical based characters have several options for immediate actions. casters should be no different.
throwing up a defense in a response to an attack isn't cheesy, it's a classic part of combat.
throwing up a defense in a response to an attack isn't cheesy, it's a classic part of combat.
I can't think of any immediate action spells. If they are such a classic part of combat, you'd think there would be more of them. Vaguely patronizing wording of that advice aside, if a player presented a custom spell with a casting time of an immediate action, all sorts of warning bells would be going off. Maybe there's a few situations where it could make sense... but I can't think of any off the top of my head.
What classic parts of combat am I missing? And what are all the immediate actions that physical-based characters have access to?
Immediate actions are swift actions.... That's all we need (the rest is "that can be cast when it's not your turn").
You are still getting two spells.
Though I do think that some immediate spells are okay. Featherfall is an immediate action spell. Others I would consider OK would be something that only works for one turn. You put it up quickly, it defends you against something, it goes away again.
It shouldn't be overdone, though. Let's say you have a spell you can throw up that makes you immune to one element for one turn (or gives you resistance). You throw it up, defend against a fireball, and it goes away. Unless the enemy has more fire spells (and gets to live to use them), that basically neutralised the poor sucker's offensive.
Stuff that boosts your AC for a short while is OK. He can just hit you again, and you'll have to expend more of your emergency defence because you still didn't manage to get to safety.
That's what those immediate spells should be about: Emergency defences. They're for spellcasters who didn't have the foresight to prepare properly, so they'll have to blow their slots on short-term emergency magic to tide them over a little bit. Shouldn't be even nearly as good as the normal magic, since preparation should be rewarded.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting fact: the spell cold ice blast form the very same book goes directly against this design principle. Functionally, the spell is identical to a quickened cone of cold, in fact it is even better as it has no components whatsoever. And it's outrageously "cheap", being a 6th-level spell only, when the quickened cone of cold would be 9th level. And on top of that, it's available to clerics. For the first time I'm wondering, what were they thinking?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting fact: the spell cold ice blast form the very same book goes directly against this design principle. Functionally, the spell is identical to a quickened cone of cold, in fact it is even better as it has no components whatsoever. And it's outrageously "cheap", being a 6th-level spell only, when the quickened cone of cold would be 9th level. And on top of that, it's available to clerics. For the first time I'm wondering, what were they thinking?
Yeah, that has been discussed at length on boards. Some people think Cone of Cold is outrageously bad anyway so its not a big deal, others don't like as it goes against design principles. Sean Reynolds said that they will be looking at that spell because most likely it's not written as it should be.
Mastering magic is imo the best chapter of Ultimate Magic which is not that great book really. I am under the impression that Designing Spells under chapter 2 was written by someone who doesn't have the best grasp on spells.
Some controversial and/or redundant suggestions include:
*It doesn't really matter what school spell belongs too. Even citing that conjurations should deal the same damage as evocations. Very simplistic approach, which I don't like at all.
*Saying that Burning Hands is better than Sleep because it affects more squares.
*Glorification of Magic Missile as the best 1st level spell. The game has changed a lot since magic missile was staple fire and forget spell.
*Claiming that fireball deals large amounts of damage and that gaining that spell changes paradigm of the game.
*Referencing traditional kill spells like they didn't get changed. According to UM, Finger of Death, Slay Living and Disintegrate kill creatures outright.
Immediate actions are swift actions.... That's all we need (the rest is "that can be cast when it's not your turn").
You are still getting two spells.
Though I do think that some immediate spells are okay. Featherfall is an immediate action spell. Others I would consider OK would be something that only works for one turn. You put it up quickly, it defends you against something, it goes away again.
It shouldn't be overdone, though. Let's say you have a spell you can throw up that makes you immune to one element for one turn (or gives you resistance). You throw it up, defend against a fireball, and it goes away. Unless the enemy has more fire spells (and gets to live to use them), that basically neutralised the poor sucker's offensive.
Stuff that boosts your AC for a short while is OK. He can just hit you again, and you'll have to expend more of your emergency defence because you still didn't manage to get to safety.
That's what those immediate spells should be about: Emergency defences. They're for spellcasters who didn't have the foresight to prepare properly, so they'll have to blow their slots on short-term emergency magic to tide them over a little bit. Shouldn't be even nearly as good as the normal magic, since preparation should be rewarded.
I like the idea that immediate action defense spells go away as quickly as they are brought up. Unfortunately, and as evidenced in late edition 3.5 spells, this has rarely been the case.
Even in Pathfinder, we find a cheesy immediate action spell. I'm not talking about Cold Ice Strike either. In the Cheliax Pathfinder Companion there exists Emergency Force Sphere, which is an immediate action spell that brings up a hemispherical Wall of Force for 1 rd/caster level (centered on the caster). The stated purpose was to protect the caster from avalanche style cave-ins or rockslides. The actual use is as a force effect that breaks line of effect from just about everything. With a 4th level spell. Argh.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gallant Inspiration is an immediate action spell that grants +2d4 to one roll.
Even in Pathfinder, we find a cheesy immediate action spell. I'm not talking about Cold Ice Strike either. In the Cheliax Pathfinder Companion there exists Emergency Force Sphere, which is an immediate action spell that brings up a hemispherical Wall of Force for 1 rd/caster level (centered on the caster). The stated purpose was to protect the caster from avalanche style cave-ins or rockslides. The actual use is as a force effect that breaks line of effect from just about everything. With a 4th level spell. Argh.
You missed some stuff -- Resilient Sphere is the spell emergency force sphere is based off of.
Resilient sphere protects you from gas and attacks from below -- emergency force sphere doesn't. Resilient Sphere is cast at range, and can be used on your allies in addition to being bigger and lasting longer.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I read that paragraph as "avoid making spells with swift/ immediate/ move casting times unless you have a really good reason to make it that way". Feather Fall is a perfect example of a really good reason.
The cheese enters the picture when a player makes swift equivalents for a bunch of spells to avoid taking the Quicken Spell feat.
|
ultimate magic, pg 132 - "avoid the temptation to invent spells with a casting time of '1 move action,' '1 swift action,' or '1 immediate action,' as that's just a cheesy way for spell casters to be able to cast two spells in a round, and there's already a mechanism for that: the Quicken Spell feat."
but immediate actions? how is that cheesy? immediate action defensive spells add fluidity to combat, and provide an alternative to long duration defensive buffs. also, how does Quicken Spell in ANY way provide a mechanism that allows for immediate actions?
Quicken doesn't provide that mechanism, nor does the passage say that it does. It says that there is already a mechanism for casting two spells in one round. That is true.
If you want to argue that immediate action spells result in a type of combat that you like, that's fine. I haven't yet been able to read Ultimate Magic (gotta love a distribution system that has the book unavailable, nor even ordered, in a county of over 1 million people, but I digress). But, from the quote above, it sounds like the designers are suggesting that it is easy to overdue, and that they are recommending a course of action that uses swift and immediate actions with more focus on non-spell activity.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Even in Pathfinder, we find a cheesy immediate action spell. I'm not talking about Cold Ice Strike either. In the Cheliax Pathfinder Companion there exists Emergency Force Sphere, which is an immediate action spell that brings up a hemispherical Wall of Force for 1 rd/caster level (centered on the caster). The stated purpose was to protect the caster from avalanche style cave-ins or rockslides. The actual use is as a force effect that breaks line of effect from just about everything. With a 4th level spell. Argh.You missed some stuff -- Resilient Sphere is the spell emergency force sphere is based off of.
Resilient sphere protects you from gas and attacks from below -- emergency force sphere doesn't. Resilient Sphere is cast at range, and can be used on your allies in addition to being bigger and lasting longer.
Abraham,
I think the concern though is that EFS is an immediate counter that lasts for rounds, and can be dismissed. I see it as an 'oh crap!' counter for a mage who is summoning or buffing critters.
PC: Action Ok, casting Displacement.
NPC: Casting maximized slay living!
PC: Oh crap! EFS! Ok, now I've a round or two to buff.
Compare it to my bracelet of shields from a few years ago. It allows a resiliant sphere for one round, and burns out a charge in the bracelet. *that's* what I think a EFS should be, not a "Well I have (roughly) a minute to buff, and either he can ready an action to hit me when the EFS goes down (taking the waiting caster out of the fight) or he can attack the other party members while I come out fully buffed."
|
Even in Pathfinder, we find a cheesy immediate action spell. I'm not talking about Cold Ice Strike either. In the Cheliax Pathfinder Companion there exists Emergency Force Sphere, which is an immediate action spell that brings up a hemispherical Wall of Force for 1 rd/caster level (centered on the caster). The stated purpose was to protect the caster from avalanche style cave-ins or rockslides. The actual use is as a force effect that breaks line of effect from just about everything. With a 4th level spell. Argh.You missed some stuff -- Resilient Sphere is the spell emergency force sphere is based off of.
Resilient sphere protects you from gas and attacks from below -- emergency force sphere doesn't. Resilient Sphere is cast at range, and can be used on your allies in addition to being bigger and lasting longer.
Abraham,
I think the concern though is that EFS is an immediate counter that lasts for rounds, and can be dismissed. I see it as an 'oh crap!' counter for a mage who is summoning or buffing critters.
PC: Action Ok, casting Displacement.
NPC: Casting maximized slay living!
PC: Oh crap! EFS! Ok, now I've a round or two to buff.Compare it to my bracelet of shields from a few years ago. It allows a resiliant sphere for one round, and burns out a charge in the bracelet. *that's* what I think a EFS should be, not a "Well I have (roughly) a minute to buff, and either he can ready an action to hit me when the EFS goes down (taking the waiting caster out of the fight) or he can attack the other party members while I come out fully buffed."
Yeah, I had a sorcerer with EFS in a recent campaign I ran, and even though he tried not to abuse the spell, it still came up more often than I'd like. The problem is, it's such a perfect counter. Several times a creature would go to unload a full attack on him, only for him to throw up an EFS, leaving the creature no viable melee targets save a force shield with hardness 30(!) and ungodly hit points. It was kind of cool the first time or two...then it got teeth-clenchingly annoying.
Plus, planned correctly you don't even need to dismiss it. Elemental body to get earth glide was the sorcerer's favoured way of leaving the sphere after it had served its purpose...
|
|
*It doesn't really matter what school spell belongs too. Even citing that conjurations should deal the same damage as evocations. Very simplistic approach, which I don't like at all.
Except, that's not what they said.
"In terms of balancing the power of a spell, its school isn’t very important—a 6th-level conjuration attack spell should be about as powerful as a 6th-level evocation attack spell. Deciding on the spell’s school is really about choosing what best fits the theme and effect of the spell."
*Saying that Burning Hands...
*Claiming that fireball... (etc)
The point of the Benchmarks isn't to argue about the relative powers of the spells (which is endlessly debatable and ultimately situational), the point is to provide a reference point for creating other spells. Since many people who play wizards like damage spells burning hands and fireball are good reference spells. If you prefer save or suck spells then use sleep or color spray as your benchmark spells instead.
I liked the chapter, lots of good advice, I didn't agree with everything (for example I'd have put color spray as a 1st level reference) but then I don't expect to agree with everything in a book.
Creative Director
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The MAIN reason in my experience that immediate action spells are annoying is merely that they interrupt the flow of the game. They're designed to do so. It's like putting rules in the game that encourage you to interrupt other players in the middle of talking. It's kinda annoying.
I've much less a problem with swift action spells, since swift actions have to happen on your turn, and thus you're not interrupting anyone but yourself.
I read that paragraph as "avoid making spells with swift/ immediate/ move casting times unless you have a really good reason to make it that way". Feather Fall is a perfect example of a really good reason.
Yes.
The other three immediate action spells I can think of (saving finale, purging finale and gallant inspiration) also haven't been terribly interruptive to the flow of the game in my experience, as their use is contingent on something else.
Fighter: I roll <attack> <attack> <attack>.
DM: Two hits, roll damage.
Bard: Want a GI on that third one?
Fighter: Sure, thanks.
An immediate action fireball I can see as being more interruptive - since unlike those four spells, you actually can cast it at any time.
Casters already have a big advantage in action economy. Allow several immediate action spells would be madness.
Is not only a matter of "game balance", but of fights would be enjoyable or not for players and GM.. unless you add immediate action options for everybody. But then the game would be clunkyier to run.
The game is already full of immediate action abilities for non-casters. Barbarians get clear mind, fighters get reliable strike, rangers get pole fighting, rogues get resiliency, shield users get saving shield... what all these abilities have in common is that they are situational enough not to bog the flow of actions down.
Perhaps I have different things in mind - but I'm not sure you can compare these effects with spells.
Interesting fact: the spell cold ice blast form the very same book goes directly against this design principle. Functionally, the spell is identical to a quickened cone of cold, in fact it is even better as it has no components whatsoever. And it's outrageously "cheap", being a 6th-level spell only, when the quickened cone of cold would be 9th level. And on top of that, it's available to clerics. For the first time I'm wondering, what were they thinking?
Naw. Cold Ice Strike is decent. Being better than a quickened C o C is like beating Hellen Keller at I-Spy. If you want to compare it to something, compare it to other 6th level spells, and tell us that that piddly point blank damage is better than some of the cool stuff you an do as a standard action at that level. The fact that it's a swift action is the only thing that makes it worth expending such a high level spell slot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You missed some stuff -- Resilient Sphere is the spell emergency force sphere is based off of.
Resilient sphere protects you from gas and attacks from below -- emergency force sphere doesn't. Resilient Sphere is cast at range, and can be used on your allies in addition to being bigger and lasting longer.
EFS beats the stuffing out of Resilient Sphere (and I like RS) due to its action economy. Archers drawing bows, spellcasters casting, giants hoisting boulders, charging hordes, it practically doesn't matter, because this little gem will stop all of it with an immediate action and a 4th level slot. It's too good because it's an immediate action spell.
EFS beats the stuffing out of Resilient Sphere (and I like RS) due to its action economy. Archers drawing bows, spellcasters casting, giants hoisting boulders, charging hordes, it practically doesn't matter, because this little gem will stop all of it with an immediate action and a 4th level slot. It's too good because it's an immediate action spell.You missed some stuff -- Resilient Sphere is the spell emergency force sphere is based off of.
Resilient sphere protects you from gas and attacks from below -- emergency force sphere doesn't. Resilient Sphere is cast at range, and can be used on your allies in addition to being bigger and lasting longer.
This. The spell is unbelievably good.
I had a GM for a 3.5 game who hated immediate action spells for exactly the reason J.J. stated -- they interrupt the flow of the game. He'd start resolving some spell that bad guy had cast, and then someone (i.e. me) would say "nuh-uh, I cast this spell instead and ruin it". After a couple of times of that, he got a little peeved. I can't say I blamed him.
EFS beats the stuffing out of Resilient Sphere (and I like RS) due to its action economy. Archers drawing bows, spellcasters casting, giants hoisting boulders, charging hordes, it practically doesn't matter, because this little gem will stop all of it with an immediate action and a 4th level slot. It's too good because it's an immediate action spell.You missed some stuff -- Resilient Sphere is the spell emergency force sphere is based off of.
Resilient sphere protects you from gas and attacks from below -- emergency force sphere doesn't. Resilient Sphere is cast at range, and can be used on your allies in addition to being bigger and lasting longer.
Oh I'm not saying that it isn't a great spell -- I'm simply pointing out that wall of force wasn't the correct comparison. Truthfully I kind of think the spell level on wall of force should be swapped with resilient sphere -- however lets not forget that the gap at the bottom of EFS means that it isn't invulnerable. In fact since it isn't actually against the ground across a distance of 5 feet there is enough of a gap to give enough space to mean that line of effect is not broken.
An otherwise solid barrier with a hole of at least 1 square foot through it does not block a spell's line of effect. Such an opening means that the 5-foot length of wall containing the hole is no longer considered a barrier for purposes of a spell's line of effect.
Oh I'm not saying that it isn't a great spell -- I'm simply pointing out that wall of force wasn't the correct comparison. Truthfully I kind of think the spell level on wall of force should be swapped with resilient sphere -- however lets not forget that the gap at the bottom of EFS means that it isn't invulnerable. In fact since it isn't actually against the ground across a distance of 5 feet there is enough of a gap to give enough space to mean that line of effect is not broken.
An otherwise solid barrier with a hole of at least 1 square foot through it does not block a spell's line of effect. Such an opening means that the 5-foot length of wall containing the hole is no longer considered a barrier for purposes of a spell's line of effect.
I agree that Resilient Sphere seems more practical than Wall of Force for their respective levels.
I don't know where you get that EFS isn't against the ground or that it has a gaping hole from, however.
"As wall of force, except you create a hemispherical dome of force with hardness 20 and a number of hit points equal to 10 per caster level. The bottom edge of the dome forms a relatively watertight space if you are standing on a reasonably flat surface."
Most watertight enclosures I'm aware of don't have 1 foot square holes in them.
|
|
I had a GM for a 3.5 game who hated immediate action spells for exactly the reason J.J. stated -- they interrupt the flow of the game. He'd start resolving some spell that bad guy had cast, and then someone (i.e. me) would say "nuh-uh, I cast this spell instead and ruin it". After a couple of times of that, he got a little peeved. I can't say I blamed him.
As a matter of procedure, I don't see any reason to permit immediate actions between the action taken and the resolution of the action. There can be exceptions, but immediate actions interrupt the flow of actions, not the mechanical execution of them.
"The bad guy attacks Joe. (can interrupt now) He hits. (cannot interrupt...) He does x damage. (can interrupt again)"
"The bad guy casts a spell. (spellcraft checks...can interrupt) The fireball erupts here. (points to center...cannot interrupt) It does (roll) 42 points of damage. I need saves from the rogue and wizard for half. (cannot interrupt). Ok, wizard takes full, rogue evades. (now can interrupt again)"
"The bad guy casts a spell. (spellcraft checks...can interrupt) The fireball erupts here. (points to center...cannot interrupt) It does (roll) 42 points of damage. I need saves from the rogue and wizard for half. (cannot interrupt). Ok, wizard takes full, rogue evades. (now can interrupt again)"
The GM would be gleefully rolling damage at the same time as saying "The bad guy casts fireball", though. In which case I had to point out that he skipped a step where I could have interrupted...
Not sure if this is on here yet, but Mirror Image, Greater from the Spell Compendium in 3.5 was an immediate action. And you got an image back every round.
lol, my wizard player pulled that spell out on me last session we played. told him its a standard action to cast, or we could just bump it up from a 4th level spell to a 6th level spell and keep it as it appears in the book. he went with keeping it as a 4th level spell.
Slaunyeh: The only Immediate Action spell I know of is Featherfall.
Smrtgmp: Avoiding for the moment the 'cheesy-ness' of immediate action spells, the way I read the text you quoted from Ultimate Magic doesn't say that Quicken provides the chance to cast spells as immediate actions. It says Quicken allows you to cast 2 spells per round.
EDIT:
Slaunyeh: A couple of the Immediate Actions physical-type characters can gain access to include the feats: Step Up, Following Step, Step Up and Strike, and Sidestep (and Improved Sidestep). There may be others, but those are ones I know of.
Paladins get a surprising number of Immediate spells between APG and UM. One of the level 1 spells lets you use Lay on Hands as an immediate action upon reaching 0 or fewer HP.
|
|
The GM would be gleefully rolling damage at the same time as saying "The bad guy casts fireball", though. In which case I had to point out that he skipped a step where I could have interrupted...
"The bad guy casts a spell. (spellcraft checks...can interrupt) The fireball erupts here. (points to center...cannot interrupt) It does (roll) 42 points of damage. I need saves from the rogue and wizard for half. (cannot interrupt). Ok, wizard takes full, rogue evades. (now can interrupt again)"
Yeah, that can be awkward. I don't know how to deal with it other than GM going with a pause after the the spell casting announcement and/or knowing the options available to the players. That, and players communicating that may have interrupts as they are seeing the action unfold. The point is taken that it causes frustration if it is handled without considering the interrupt options.
When I first read EFS it reminded me of the utter cheese splatbook spell Wings of Cover from 3.5, which similarly basically blocked line of effect. Except it was a 2nd level spell, so EFS is not quite that absurd.
When I first read EFS it reminded me of the utter cheese splatbook spell Wings of Cover from 3.5, which similarly basically blocked line of effect. Except it was a 2nd level spell, so EFS is not quite that absurd.
I remember that as well. Towards the end of 3.5, almost every spellcaster (regardless of level) was firing off 2 spells per round. I was glad to see that Pathfinder reined that in. I don't use EFS in my campaigns.
"As wall of force, except you create a hemispherical dome of force with hardness 20 and a number of hit points equal to 10 per caster level. The bottom edge of the dome forms a relatively watertight space if you are standing on a reasonably flat surface."Most watertight enclosures I'm aware of don't have 1 foot square holes in them.
Hm... I thought it left more of a gap than that -- hope the floor is reasonably flat -- also it doesn't state it has to be a complete 1 foot square hole just that it has to have that much space missing total -- meaning a long narrow gap would do the trick just as well as a 1 foot by 1 foot hole.
However that is much less room than I remember it having.
Hm... I thought it left more of a gap than that -- hope the floor is reasonably flat -- also it doesn't state it has to be a complete 1 foot square hole just that it has to have that much space missing total -- meaning a long narrow gap would do the trick just as well as a 1 foot by 1 foot hole.
However that is much less room than I remember it having.
So the gap would have to have a minimum height or width of 2.4 inches along an entire length of a 5 foot wall section to not block line of effect. Just trying to make a quick calculation/visualization.
I can't think of any immediate action spells. If they are such a classic part of combat, you'd think there would be more of them.
combat. as in being in a fight. do you preemtively set your arm at a particular angle and hope that it deflects any incoming punch? or do you react to your opponent's attack to protect yourself from harm? ever heard of a parry? long term buffs are your plate mail; immediate action buffs should be the parry.
i was speaking conceptually; i should have been less vague.
imo, better advice would have been "if you're going to allow an immediate action spell, make sure it is defensive in nature, and that it has a duration of instantaneous or 1 round."
i would touch on the immediate action melee feats, but several have already been mentioned above, and i see no point in reiteration.
same goes for the paladin "haha, i really needed another way to be unkillable" spell and the 6th level swift action cone of cold. if you're going to hand down patronizing advice, at least have the decency to follow it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
one of my favorite spells is an immediate action. emergency force sphere from the cheliax companion
That's what those immediate spells should be about: Emergency defences. They're for spellcasters who didn't have the foresight to prepare properly, so they'll have to blow their slots on short-term emergency magic to tide them over a little bit. Shouldn't be even nearly as good as the normal magic, since preparation should be rewarded.
this sums up my thoughts on the matter.
Quicken doesn't provide that mechanism, nor does the passage say that it does. It says that there is already a mechanism for casting two spells in one round. That is true.
i know quicken doesn't provide for the mechanic. that was the point. =/ their choice of wording was poor, to say the least. in the first part of the sentence, they included immediate actions as a means of casting two spells in one round, and then referenced quicken spell, which in no way provides for the immediate action mechanic. their words, not mine.
The MAIN reason in my experience that immediate action spells are annoying is merely that they interrupt the flow of the game. They're designed to do so. It's like putting rules in the game that encourage you to interrupt other players in the middle of talking. It's kinda annoying.
and yet you give melee characters immediate action feats. apply the rule accross the board or not at all.
because you know what else is annoying? hypocrisy.
The MAIN reason in my experience that immediate action spells are annoying is merely that they interrupt the flow of the game. They're designed to do so. It's like putting rules in the game that encourage you to interrupt other players in the middle of talking. It's kinda annoying.and yet you give melee characters immediate action feats. apply the rule accross the board or not at all.
I can't speak for James, but I find all immediate action stuff (spells, feats, class features, etc.) to be equally disruptive and I agree they all should be used sparingly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
one of my favorite spells is an immediate action. emergency force sphere from the cheliax companion
And it is eminently cheesy!
|
|
Quicken doesn't provide that mechanism, nor does the passage say that it does. It says that there is already a mechanism for casting two spells in one round. That is true.i know quicken doesn't provide for the mechanic. that was the point. =/ their choice of wording was poor, to say the least. in the first part of the sentence, they included immediate actions as a means of casting two spells in one round, and then referenced quicken spell, which in no way provides for the immediate action mechanic. their words, not mine.
Yes, they say there is a mechanism...quicken. It is a mechanism for casting two spells in one round. They recommend it instead of immediate action spells. You disagree. So be it. Gotta go, have a whole bunch of tangible irony to wade back through to emerge. :D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
one of my favorite spells is an immediate action. emergency force sphere from the cheliax companionAnd it is eminently cheesy!
"Normally this spell is used to buy time for dealing with avalanches, floods, and rock-slides, though it is also handy in dealing with ambushes."
Yeah right. Banned.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It should be pointed out that a good number of spells up to 6th level can be used as an interrupt with a simple contingency spell.
I think celerity completely ruined the entire concept of interrupt spells for me. Broken. Broken. Broken.
Also, if we want to start getting into "whats fair" in terms of the economy-of-actions (including readied actions) between casters and martial types, casters shouldn't even think of asking for more ways to get extra actions. It is very easy to get several actions each round as a caster, without even using quicken. The more I think about it, adding more "quick" or especially interrupt spells isn't just cheesy, it shows a profound lack of understanding of game balance, and less understanding of "waiting-for-your-turn" then I would expect from most 1st graders.
The MAIN reason in my experience that immediate action spells are annoying is merely that they interrupt the flow of the game. They're designed to do so. It's like putting rules in the game that encourage you to interrupt other players in the middle of talking. It's kinda annoying.
I've much less a problem with swift action spells, since swift actions have to happen on your turn, and thus you're not interrupting anyone but yourself.
I agree with the OP that the wording is a bit off; spells as swift or move actions do have as their /primary/ effect the ability to cast two spells a round, and are therefore redundant with Quicken, but spells as immediate actions have a different /primary/ effect, that of being reactive, which is not redundant with Quicken.
People upthread have argued whether magic spells even should be able to be reactive (spellcasters must plan ahead!), and people all over the boards argue that spellcasters have too much goodies anyhow, so I won't get into what's "fair". But the mere fact that an immediate spell could interrupt another player's turn should not be enough to rule them out. AOOs are the king of interrupting other players' turns and I think the game would be poorer for it if we removed them for "interrupting the flow of the game."
Fergie, I'm curious. Besides Haste (which doesn't help casters nearly as much as martial types) and Time Stop (which admittedly is great but is mostly out of reach) how do casters get extra actions? Speaking as a caster, I'd love to know. Or do you mean only that most spells are standard action compared to a martial character's full attack, limiting martial characters' mobility?
and yet you give melee characters immediate action feats. apply the rule accross the board or not at all.
Nope. Melee types need improvements to their economy of actions. Main spellcasters really don't. Expansion of swift and immediate spells for any full casters should be considered suspect (though potentially more welcome among rangers and paladins).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fergie, I'm curious. Besides Haste (which doesn't help casters nearly as much as martial types) and Time Stop (which admittedly is great but is mostly out of reach) how do casters get extra actions? Speaking as a caster, I'd love to know. Or do you mean only that most spells are standard action compared to a martial character's full attack, limiting martial characters' mobility?
I should have specified that the player gets more actions, not the character. During the alpha/beta playtest I played a conjuration specialist. Sometimes my turn would consist of:
Acting for a few summoned creatures (many of whom could cast)
Directing another spell (such as flaming sphere).
Casting black tenticles or another standard action spell that functioned almost like a creature.
Then there were the times I had a dominated or called creature to control.
I always tried to be as efficient with this stuff as I could, and not really have all these things going at the same time, but there was just more going on during my turn then any other players. It lead me to see how abusive this stuff could become if you put in any effort, or summoned a lot of creatures. (I only had one summoning spell active at a time, and it was still a lot!)
The MAIN reason in my experience that immediate action spells are annoying is merely that they interrupt the flow of the game. They're designed to do so. It's like putting rules in the game that encourage you to interrupt other players in the middle of talking. It's kinda annoying.
I've much less a problem with swift action spells, since swift actions have to happen on your turn, and thus you're not interrupting anyone but yourself.
"AoO" & "Combat Reflexes" Need I say more.
So it ok for melee but not caster to interrupt the game.