so it says I can only take one swift action a round.
I concur
but....(here it comes) can I just not take a standard action or a move action to perform more swift actions?
specifically the master of many styles what if i want not to move and activate 2 styles? do i have to wait 2 turns or can i put my standard/move action upon the altar of convenience and spill there blood in some sorts of indiana jonesesque ceremony of sacrifice to do more swift actions?.
see where I am coming from?
a swift action is a last minute quick action but if i have all the time in the world? can't I just do a bunch of little swift actions. instead of swinging my sword cant Ii pull my sunglasses down off with one finger and look bad ass then do a robot dance and say in my best robot voice i will destroy you!
The short answer to this and your question is no.
This has been brought up a few times. Can I use what is supposed to be a more intensive action, like a move action or standard action, to activate a swift action.
It makes sense that you should be able to, but strictly RAW no.
Crazy I know, but what can we do.
Raw says no. your DM may say yes. its up to them. I know you are allowed 1 Swift, 1 Immediate and I forget if you get more than 1 free per turn. I would say that if you speak with your GM they may allow the sacrifise of a standard or move action to give another swift. but it would be up to them.
Actually Immediate and Swift action are almost the same. Immediate can be taken when it's not your turn but it counts as your swift action for your next turn, so you can't take both.
You can as many free actions as you want (or unless the GM says "Ok, stop now")
am I making sense though? it seems strange to me?
i can choose not to swing my fists and run extra or not choose to run or move and swing extra fists? but i cant juyst stand there and squawk like a chicken and rotate my arms like a bird more than once in 6 seconds?
the logic is sound, but the rules say no, but if you are going to be a high level master of many styles, the combat style master feat is a must
I am not just using it has an example
|
I certainly allow it; I read the action types as being the minimum time they would take.
If you want to take longer to perform an action than it officially takes, feel free.There's already a precedent, in taking a second move action as your standard action for the turn.
Thinking about it there is one flaw in all of this, quickened spell, using this proposed change would allow for two quickened spells and a standard action spell in one round
i can choose not to swing my fists and run extra or not choose to run or move and swing extra fists?
Yes. You can take two move actions, and a move and standard, or a full-round action each turn.
but i cant juyst stand there and squawk like a chicken and rotate my arms like a bird more than once in 6 seconds?
Sure you can. That would be a free action. You can do as many of those as is reasonable in six seconds.
It's the swift action that is limited to once per turn, giving you an opportunity to do something that still allows you to take your normal actions but that can't be done multiple times in a single turn. This is the purpose of a swift action, and it generally works as intended.
The only problem is when there are two or more different swift actions that people would really like to be able to do in the same turn.
Allowing an extra swift action in place of a standard action may be balanced (but is not allowed RAW). Allowing an extra swift in place of a move is probably broken.
the logic is sound, but the rules say no, but if you are going to be a high level master of many styles, the combat style master feat is a mustI am not just using it has an example
Now there are a few specific things where you can do this though:
Bards for example as they gain levels gain the choice of what type of action they want to use to start their bardic music.
The reason they might want to choose say, a move action instead of a swift action at level 13 is to be able to quicken a spell to use their swift action, then use a standard action to cast another spell and finally spend their move action to start bardic performance.
In this way they could cast good hope, haste and inspire courage all on the same round.
However cases like this are rare and generally state when they come up (the cavalier has a similar ability with his tactician ability).
|
Star wars Saga Editions explicitly allowed actions to be traded down (standard -> Move -> Swift). This doesn't exist in PF, although you are allowed to move as a standard. Anything else is up to the GM.
Since a quickened spell is cast as a Swift action, down-trading actions would allow a properly prepared spellcaster to potentially cast 3 spells on his turn. That's a bit overpowering (especially when your DM uses as a tactic against the party).
-Skeld
By the same logic, you can move 20'+ in a round, why can't you take that move in 5' steps?
The character taking his 20' of movement in 5' step increments to get around an opponent to flank without provoking an attack of opportunity or the character taking several swift actions to avoid the consequences of standard or full round actions both sound doable on the surface but would affect game balance.
That's where feats come in, to allow a way to bend core concepts without breaking them.
By the same logic, you can move 20'+ in a round, why can't you take that move in 5' steps?
The character taking his 20' of movement in 5' step increments to get around an opponent to flank without provoking an attack of opportunity or the character taking several swift actions to avoid the consequences of standard or full round actions both sound doable on the surface but would affect game balance.
That's where feats come in, to allow a way to bend core concepts without breaking them.
Because a five foot step is an specific free action that explicitly states how and when you can do it.
However If you want to spend a move action to five foot step, and a standard action to five foot step, and a swift action to five foot step and only move 20 foot total for a whole round's worth of actions I'd be inclined to allow it as a GM -- simply because you've killed your action economy for the round.
Because a five foot step is an specific free action that explicitly states how and when you can do it.
However If you want to spend a move action to five foot step, and a standard action to five foot step, and a swift action to five foot step and only move 20 foot total for a whole round's worth of actions I'd be inclined to allow it as a GM -- simply because you've killed your action economy for the round.
Yes, but that could quickly be abused. A character with 0 points in Acrobatics uses those consecutive 5' steps to move, at no risk, around an opponent with a high CMD to set up the flank for the rogue. Or to move past the enemy fighter so as to end up standing next to the enemy spell caster ready to do an attack of opportunity.
|
I certainly allow it; I read the action types as being the minimum time they would take.
If you want to take longer to perform an action than it officially takes, feel free.There's already a precedent, in taking a second move action as your standard action for the turn.
Thinking about it there is one flaw in all of this, quickened spell, using this proposed change would allow for two quickened spells and a standard action spell in one round
I may not have been clear.
I was only referring to swift actions being able to be converted to standard actions, not moves.So, there would still be the current max of swift+move+standard, or swift+full.
The intent of most swift actions are to be less effective than what could be done via a standard action; power is sacrificed for speed.
If you want to perform two weak actions, instead of a weak action and a regular action, go for it.
There's no point performing two Quickened spells as a swift+standard, since by definition, once it ceases to be swift, it ceases to benefit from being a Quickened spell. All you've done is blow a higher level slot for no benefit.
i can choose not to swing my fists and run extra or not choose to run or move and swing extra fists?Yes. You can take two move actions, and a move and standard, or a full-round action each turn.
but i cant juyst stand there and squawk like a chicken and rotate my arms like a bird more than once in 6 seconds?Sure you can. That would be a free action. You can do as many of those as is reasonable in six seconds.
It's the swift action that is limited to once per turn, giving you an opportunity to do something that still allows you to take your normal actions but that can't be done multiple times in a single turn. This is the purpose of a swift action, and it generally works as intended.
The only problem is when there are two or more different swift actions that people would really like to be able to do in the same turn.
Allowing an extra swift action in place of a standard action may be balanced (but is not allowed RAW). Allowing an extra swift in place of a move is probably broken.
not trying to start a huge argument but i think squakign and flapping my arms and would be a swift action, if not add spinning in a circle and then jumpng around. the logic remains the same
not trying to start a huge argument but i think squakign and flapping my arms and would be a swift action, if not add spinning in a circle and then jumpng around. the logic remains the same
That's the problem, you are trying to apply real world logic and examples to a game. The limitations on the number of actions you get a round aren't meant to simulate what you can do in six seconds, but rather limit the number of game activities you can take.
Why do they limit what you can do? Game balance. Not all examples of substituting a swift action for a move action or standard action are going to be game breaking, heck, many are likely to be completely underwhelming. Potentially casting three spells in a round could be. So rather than leave the door open for abuse the designers closed the door by applying restrictions.
You get one standard action, one move action, one swift action, and as many free actions as the GM allows. It doesn't matter that logically you could repeat a swift action half a dozen times in six seconds the game mechanics only lets you do it once.
I always took swift and immediate actions to be "speed of thought" quick type actions.
not trying to start a huge argument but i think squakign and flapping my arms and would be a swift action, if not add spinning in a circle and then jumpng around. the logic remains the sameThat's the problem, you are trying to apply real world logic and examples to a game. The limitations on the number of actions you get a round aren't meant to simulate what you can do in six seconds, but rather limit the number of game activities you can take.
Why do they limit what you can do? Game balance. Not all examples of substituting a swift action for a move action or standard action are going to be game breaking, heck, many are likely to be completely underwhelming. Potentially casting three spells in a round could be. So rather than leave the door open for abuse the designers closed the door by applying restrictions.
You get one standard action, one move action, one swift action, and as many free actions as the GM allows. It doesn't matter that logically you could repeat a swift action half a dozen times in six seconds the game mechanics only lets you do it once.
tim, if i may call you that i know some do. i honestly respect your opinion alot. what i was arguing was that what i was describing above was the definition of a free action vs a swift action. the rest makes sense to me esoterically with quickened spell
not trying to start a huge argument but i think squakign and flapping my arms and would be a swift action, if not add spinning in a circle and then jumpng around. the logic remains the same
Again, a swift action is something that doesn't need to take up the other actions of your turn but that you should only be able to do once a turn.
What is it about flapping your arms and jumping around that you believe it should be limited to once per turn?
If nothing, then it's a free action, not a swift action.
Swift actions are for things we only want to happen once per turn, like quickening spells and activating certain once-per-turn abilities.
Forgive me but I disagree, if activating a fighting style is a swift action, imagine me moving my feat and raising my arms up and looking scary, and screaming "dragon style rarrrghh" then by the same definition, me flapping my arms and jumping up and down and squawking would be a swift action. if i chose to do my best "robot dance" it would be a swift action a free action is scratching your nose, yelling something" watch out for his dragon style" ect.. i will agree that moving my sunglasses down my face to show my eyes all cool like. would be a free action
So I have a similar questions:
Can you use a swift action during a suprise round? The rules specifically say you can take either a standard or move action...and free actions. No mention of swift actions.
Swift actions are things that are fairly short but can be complex enough that you cannot easily perform them. They cannot be traded down because they were designed with a 1/round ballance in mind.
As for all the flapping your arms things, I would actually be inclined to make most of those move or standard actions. They have no in game effect (unless perhaps to convey a message of some kind), but they are things that take active concentration and consume time. Not every action has equal value.
Personally, I would like to see something more like Saga Edition Star Wars for the next revision of Pathfinder. It eliminates your ability to give a standard action and still have a 1/round ability, but it allows for combining multiple swift actions (downgrade your move or spend swifts in 2+ consecutive rounds). Its one of the things I really like about the system.
Yes, but that could quickly be abused. A character with 0 points in Acrobatics uses those consecutive 5' steps to move, at no risk, around an opponent with a high CMD to set up the flank for the rogue. Or to move past the enemy fighter so as to end up standing next to the enemy spell caster ready to do an attack of opportunity.Because a five foot step is an specific free action that explicitly states how and when you can do it.
However If you want to spend a move action to five foot step, and a standard action to five foot step, and a swift action to five foot step and only move 20 foot total for a whole round's worth of actions I'd be inclined to allow it as a GM -- simply because you've killed your action economy for the round.
Again at the point he spent a full round of actions doing nothing but that I'm not too worried about it. He's setting himself up for a potential helpful position -- there is no guarantee that it will be helpful and in the mean time he's giving up a full attack, or a move and attack or whatever else he might have done in the round.
*Noting that this is of course strictly house rule material*
I think I see what's going on with the mechanics. Swift actions have other qualities besides just letting you do something. A quickened spell doesn't provoke, for example. The description for swift actions describes it as it represents a larger expenditure of effort than a free action, as the justification for why you can do only one regardless of other moves.
Seems like the idea is you're cramming in a more substantive action into the space of time of a free action. That's a big effort, so you can only do it once in 6 seconds. The rest of those 6 seconds you have to do things at a normal pace.
Seems the question, then, is a little backwards - it's not why can't I squeeze down my standard action into another swift action, it's more why can't I do the ability at a more leisurely pace to fill up the time available to me for move and standard actions.
In other words, the question isn't why can't I spend my standard action as another swift action, it's why can't I do X as a standard action, rather than only a swift action.
Is that making sense at all? Like imagine a quickened spell. you can't cast 2 quickened spells, thereby each avoiding AoO since they're both swift actions, but you *can* cast one swift and the other as a standard action, one with no AoO (because it's so swift) the other provoking (because it's too much of an effort to cast so fast twice in the same 6 seconds).
Begs the question whether and why can't you take more time to activate a style, but I think *that's* the question.
NOW, I'm looking, and no place does it seem to prohibit, for example, retreiving a stored item as a full round action. It's normally a move action, i.e. takes a fraction of 6 seconds. But there's nothing that seems to prohibit you from taking a full 6 seconds to do it, or 12 seconds, or a minute. The rules are concerned with how little time it can take to do something, not how much time you may wish to take doing it.
So, argument would be, just as the rules don't prohibit spending a full round action to do any number of actions that don't normally take a full round, the rules likewise don't prohibit someone from performing what can be a swift action over a longer action, forgoing all the benefits of swiftness. You are still obeying the no more than one swift action per turn rule, because you are not taking more than one swift action.
Because a five foot step is an specific free action that explicitly states how and when you can do it.
Just for the record, a five-foot step is actually No Action (Core Rulebook, p. 183) or a Miscellaneous Action (Core Rulebook, p. 189).
While I don't like 'slippery slope' arguments, if you allow swapping out for five-foot steps. You would have to allow 3 five-foot steps then a standard action, such as an attack. Now you've weakened the need for acrobatics or even the withdrawal action. I just see too much potential for abuse, arguments, and more house rules.
Because a five foot step is an specific free action that explicitly states how and when you can do it.Just for the record, a five-foot step is actually No Action (Core Rulebook, p. 183) or a Miscellaneous Action (Core Rulebook, p. 189).
While I don't like 'slippery slope' arguments, if you allow swapping out for five-foot steps. You would have to allow 3 five-foot steps then a standard action, such as an attack. Now you've weakened the need for acrobatics or even the withdrawal action. I just see too much potential for abuse, arguments, and more house rules.
If they want to give up a move action, standard action and swift action to get three 5 foot steps then sure -- 20 feet without AoO's in a round with no other action coming from them it is still going to be a very poor trade. The place it will get fishy is trading only some of the action, like the swift, or move only.
To 'even' it out I might suggest a 'hierarchy' of trading for the 5 foot step where you have to trade actions in a specific order --
Non-action 5 foot step
Standard action 5 foot step
Move action 5 foot step
Swift action 5 foot step
So that it must be taken in that order -- if you use up one of those types of actions you can not skip it to trade for another 5 foot step -- you also couldn't break the 'standard' 5 foot step rule of no other movement for the round (so you couldn't 5 foot step, standard action 5 foot step and then move your speed with a move action -- though you could use your move action to draw a potion or some other item or open a door).
Withdrawal would be an issue -- however with a withdraw action you can move up to twice your speed -- with what we are talking about you'll only get 20 feet of movement total. So there will be cases where each one will be a better choice... personally I'm okay with that since it gives more options without forcing all characters to invest for those options (as represented by taking feats or skills to do something).
I don't think it will hurt acrobatics (with the above trade order being mandatory) since acrobatics will still generally be your better bet -- you'll generally be able to move further, and still have a standard action after using acrobatics, and acrobatics still has uses beyond simply avoiding AoOs.
That's all stuff for the suggestions/homebrew/houserule forum though, right?
That's all stuff for the suggestions/homebrew/houserule forum though, right?
Very much so thank you for pointing this out -- it is important we label it as such to prevent confusion with what the actual rules are.
|
I think I see what's going on with the mechanics. Swift actions have other qualities besides just letting you do something. A quickened spell doesn't provoke, for example. The description for swift actions describes it as it represents a larger expenditure of effort than a free action, as the justification for why you can do only one regardless of other moves.
Seems like the idea is you're cramming in a more substantive action into the space of time of a free action. That's a big effort, so you can only do it once in 6 seconds. The rest of those 6 seconds you have to do things at a normal pace.
Seems the question, then, is a little backwards - it's not why can't I squeeze down my standard action into another swift action, it's more why can't I do the ability at a more leisurely pace to fill up the time available to me for move and standard actions.
In other words, the question isn't why can't I spend my standard action as another swift action, it's why can't I do X as a standard action, rather than only a swift action.
Is that making sense at all? Like imagine a quickened spell. you can't cast 2 quickened spells, thereby each avoiding AoO since they're both swift actions, but you *can* cast one swift and the other as a standard action, one with no AoO (because it's so swift) the other provoking (because it's too much of an effort to cast so fast twice in the same 6 seconds).
Begs the question whether and why can't you take more time to activate a style, but I think *that's* the question.
NOW, I'm looking, and no place does it seem to prohibit, for example, retreiving a stored item as a full round action. It's normally a move action, i.e. takes a fraction of 6 seconds. But there's nothing that seems to prohibit you from taking a full 6 seconds to do it, or 12 seconds, or a minute. The rules are concerned with how little time it can take to do something, not how much time you may wish to take doing it.
So, argument would be, just as the rules don't prohibit spending a full round action to...
+1
I think the thing people are getting caught up on in this discussion is that they think the OP is trying to take three swift actions in one turn as opposed to giving up his standard and move actions to do these silly things.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
In order to understand this, it is important to know the historical background behind Swift Actions. Originally, 3rd Edition D&D did not have such a thing as swift or immediate actions. Quickened spells were a free action.
Later on, the designers realized that it would be nice to have a third type of action, in addition to a move and standard action, but limited to once per round. Thus was born the Swift action.
Because they were added later, swift actions were never really integrated into the system the way the other action types were. That's why in 3.x/PF, you can't "downgrade" an action to a Swift Action.
4th Edition explicitly allowed the player to use a Move or Standard action to perform a Minor action, which is, I believe, the ultimate endpoint of the action's evolution.
|
Would this be a bad time to mention that 4th edition covers this nicely? In 4e, the rules specifically state that you get a standard action, move action, and minor (swift) action every turn. You can give up the standard for an extra move or minor, or you can up the move for an extra minor. It's all laid out very clearly and cleanly up front, so debates like this are unnecessary.
I know everyone around here (Pathfinder fans) tend to think of 4e as a thing of pure evil. But as a newbie learning 4e and Pathfinder at around the same time, and not yet decided which I prefer yet, I will say that 4e seems to have done a nice job of cleaning up a lot of these little details that are unnecessarily messy in Pathfinder (and presumably in 3.5, though I wouldn't know). It's the big picture stuff that was changed in 4e compared to ALL earlier versions (I used to play 1st edition when it was new) that I'm not so sure about.
The only issue with Standard/Move > Swift is the ability to cast more than 2 spells in a round. I would vote for an addendum or clause in future sections of the Magic section that stated "You cannot cast more than two spells in a round unless otherwise noted in an ability".
That clause already exists in the rules:
A spell with a casting time of 1 swift action doesn't count against your normal limit of one spell per round. However, you may cast such a spell only once per round. Casting a spell with a casting time of 1 swift action doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity.
The normal limit is one spell per round, and you can only cast one swift action spell per round. Hence, no more than 2 spells possible in a round, regardless of how many other actions you'd be able to convert.
It's Alive! I was trying, to make a point that in six seconds I can do crazy things and they should be swift not free or standard or what ever I honestly Don't remember my point I think it was about giving up my standard and Move actions to do swift actions if you cna give up standard actions to move why cant i take 3 swift actions I didnt know about the quicken spell at the time.
...I think I see what's going on with the mechanics. Swift actions have other qualities besides just letting you do something. A quickened spell doesn't provoke, for example. The description for swift actions describes it as it represents a larger expenditure of effort than a free action, as the justification for why you can do only one regardless of other moves.
Seems like the idea is you're cramming in a more substantive action into the space of time of a free action. That's a big effort, so you can only do it once in 6 seconds. The rest of those 6 seconds you have to do things at a normal pace.
Seems the question, then, is a little backwards - it's not why can't I squeeze down my standard action into another swift action, it's more why can't I do the ability at a more leisurely pace to fill up the time available to me for move and standard actions.
In other words, the question isn't why can't I spend my standard action as another swift action, it's why can't I do X as a standard action, rather than only a swift action.
Is that making sense at all? Like imagine a quickened spell. you can't cast 2 quickened spells, thereby each avoiding AoO since they're both swift actions, but you *can* cast one swift and the other as a standard action, one with no AoO (because it's so swift) the other provoking (because it's too much of an effort to cast so fast twice in the same 6 seconds).
Begs the question whether and why can't you take more time to activate a style, but I think *that's* the question.
NOW, I'm looking, and no place does it seem to prohibit, for example, retreiving a stored item as a full round action. It's normally a move action, i.e. takes a fraction of 6 seconds. But there's nothing that seems to prohibit you from taking a full 6 seconds to do it, or 12 seconds, or a minute. The rules are concerned with how little time it can take to do something, not how much time you may wish to take doing it.
So, argument would be, just as the rules don't prohibit spending a
yes exactly sacrifice move and standard to do swift things like robot dancing or adjusting my sunglasses or gun show with my huge african biceps.
4th Edition explicitly allowed the player to use a Move or Standard action to perform a Minor action, which is, I believe, the ultimate endpoint of the action's evolution.
That may be the case, chronologically, but I think Star Wars Saga Edition's take on minor actions is even more interesting than 4e's - despite coming first.
An angle that no one is discussing is that Immediate Actions are linked to your Swift Actions. This could potentially allow Immediate and Swift actions together in the same round.
While I do not know the rammifications off-hand, it is something that the rules specifically do not allow with a hard limit.
Aside: Also, I would not berate your ignorance as I see it is in full swing! Ho-ho! See what I did there? I hope you realize that was a joke, based on the title of the thread.
An angle that no one is discussing is that Immediate Actions are linked to your Swift Actions. This could potentially allow Immediate and Swift actions together in the same round.
While I do not know the rammifications off-hand, it is something that the rules specifically do not allow with a hard limit.
Aside: Also, I would not berate your ignorance as I see it is in full swing! Ho-ho! See what I did there? I hope you realize that was a joke, based on the title of the thread.
COmmennayeahhhh Luckily for you my feelings regenerate 3 times the speed of a normal mans.
and shadow cat they are a style not a complicated series of gestures for mantis style you raise your hands up and bob your head monkey style you crouch and sway like a monkey ect.. those are comparable to jumping up and down like a chicken and flapping your wings and in your best Neil Diamond voice saying i will destroy you comenayeahhhh
Can you use a swift action during a suprise round? The rules specifically say you can take either a standard or move action...and free actions. No mention of swift actions.
I believe the surprise round would qualify as restricted activity:
The Surprise Round: "If some but not all of the combatants are aware of their opponents, a surprise round happens before regular rounds begin. In initiative order (highest to lowest), combatants who started the battle aware of their opponents each take a standard or move action during the surprise round. You can also take free actions during the surprise round."
Restricted Activity: "In some situations, you may be unable to take a full round's worth of actions. In such cases, you are restricted to taking only a single standard action or a single move action (plus free and swift actions as normal)."
Move -> Swift may not be possible, but Standard -> Swift is actually quite simple. Ready your swift action, and choose a condition that's easy to meet. Speaking is a good choice, since you can trigger your own action immediately.
Nice loophole.
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."
I think the limit on one swift action per turn overrides a readied swift action. Meaning, you can ready a swift action, but only if you have not yet used yours for the turn.
Obviously not, your only allowed one swift action per round as shown by the post above. Rules wise swift actions are a 3.5 mechanic to replace free actions as something that does not require an action but people shouldn't be able to do more than once a round.
Its more of a balance issue and everything they select as a swift action is something that has a major impact on gameplay, ie a quickened spell or changing from an offensive combat style to a defensive combat style, rather than a free action, ie setting your combat expertise or dropping an item.
If you could switch from an offensive combat style to a defensive combat style it would be similar to power attacking and still getting the combat expertise bonus for the basic - to hit for your level.
While it's established that multiple swift actions is not available in RAW, for house ruling purposes, you could easily get away with dropping move and standard actions for swift actions without worry about the Quicken Spell feat, because in the Swift Action entry, it states,
"You can cast a quickened spell (see the Quicken Spell metamagic feat), or any spell whose casting time is designated as a free or swift action, as a swift action. Only one such spell can be cast in any round"
So swift actions are by RAW excluding swift spells from any multiple-swift-per-turn ideas you have in your home games.
why did you necro this thread?