| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Suppose I ready an action to counter spell an enemy spellcaster. If I end up using an immediate action before that spellcaster begins to cast a spell, do I lose my readied action to counter that spell?
|
There is absolutely nothing that says you'd lose your Ready Action, and if nothing says something happens, then generally, it doesn't happen.
Nothing of the rules would prevent you from readying an action, casting an immediate action spell, and then completing your readied action when the trigger occurs.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
There is absolutely nothing that says you'd lose your Ready Action, and if nothing says something happens, then generally, it doesn't happen.
Nothing of the rules would prevent you from readying an action, casting an immediate action spell, and then completing your readied action when the trigger occurs.
Although it doesn't specifically mention losing the readied action, I'm worried that this sentence precludes the use of any other actions before the readied action:
Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition.
I feel like this sentence may imply that you cannot take your readied action if it's at a time after your next action. On the other hand, this would also mean that you can't even take free actions before using the readied action, which is weird.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Alternatively, they could have worded it:
"Then, anytime before your next turn, you may take the readied action in response to that condition."
But I wish it was spelled out more clearly what happens if you take some kind of action before, and I'm not sure it would be problematic in terms of balance if free or immediate actions were allowed.
|
|
Alternatively, they could have worded it:
"Then, anytime before your next turn, you may take the readied action in response to that condition."
But I wish it was spelled out more clearly what happens if you take some kind of action before, and I'm not sure it would be problematic in terms of balance if free or immediate actions were allowed.
I agree, I think making the ready action "any time before your next turn" would have made a lot more sense. Readied actions are a gamble to begin with, and anything that makes them less likely to be used just makes the entire ready action system that much less likely to ever be used.
It's like the way no one ever uses Brace unless they're playing a Phalanx Fighter who can do it as an immediate action. The mechanic seems like the appropriate counter to Charge, but since you have to stop and spend your turn Bracing your weapon before the other guy has even gone, it tends to just be a wasted turn when he charges somebody who didn't set a polearm to skewer him. So it goes largely unused except for a single archetype.By the reading of "any time before your next action" you couldn't even take a free action to shout a warning to an ally without wasting your readied action.
I agree, I think making the ready action "any time before your next turn" would have made a lot more sense. Readied actions are a gamble to begin with, and anything that makes them less likely to be used just makes the entire ready action system that much less likely to ever be used.
It's like the way no one ever uses Brace unless they're playing a Phalanx Fighter who can do it as an immediate action. The mechanic seems like the appropriate counter to Charge, but since you have to stop and spend your turn Bracing your weapon before the other guy has even gone, it tends to just be a wasted turn when he charges somebody who didn't set a polearm to skewer him. So it goes largely unused except for a single archetype.
I don't have any experience with phalanx fighters, but it does seem to be that readying an action can often lead to a wasted turn in many cases, and that it is much better to have an immediate action.
By the reading of "any time before your next action" you couldn't even take a free action to shout a warning to an ally without wasting your readied action.
Not being able to even perform free actions before your readied action seems like a huge oversight which makes me think that some errata is called for to deal with these cases.
There is nothing to indicate that you can't take an immediate action. I would equate it to an Attack of Opportunity with a different trigger/outcome. I imagine we all agree AoOs don't mess up the readied action, right?
So what if the Readied action is to cast invisibility once you take damage? The situation is that you are on the side of a cliff. When you take damage it knocks you off. So, your immediate action is to cast Feather Fall and your readied action is to cast invisibility.
There is nothing to indicate that you can't take an immediate action. I would equate it to an Attack of Opportunity with a different trigger/outcome. I imagine we all agree AoOs don't mess up the readied action, right?
I'd like to agree with that (and I would make that a house rule if I were running a game), but the text I quoted above regarding the rules for readying an action seems to indicate that any action on your part before the triggering condition would ruin your readied action. Unless there's a different interpretation of that text you'd like to offer!
It would be nice to get a FAQ on this because I assume that it's not intended that you literally cannot do anything if you want to use your readied action later in the round.
Condition happens -> Ready action triggers.
Creature who readied action uses action and moves according to the initiative. Creature still has immediate action left to use.
This is how I see it.
Sure, but what about the other order of events? Where you need to use feather fall (or some other immediate action, take a free action to warn an ally, make an attack of opportunity) before trigger occurs (or before your next turn would come up, for the matter)?
|
|
There is nothing to indicate that you can't take an immediate action. I would equate it to an Attack of Opportunity with a different trigger/outcome. I imagine we all agree AoOs don't mess up the readied action, right?
Actually, we don't and that's the problem. That was how I had been interpreting it up to this point, but as meta pointed out, the rules for a readied action state "Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition".
This would mean that an AoO, an immediate action, or any other action, disrupts and cancels your readied action.This would be a good one to errata to "before your next turn" which would make a lot more sense.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am fairly sure that AoOs don't interfere with readied actions because the AoO rules never use the word "Action" when describing an AoO - so you're not taking an AoO Action, you're taking a "free attack" as described in the CRB.
As for immediate actions, they really are actions, so it might seem unclear, but the text that says "any time before your next action" CANNOT be a reference to the readied action itself because that would make it recursive; in other words it would effectively be saying: "Then, anytime before your readied action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition."
That would be nonsense. Ergo, the word "next" in that sentence MUST be a reference to your next regularly-scheduled action in the initiative sequence (e.g. your next turn). It cannot be interpreted any other way and still make sense.
I also think these quotes from the CRB should help answer the question:
Immediate Action:
"Using an immediate action on your turn is the same as using a swift action and counts as your swift action for that turn."
Swift action:
"You can perform one swift action per turn without affecting your ability to perform other actions."
So using your immediate action is the same as using a swift action and using a swift action does not affect your ability to perform other actions.
In light of these rules, and not seeing anything to clearly state that taking an immediate action negates having a readied action, I default to these rules and take the side that you CAN use an immediate action and still take your readied action.
|
|
An AOO is not an action, in game terms. If you look in the combat chapter of the Core Rulebook, there's a whole table for what type of action particular activities are, and AOOs aren't on that chart at all.
Which makes the even more ridiculous situation that hitting someone with a sword when it's not your turn wouldn't disrupt your readied action, but yelling out "Incoming!" would.
An AOO is not an action, in game terms. If you look in the combat chapter of the Core Rulebook, there's a whole table for what type of action particular activities are, and AOOs aren't on that chart at all.Which makes the even more ridiculous situation that hitting someone with a sword when it's not your turn wouldn't disrupt your readied action, but yelling out "Incoming!" would.
Speaking (yelling) is a free action you can take when it is not your turn. Free actions take no time (much less time than Swift or Immediate actions take). They never disrupt anything.
Also, see my previous post.
|
|
An AOO is not an action, in game terms. If you look in the combat chapter of the Core Rulebook, there's a whole table for what type of action particular activities are, and AOOs aren't on that chart at all.Which makes the even more ridiculous situation that hitting someone with a sword when it's not your turn wouldn't disrupt your readied action, but yelling out "Incoming!" would.Speaking (yelling) is a free action you can take when it is not your turn. Free actions take no time (much less time than Swift or Immediate actions take). They never disrupt anything.
Also, see my previous post.
They are still actions. Per the rules for readied actions, your readied action is only available any time before your next action. Pretty cut and dried per the RAW. How you choose to house-rule has no impact on what is actually spelled out in the specific rules for readied actions.
While I can see the point of the argument, and it does seem to be ambiguously-worded, a number of the designers have recently said that 'common sense' should always be used when interpreting the rules. So let's look at it from that perspective:
We can say that taking an AoO would not interrupt a readied action because an AoO is not an action; it's not on any of the lists of defined action types.
So now let's apply common sense: Does it make sense for someone shouting a single word ("INCOMING!") to have his readied action interrupted when he could swing his weapon four times as attacks of opportunity (assuming he has Combat Reflexes) without interrupting it?
No, it doesn't.
That said, I did click FAQ because while I think the RAI is clear and aligns with RAW when read with a filter of common sense, I agree that as worded it could be taken to mean something else.
They are still actions. Per the rules for readied actions, your readied action is only available any time before your next action. Pretty cut and dried per the RAW. How you choose to house-rule has no impact on what is actually spelled out in the specific rules for readied actions.
So it's your interpretation that the authors are literally saying "Then, anytime before your readied action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition."
You're really OK with that interpretation?
I'm not.
Which I why I said that "next action" CANNOT refer to your readied action to avoid that nonsense recursion. That's not a house-rule, it's just reading the RAW with a critical eye.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Which I why I said that "next action" CANNOT refer to your readied action to avoid that nonsense recursion. That's not a house-rule, it's just reading the RAW with a critical eye.
I don't think he's referring to the readied action; he's referring to actions that might be taken from the time that you ready the action to the time that the readied action is actually triggered.
For example, take a combat with Wizard, Mook A, Ally, and Mook B (in that initiative order). Wizard readies a counterspell if Mook B begins to cast; that ends his turn (pending the trigger of his readied action). Mook A, up next, throws a bomb at Ally, but Ally doesn't see it; while it won't do anything tangible from a mechanical standpoint, Wizard uses a free action to shout "WATCH OUT!" to his ally.
That 'free action' is technically his next action - and it occurred before his readied action triggered. From a strict reading of RAW, you've just violated the statement, "Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition."
Since the statement implies that your readied action must be taken before your 'next action', you'd lose your readied action because of shouting the warning.
|
|
So it's your interpretation that the authors are literally saying "Then, anytime before your readied action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition."
You're really OK with that interpretation?
I'm not.
Which I why I said that "next action" CANNOT refer to your readied action to avoid that nonsense recursion.
"Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. "
The only action which would not disrupt your Readied Action, is the readied action itself. There's no nonsense recursiveness going on here, just the reality that any action taken before your Readied Action disrupts/disqualifies it.
And you're over-simplifying it, it's not "Any time before your Readied Action" because there's a multiplicity of other actions that could interrupt it. If your turn ends without the trigger being met and you decide to take a different action on your next turn, that disrupts the Readied action. If you decide to take an immediate or free action, per RAW that action disrupts your Readied Action.
And that's the biggest thing that needs to be addressed, is how immediate actions and non-turn actions work with the mechanic. Because common sense can lead to two different interpretations here. It doesn't really make sense for a guy who braced his polearm for a charge to be able to swing it around and attack other people with it, does it? And whether a wizard casting a spell that takes a small amount of time but a large amount of mental effort (i.e. immediate action), would disrupt him from casting another spell he was holding in preparation for a counter spell is.... foggy. I personally think it should be "Before your next turn" instead of "before your next action" but there are reasons for both interpretations.
|
|
I don't think he's referring to the readied action; he's referring to actions that might be taken from the time that you ready the action to the time that the readied action is actually triggered.
For example, take a combat with Wizard, Mook A, Ally, and Mook B (in that initiative order). Wizard readies a counterspell if Mook B begins to cast; that ends his turn (pending the trigger of his readied action). Mook A, up next, throws a bomb at Ally, but Ally doesn't see it; while it won't do anything tangible from a mechanical standpoint, Wizard uses a free action to shout "WATCH OUT!" to his ally.
That 'free action' is technically his next action - and it occurred before his readied action triggered. From a strict reading of RAW, you've just violated the statement, "Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition."
Thanks X, that was an excellent summation of the way I'm interpreting the rules to read currently.
Another example-
Wizard readies a spell to counterspell BBEG's Fireball, which will likely destroy the weakened party. While he's standing ready to cast, one of BBEG's mooks grabs him from behind. The party Bard casts Liberating Command on the Wizard and he uses the immediate action to escape. Since he's now taken an action, the current wording of the rules would state that he can no longer complete his readied action.
Your missing my point.
They say "Then, any time before your next action, ..."
The word "next" can be interpreted to mean:
1. Any possible action you can imagine. Free, Swift, Immediate, Standard, Full-round, Readied, whatever.
2. Your next regularly schedule action in the initiative order.
If it means #1, then we have to accept that the sentence COULD be read as "Then, any time before your readied action, ..."
So, if that is the definition, then we have a nonsensical recursion.
Ergo, it CANNOT mean that.
Ergo, "next action" CANNOT mean "Any possible action you can imagine".
Ergo, it MUST mean #2 because we MUST avoid the recursion - if we don't avoid the recursion, then we get the problem the OP is complaining about that the whole rule can become nonsensical. Since we don't want the whole rule to be nonsensical, we therefore avoid the recursion and accept definition #2.
Combine that with the rules I quoted above about Swift and Immediate actions, and it all makes perfect sense.
|
|
***
I'm sorry, but your logic is flawed by the assumption that an interpretation that includes other actions has to include the action itself. You're muddying the waters with a very roundabout and stretched logic chain to try and create a situation where only the option you want is valid, despite that option being the one that varies most from the RAW. "Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition" separates the Readied Action from other possible actions. You have the span of possibilities inherent in the term action, and then you have the singular Readied Action.
Whether DM_Blake's recursion is an issue or not, I am not going to get into that debate, he did accurately state the two options. It is either #1 or #2 and I believe the intent is #2.
Do I have anything to back that up with? Not really. Just that I believe that when they phrased next action they intended your next regularly scheduled action and not any little free action.
This is based on the idea that Pathfinder is built upon opening up options, not closing them down. Saying that you cannot speak while having a readied action just seems silly to me. Thus, there should be no reason you are restricted from other actions you can take when it is not your turn, ie: Immediate actions.
- Gauss
|
|
Whether DM_Blake's recursion is an issue or not, I am not going to get into that debate, he did accurately state the two options. It is either #1 or #2 and I believe the intent is #2.
Do I have anything to back that up with? Not really. Just that I believe that when they phrased next action they intended your next regularly scheduled action and not any little free action.
This is based on the idea that Pathfinder is built upon opening up options, not closing them down. Saying that you cannot speak while having a readied action just seems silly to me. Thus, there should be no reason you are restricted from other actions you can take when it is not your turn, ie: Immediate actions.
- Gauss
Frankly, that's my preferred interpretation as well, but it's also the one that requires the most implied verbage. Definitely a function that could stand a little developer TLC.
Immediate and Swift actions appear first in a D&D 3.5 supply book (Complete Mage?) in the middle of the D&D 3.5 era. Before that it was not possible to take any action outside of your turn.
The wording of the 'Ready' action is the same as in D&D3 , D&D 3.5 and PF .. so in my opinion the 'Ready' action was not rewritten since non-immediate/swift-action days.
DM_Blake and his option #2 are RAI
|
|
Immediate and Swift actions appear first in a D&D 3.5 supply book (Complete Mage?) in the middle of the D&D 3.5 era. Before that it was not possible to take any action outside of your turn.
The wording of the 'Ready' action is the same as in D&D3 , D&D 3.5 and PF .. so in my opinion the 'Ready' action was not rewritten since non-immediate/swift-action days.
But Swift actions are specifically referenced in the rules for readying an action-
"Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character's activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Your initiative result changes. For the rest of the encounter, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action."
Additionally I will note that, so far as I can recall, the rules compendium changed the wording of the readied action in 3.5 from before your next action to before your next turn.
This is correct. P. 110: "Then, any time before your next turn, you can take the readied action in response to those conditions" [my italics].
"Then, any time before your next action, ..."
The word "next" can be interpreted to mean:
1. Any possible action you can imagine. Free, Swift, Immediate, Standard, Full-round, Readied, whatever.
2. Your next regularly schedule action in the initiative order.If it means #1, then we have to accept that the sentence COULD be read as "Then, any time before your readied action, ..."
So, if that is the definition, then we have a nonsensical recursion.
Ergo, it CANNOT mean that.
Ergo, "next action" CANNOT mean "Any possible action you can imagine".
I don't see #1 as a nonsensical (or vicious) recursion. It just means that you can take your readied action anytime before you take your readied action (moreover, you can't take your readied action after you've taken it!). This is trivially true, but it doesn't make it nonsensical.
However, I do feel like #2 might be rules as intended and it falls in line with what common sense says your character can reasonably do. I don't think that the semantics of the rule supports this common sense, however, so I think that developer input would be valuable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So Pathfinder actually rolled the rule back to its earlier wording... At least the Rules Compendium update gives à good idea that someone saw the issue inherent in the "action" terminology.
Interesting. I wonder if it was an intentional rollback. Since these problems with ready action aren't immediately obvious, it may be that they saw no reason to change it, even if they were aware of how the rules compendium describes readied actions.