| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, with this system does it mean you can cast 3 spells every 2 turns (provided you do nothing else)?
On page 102...
Advanced actions are more complicated; you must
commit 2 or more acts to perform them. Some advanced
actions require more acts than you can possibly commit
during a single turn. In this case, you must continue
committing acts toward that advanced action over
multiple turns until the advanced action is complete.
On page 105 under Advanced Actions...
Cast a Standard-Action Spell (Complex; 2 Acts): You
cast a spell with a casting time of 1 standard action. This
isn’t an attack action, even if the spell requires a ranged
attack roll. If you provoke attacks of opportunity when
casting the spell, you don’t provoke attacks a second time
when making the ranged attack roll
So does this mean you can spend 2/3 of your actions to cast the first spell, then start casting the second with 1/3...then complete it on the 1/3 of your next turn and then do another spell with the last 2/3?
I know Swift Spells are limited to once per turn but are standard actions limited in any such way?
Not that I know of. It seems legit. Broken, but legit if I may say so.
Maybe people will stop complaining about casters being completely gimped by the new action economy rules then. This seems to balance it out...and then some.
Agreed Other Guy. People whine but spells were so optimal to begin with.
If it's not a buff, it's crap!?
Actually, from memory, noone complained about casters. What everybody said where screwed where half-casters since they tend to have tons of swift action required to be effective.
I honestly love the new system even for casters, it allows the addition of interesting things besides just full attack nuke or 2 spells nuke. While I do feel somethings will need adjusting I think the added versatility is greater than not being able to use a few swifts.
Do the optional rules somehow circumvent the Core ruling* that a caster can only cast, at most, 2 spells a round?
(*might just be that's as much as you could ever do)
The ruling is that you can only ever cast one spell a round, with quickened spells specifying an exception, iirc. And yeah, people only complained about partial casters' reliance on swift actions screwing them over with the new options.
There is no rules in Core that restrict number of spells cast aside from quickened one, as far as i remember.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Core page 213 (Magic Chapter) "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."
A GM could consider the mention of a normal limit of one spell per round to mean that you are limited to one non-swift spell per round.
That is how I've always interpreted.. normal rules, 1 spell per round. A single swift spell does not count towards that limit of 1.. nothin the unchained changes that core rule.
Is this "normal limit" mentioned anywhere else?
Now i remembered, that issue come up also during the Mythic playtest, and even the devs where not aware of that awkard wording. I remember Jahson Bulmann itself saing "we didn't know we ever wrote that" or something along those lines. In fact in the end, the mythic initiative explicitly forbids spell casting because everyone agreed that that wordage was informal and only mean to represent the normal limit of having a single standard action to work with.
Ultimately it will come down to the individual GM. The RAW is one spell per round even if that wasn't the RAI. This isn't getting used in PFS anyway, so the RAW isn't particularly important.
I don't think continuing actions from one round to another was intended for most actions, just the ones listed as "at least 3 acts", as there seem to be a lot of potential issues cropping up. If it works for spells, it would presumably work for other things, and I think it rapidly devolves into a mess.
For example, if you can cast 3 spells per two rounds, does that mean my fighter can hit a guy twice, then spend his last act to start a charge towards another target, then finish it when it gets to his turn, and then hit the new target 2 more times in addition to the charge attack? Can I grapple you, then start tying you up, finish tying the next turn, and then charge a new opponent as soon as I am done?
If the answer is yes for 3/2 spells, then it has to be yes to these situations, and anything else a player thinks up to abuse the system.
I don't think continuing actions from one round to another was intended for most actions, just the ones listed as "at least 3 acts", as there seem to be a lot of potential issues cropping up. If it works for spells, it would presumably work for other things, and I think it rapidly devolves into a mess.
For example, if you can cast 3 spells per two rounds, does that mean my fighter can hit a guy twice, then spend his last act to start a charge towards another target, then finish it when it gets to his turn, and then hit the new target 2 more times in addition to the charge attack? Can I grapple you, then start tying you up, finish tying the next turn, and then charge a new opponent as soon as I am done?
If the answer is yes for 3/2 spells, then it has to be yes to these situations, and anything else a player thinks up to abuse the system.
Nope charge isn't a complex action so that doesn't work. The reason why it works is because casting is complex which let's you break it up between rounds. One thing to note is that each time you commit acts to a complex action you provoke an aoo.
You know, as I think more about this, I honestly think it's okay for the 3/2 spells. You are sacrificing the ability to move to do so, which would have essentially been 'free' in the core system. Splitting your casting over 2 rounds also opens you up to a much greater chance of taking damage during the casting and having to make a concentration check.
Solution: Increase number of acts per spell.
The 3/2 really only works out when the caster is protected from threats. Anybody with sense is going to attack the spellcaster in the middle of the second spell and with enough damage, you will fail that concentration check.
Guys, it's really not that powerfull, you are opening yourself for a full turn to be interrupted having to make con checks every times somebody scratches you. It's actually a big giant red bullseye on you with a "hit me please" neon sign. I'm sure actually noone would risk his spell slots this way.
@Dekalinder, I agree that it's very risky, but I could see it in a few cases.
- When you know a fight it coming quickly and you only have a couple rounds to prep.
- When your foes are all melee and you have good blockers up front.
- When you have good cover or concealment.
- When you have good defenses up like mirror image or stoneskin.
I don't think that 3/2 casting is overpowered.
My first reaction was "Aw hell no!", but the more I think about it, the more I'm okay with it. It can set up interesting situations, like a rather classic "A magical cultist behind his guards chanting spells and the heroes must stop him". It also follows a general system idea of "If you devote all your actions to something, you get more out of it".
As a martial fan, I'll be the first to shut down caster shenanigans, but I'm okay with this.
Related to this:
Can you use a hero point to gain one extra act and cast 2 spells in one round?
Sure, why not.
There is no limit on spells per round, there is only a limit on actions per round. The unchained action economy alters the number of actions per round and so do hero points, so if you can get four actions in the round and each spell costs two actions, then you can certainly cast two spells.
Unless Unchained has a rule to override this? I admit, I skimmed this section so might have missed a rule if there is one.