| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My interpretation of the various swift actions and the rules surrounding them is not "faster" or "slower" than a move action but "thing that you can do while taking other actions without kludging anything". Mechanically, swift actions takes place in order just like any other action, but the way it tends to play out they might as well be simultaneous.
As for "fixes", that's more of a question for the Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew forum.
I feel its fine the way it is. I wouldn't open up more ways to use swift actions. Many can be pretty powerful and their limiting factor is use/round. It like letting people use their move action as a standard action.
For instance, using #1 above you could cast three spells in a round with quicken.
Also, many classes have a hard time getting even 1 swift action to do. Its even more unbalancing for them when you open it up for others to get more swift actions.
Like a Magus with Arcane strike. Magus inherently have a ton of swift actions. I think they should stick to only using one/round as their action economy dictates.
Thats just me though. I don't think it would break the game (at least if you made it a standard, I think its extremely strong as a move) I just feel it unnecessary.
There are many instances where you could modify swift actions so you can trade down for them and just make a clause in overpowered swift actions that doesn't allow them to be performed multiple times a round. Maybe you might think that's too much work for your campaigns though. -shrug-
Another option might be to change the way certain swift actions work so you can use them when you need to without eating a swift action. If you feel like they have to be done in the class but they shouldn't devour an action or they should be usable with other swift. Something like "A magus may use his arcane pool to enhance his weapon on his first round of combat as a free action" for example.
Watch for crazy combos though. Extra spells per round for a caster might sound really nice.
there's a lot of swift/immediate stuff buried in Mythic rules, and I'm starting to suspect that some powers are basically impossible to use.
Yeah, the over use of swift/immediate can be a pain in the butt, especially if you already had a swift hungry character before like a paladin or dual cursed oracle.
I've noticed that a whole lot of things use "as a swift action". Obviously, you can't allow swift actions to be performed with "larger" action types, because if you do, you end up with people spamming quickened spells, etc.
But... It seems to me that in many cases, "as a swift action" now tends to mean not "faster than a move action" but "slower than a move action", in that the impact on your ability to do things is more severe, because one you have a bunch of swift actions, you're capped at one of them per round no matter what, and you can't sacrifice other actions for them.
I have been toying with this, and I've come up with two possible fixes:
1. Go through a lot of them changing to "as a swift or move action".
2. Allow performing a swift action as a *standard* action, but not as a move action.The idea of either of these would be to reduce the degree to which you can end up spending many rounds with nothing to do with your move or standard actions, doing a swift action every round and otherwise just waiting.
Actually we allow substituting lesser actions for greater - all we had to do was make Quicken Spell shorten casting time to a move action instead of a swift. Very easy fix.
The only real pain-in-the-butt swift I've noticed is Arcane Armor Training and it's progeny. It was practically made for Eldritch Knight, yet it can't be used with EK's capstone.
Actually we allow substituting lesser actions for greater - all we had to do was make Quicken Spell shorten casting time to a move action instead of a swift. Very easy fix.I've noticed that a whole lot of things use "as a swift action". Obviously, you can't allow swift actions to be performed with "larger" action types, because if you do, you end up with people spamming quickened spells, etc.
But... It seems to me that in many cases, "as a swift action" now tends to mean not "faster than a move action" but "slower than a move action", in that the impact on your ability to do things is more severe, because one you have a bunch of swift actions, you're capped at one of them per round no matter what, and you can't sacrifice other actions for them.
I have been toying with this, and I've come up with two possible fixes:
1. Go through a lot of them changing to "as a swift or move action".
2. Allow performing a swift action as a *standard* action, but not as a move action.The idea of either of these would be to reduce the degree to which you can end up spending many rounds with nothing to do with your move or standard actions, doing a swift action every round and otherwise just waiting.
You could also just put a hard cap of 1 spell and 1 quickened spell per turn, period, the way the designers seem to want the game to run. It's a wonder they haven't published it as an explicit hard cap.
You could also just put a hard cap of 1 spell and 1 quickened spell per turn, period, the way the designers seem to want the game to run. It's a wonder they haven't published it as an explicit hard cap.
It is, always has been.
You can cast a quickened spell (see the Quicken Spell 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, and such spells don't count toward your normal limit of one spell per round. Casting a spell as a swift action doesn't incur an attack of opportunity.
.
Considering that rule already in place, I have yet to see a specific example where letting someone use a "normally swift action in a move action" would be game-breaking.It's honestly how I played the game until this was implied that you couldn't; I read it such that you weren't taking two swift actions, but performing one swift action, and then another action (normally capable of being done as a swift action) as a move or standard action.
To me, the "no two swift actions" was to reinforce that "these aren't free actions", so you can't just do move+standard+swift+swift+swift, etc.
Not, "the Paladin/Sorcerer can't lay hands himself and put up Arcane Strike and then attack" (for example, swift action + swift-as-move action + standard action).
In that regard, a swift action is like a free action. You can, however, perform only one single swift action per turn, regardless of what other actions you take.
Essentially, I take both these sentences together, not as two separate general-based rules for swift actions. The word "however" ties that second sentence to the first once, modifying that first sentence. This is why I didn't think it meant that you couldn't use two different swift actions in the same round, even if you didn't expend your other actions.
|
Wait. An immediate action is not a free or swift action thus does that mean I can't cast an immediate action spell if I already cast a spell on my turn?You can cast a quickened spell (see the Quicken Spell 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, and such spells don't count toward your normal limit of one spell per round. Casting a spell as a swift action doesn't incur an attack of opportunity.
It appears that you can't cast an immediate action spell as a swift action. You can take an immediate action within your turn and it uses up your swift action, so it's practically identical. Ask your GM if it provokes an AoO.