Can you take Free and swift actions before and after a Full Round actions?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 290 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

4 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

I'm making this new thread because of other threads that raised a lot of debates and questions but came to a circle with still a desagreement to the correct interpretation (both sides believing they are right)

The two interpretation/opinions are:

1- No. You cannot because the definition of Full Round action indicates that it consumes the whole round and thus you can only take those actions within the Full round action (and under any restriction imposed by the type of Full round action you took)

2- Yes you can. Basically, the notion is that there is a gap before or after that full round actions that allows you to take the Free (which take no time at all) and swift actions.

I believe that this thread is necessary to look at the overall RAW and defines if it is possible or not and should be Faqed because it would greatly benefits from clarification from the PDT and resolve many other threads in the forum.

Thanks!


the only thing that breaks a fullround action is if you take a move action or a standard action you can take unlimited free actions in a round(tho some gms might put a kabosh on you getting to many) and swift actions are just limited free actions. if you couldnt take free actions on a full round action you wouldnt beable to full attack with a light crossbow with rapid reload which would be dumb


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

2. Yes you can. You can even take them during a full round action. As Lady-J points out, if you couldn't, taking multiple attacks with ranged weapons would be impossible. And that's clearly not the case.

The rules are actually quite explicit that you can take swift and free actions along with full round actions. See page 181 of the Core Rulebook.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I mean... the answer is yes, you can. I don't see much in the way of interpretation here. Unless you mean the very creative kind.

A full-round action only stops you from taking a move or standard with it, and they explicitly allow the use of free and swift actions in addition to them.

PRD wrote:
A full-round action requires an entire round to complete. Thus, it can't be coupled with a standard or a move action, though if it does not involve moving any distance, you can take a 5-foot step.
PRD wrote:
Full-Round Action: A full-round action consumes all your effort during a round. The only movement you can take during a full-round action is a 5-foot step before, during, or after the action. You can also perform free actions and swift actions

In addition, you can also 5-foot step both before and after a full-round, so there is time in the round to preform actions before and after the full-round action. And even then, you don't even need 'time' to perform free actions strictly speaking.

PRD wrote:
Free actions don't take any time at all

And on top of that, you can take swift actions whenever you can take a free action, and swifts explicitly don't affect your ability to perform other actions in the round.

PRD wrote:
A swift action consumes a very small amount of time, but represents a larger expenditure of effort than a free action. You can perform one swift action per turn without affecting your ability to perform other actions. 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. You can take a swift action anytime you would normally be allowed to take a free action.

There's also nothing that prevents you from ending or beginning a Standard Action+Move Action turn with a swift or free action.


Both sides agree that you can take free actions during a Full round action. The question is whether you can take them before and after.

to make it clearer:

side 1 says: During a 6 second Full round action it starts at 0 and end at 6 seconds. Therefore, when your full round action is complete, you cannot do anything else.

side 2 says: you still have some time before and after complteing a full round actions to make free and swift actions.


@The archive:

Well it is not so obvious even though it appears to be. There has been a lot of discussion about this in the Full actions + free actions thread and very good arguments has been made by both sides. In these threads they discussed it in the context of Spellcombat and TWF...

To summarize: Full round action is defined as consuming all your efforts during your turn or requiring entire round to complete:

Full-Round Actions (CRB p.187)
A full-round action requires an entire round to complete.
Thus, it can’t be coupled with a standard or a move action, though if it does not involve moving any distance, you can take a 5-foot step.

Therefore, if a full round requires en entire round (not part of it), therfore you can't take a free or swift actions before and after.

However, it clearly indicated that you can take them DURING the full round action.

Just like you said:
PRD wrote:

Full-Round Action: A full-round action consumes all your effort during a round. The only movement you can take during a full-round action is a 5-foot step before, during, or after the action. You can also perform free actions and swift actions

Please note. Assuming the Full round action consume the entire round as indicated, you can take the 5-foot step DURING the Full round action before , during or after the actual action associated with the FRA, but not before or after the actual FRA.

Fpr example, if you use spellcomabt that gives you the ability to cast and attack, you can take your 5-foot step before the casting, or after, before the acttacks or after, etc. But all within the duration of the Full round action. Now in most cases, that won't make a difference, but in order cases it will....


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Some food for thought I just came up with:

A barbarian, that isn't raging yet, begins his turn next to something/one that he wants to attack. Following the logic of no actions before/after full-round actions, the barbarian cannot:

Enter Rage(as a free action) -> Full-Attack

Instead, the barbarian would have to either:

Enter Rage(as a free action) -> Standard Action attack -> whatever else -> then next turn Full-Attack

Begin Full-Attack -> Enter Rage(as a free action) after the first swing -> continue Full-Attack

Nor can he, against an enemy further away: Enter Rage(as a free action) -> Charge

Users of the Arcane Strike feat and Bards would see similar issues.

Which, frankly, is just a silly way to look at things.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

It doesn't matter when you declare the full round action, the free action to Rage or Charge can be done before the attack and be considered a part of that action as well. This is something that has been done over and over again, not sure why our discussion on the other thread would change that.

If the full round action takes the whole round, then it stands to reason that we have been taking these free and swift actions during that full round.

I assume we want to avoid mentioning the previous subjects in this thread, but it is those situations that put the light on this issue, specifically trying to combine a magus ability with a feat that limits the attacks in a particular manner. This brought up the discussion of a spell granting a "free action attack." This out of place action combined with a very strict reading of one small passage of the combat spell use that gives this as part of a casting of a touch spell, makes for someone trying to gain an extra attack that would normally not be there.

So, we are here.

It is a full round action. It replaces the Standard and Move action to do it, and takes the full round to perform. This does not stop Free Actions or Swift actions from being used during the round, though with some abilities they need to be before or after the attack within that full round action. We have done this countless times, using quickdraw with a two handing Rogue, Raging with a Barbarian, and so on.


thaX wrote:
It doesn't matter when you declare the full round action, the free action to Rage or Charge can be done before the attack and be considered a part of that action as well.

Not by any actual game mechanic of what it means to start and finish an action.

Let's take casting a spell because it's clearer.

While you are casting a spell, you can be interrupted. If your spell takes a full-round action because, say, you're a sorcerer casting a metamagic spell, then at any time during your full-round action you are casting and your spell can be disrupted.

If someone attacked you during a free action, let's say you were wielding a staff 2H and needed to let go to begin casting, you are not yet casting when you let go of your staff. If someone damaged you right after you let go of your staff, you wouldn't need to make a concentration check because:

1) you haven't started casting yet, which means
2) you haven't started your full-round action yet, which means
3) you can take free actions before you start your full-round action

To say otherwise just breaks the game.


you can take infinite free actions before during and after a full round action weather or not the dm will let you is another thing


Lady-J wrote:
you can take infinite free actions before during and after a full round action weather or not the dm will let you is another thing

Naturally. However, some people claim that the rules say there is no time to take free actions either before or after a full-round action. And that clearly breaks things.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
_Ozy_ wrote:
Naturally. However, some people claim that the rules say there is no time to take free actions either before or after a full-round action. And that clearly breaks things.

That shouldn't be a problem, since "Free actions don't take any time at all." Free actions are like talking, you can do that before, during or after your full round actions. Like the princess bride duel.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

fun fact monologing is a free action have all the BBEG give a 2 paragraph monolog b4 the fight


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Reminder; Quick Draw lets you draw weapons as a free action. It also lets you throw those weapons at your normal rate of attack... which happens during a full round action. So the rules are specifically stating that you are making free actions in the middle of your iterative attacks.


Lady-J wrote:
fun fact monologing is a free action have all the BBEG give a 2 paragraph monolog b4 the fight

Well, you do get cut off eventually. Since: "Speaking more than a few sentences is generally beyond the limit of a free action."

phantom1592 wrote:
Reminder; Quick Draw lets you draw weapons as a free action. It also lets you throw those weapons at your normal rate of attack... which happens during a full round action. So the rules are specifically stating that you are making free actions in the middle of your iterative attacks.

The argument is against actions before/after, not during. They don't seem to have an issue with that, and have some convoluted logic that okays a 5-foot step before/after.

Though, if nothing else, it's pretty clear that the logic being used really breaks down when considering actions prior to a full-round action. The casting example by _Ozy_ is solid reason why.

And in addition: using a swift action explicitly does not affect one's ability to perform other actions on their turn. Ergo, if I start my turn with a swift, I can do whatever action thereafter with my turn (save another swift), including a full-round action. And since swift actions can be taken whenever a free action can, it follows that I can do the same with a free action. Therefore, you can perform other actions before a full-round action. And if that's true, well, that full-round action isn't somehow taking up all of your turn's time after all. So, you could perform actions after it as well.

This issue all boils down to someone trying to read more into the rules than there actually is. Thus, adding arbitrary restrictions that aren't actually there.
"A full-round action consumes all your effort during a round"/"A full-round action requires an entire round to complete" exist, yes. They are there in the rules. But, the rules explain what this means: "Thus, [a full-round action] can't be coupled with a standard or a move action." That's all there is to it. That's what it means by those quotes.

Let's be frank here. If the rules actually wanted to impose a limit on how you can use free/swift actions when you use a full-round action, don't you think they might, I don't know, say something about it?

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Takin a swift or free action before and after a full round action? Absolutely legal.
Some full round action will prevent you from taking a swift or free action while performing the full round action, but that should be valued case by case.
To consider the most extreme examples:
1) between the attacks of a full attack you can take any swift or free action,
2) if you are casting a spell that require a full round or one round action you can't do most swift or free actions while casting the spell (to reiterate, you can do them before or after without any problem).

PRD wrote:
Free Action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free, as decided by the GM.
PRD wrote:


Full-Round Actions

A full-round action requires an entire round to complete. Thus, it can't be coupled with a standard or a move action, though if it does not involve moving any distance, you can take a 5-foot step.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
The Archive wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
fun fact monologing is a free action have all the BBEG give a 2 paragraph monolog b4 the fight

Well, you do get cut off eventually. Since: "Speaking more than a few sentences is generally beyond the limit of a free action."

My players generally stop the monologues before the second syllable is uttered.


The Archive wrote:


This issue all boils down to someone trying to read more into the rules than there actually is. Thus, adding arbitrary restrictions that aren't actually there.
"A full-round action consumes all your effort during a round"/"A full-round action requires an entire round to complete" exist, yes. They are there in the rules. But, the rules explain what this means: "Thus, [a full-round action] can't be coupled with a standard or a move action." That's all there is to it. That's what it means by those quotes.

Let's be frank here. If the rules actually wanted to impose a limit on how you can use free/swift actions when you use a full-round action, don't you think they might, I don't know, say something about it?

Just to give some perspective into this discussion. This didn't come up with someone trying to read more into the rules like you are saying. It came up in the other thread because people were arguing about the impact of a full round action on potential other actions in the rounds. Someone then came up with this explanation/defintion in the books and it raised questions that I thought interesting.

MOre specifically, if you take a spellcombat Full Round Action (FRA)or take the full attack action while fighting with two weapons, both action types impose a restriction (one hand free for spellcombat and a penalty to hit for TWF).

Now if someone take take a swift action (casting a touch spell) after completing the main actions associated with the full round action, are they still under the restriction of the Full Round action?

Side 1 said: Yes. FRA consumes the entire round (from 0 to 6 seconds), therefore you still take -2 to hit for your attack or you can't switch grip to two-handed on your touch attack with the swift spell since you are required to have a free hand for the entire FRA with spellcombat.

Side 2 said: No. Once you complete a FRA, you still have time to do swift and Free and since the FRA is completed, you don't have any restriction/penalties anymore.

Please note, this thread is not about resolving theses specific issues (very intelligent people have made good arguments on both sides on this other thread). So go to this other thread if you want to discuss those specifics issues (there are more than one)

But it raised the question on whether you can take swift and free actions before and after the FRA wich I found very interesting....

Understand, that in most cases, I believe that either way, it won't really impact the game as most of the time, you will be able to take the free/swift actions anyway (either within or outside the FRA).

But in some specific cases it might impact, and maybe in the future, there might be other FRAs that impose a restriction on those swift/free actions. Personnaly that's what I want to know.....

Scarab Sages

Cuttler, It would seem I am missing your question then.. Your asking if you can take free/swift actions before and/or after a FRA but then you state it is agreed in most all cases you can. With the exception that in these only few specific examples you may not be able too?

Edit: And as an aside even though you say you would rather not discuss it. Spell combat and a very typical ie: I seen this tons of times,

Swift action: quickened truestrike FRA: spell combat shocking grasp and 5ft step then attack..

Although I cant recall which ones exactly I have seen this in PFS scenarios with magus BBEG..


Oh look at this. I didn't realize the whirlwind attack thread had a grandkid already.


No it is not agreed upon..at least it wasn't in the other thread where many arguments was brought to either side....

there are two sides on this:

1) those that think that cou cannot take free/swift outside of FRA because the FRA take the entire round (therefore the swift and free can only be taken Inside the FRA)

2) those that think that there is a gap (however small) that allows you to take Free and swift actions before/after the FRA.


Johnny_Devo wrote:

Oh look at this. I didn't realize the whirlwind attack thread had a grandkid already.

LOL

I'm sorry JOhnny, I didn't read that thread, but heard about it. I just saw the divergence in the other thread (Full action + Free actions) and wanted a more general answer that would resolve the other specifics...It seems to me if we have a clear answer to this general question, il will answer the specific ones....one might hope!!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have to say, this thread is the first place I've ever seen it argued that you can't take Free/Swift actions before or after a full round action.

Scarab Sages

I didnt read the other thread but for those believing item 1 Cuttler that would invalidate many things I have seen done..

As mentioned..
Rage then full attack

Archers with effecient quivers drawing the first blanched arrow to bypass DR in a full attack..

Quickened Truestrike the Spellcombat..

Warpriest swift action fervor themselves the any FRA..

I'm sure there are a bunch more swift actions I'm forgetting at the moment


@Yuri Sarreth

There's an ongoing debate spanning multiple threads now, and the issue outlined in this thread's topic isn't the only concern, so I'll summarize what questions are being, well, questioned. (assume magus character for all examples)

1) Can you use TWF(one-handed and unarmed), complete all your attacks, then as a free action switch your grip to two-hand your one-handed weapon?

2) As an extension, can you use TWF(one-handed and unarmed), complete all your attacks, then swift action cast shocking grasp, then free action deliver it?

3) Where the debate usually diverges: Can you TWF, then swiftcast a touch spell, then free action switch grip to two-handed, then free action deliver touch spell?

4) To the tough meat of the issue: Can you spell combat(full-attack then cast a touch spell), then free action switch grip to two-handed, free action deliver the touch spell, then free action switch grip to one-handed, swiftcast another touch spell, then free action switch grip back to two-handed, and another free action to deliver touch spell? Assuming that the GM does not object to this number of free actions.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Most times, as Cuttler has posted, it wouldn't matter that much. Free actions and swift actions are used all the time in conjunction with the Full Round Action. The Full Attack is made within the Full Round Action, typically is the main use of the Full Round Action for most characters.

As mentioned, the real issue came about when a spell with a Melee touch attack was being used with a Magus ability and the free action attack was said to happen outside the full round action. Normally not a problem, but the discussion happen to be, at the time, about combining the full round action with a feat that "is a part of a full attack action" that limits the attacks in a particular way. (The feat is mentioned above) Using the "free action attack" to impart the spells effects was stated to be outside the ability's Full Round Action and was declared to be an attack on top of what was allowed by the feat. I believe that stance is taking some liberties with the reading of the rules, and ignores some other qualities that would prevent such from occurring.

If you want to know more, please read all 700 plus posts Here

My overall take is that it doesn't matter how the player perceives the overall structure of the Full Round Action, as this one issue, based on a very unlikely build, is not the usual interaction and the overall structure of a Full Round Action doesn't do much either way otherwise.

So we likely have been taking our free/swift actions during the Full Round Action. Does it really make that much difference?


I feel like the "GM's should forbid anything that feels like excessive free actions" rule was added specifically to deal with things like issue 4 above. You don't need to ban rage-then-full-attack over it. (And any rule that states you have to go into rage between your first attack and your second attack means needless extra bookkeeping.)


Yuri, Johnny as summarized a good part of the debate in the other thread.

I will just add some of the potential consequences of the good examples given by JOhnny:

in case 3: if the swiftcast is within the TWF (full attack action that last the entire round), then you might get the -2 to hit. But if the swiftcast happens after the completion of the full round action (full attack with TWF that is completed) then you don't get the -2..

as for 4: if the swiftcast happens within the FRA (spellcombat) then you cannot switch grip for 2-handed as Spellcombat requires one hand free for the entire action which last the entire round. If you can take actions after the FRA is completed (spellcombat) then you are no longuer confined by the restriction of spellcombat and can then switch grip to 2-handed once you have swiftcast shocking grasp for example...

There might be other cases where similar questions arise..hence the overall question if you FRA takes the entire round or not.

As for your examples with the rage (or any other example that you gave):

If you declare full attack , you can still start your rage because it is allowed by RAW to do free actions Inside a FRA. SO in this case you would: Start FRA, initiate rage as Free, make your full attack sequence, do other free or swift, then end of FRA (you can also make a 5-foot step somewhere within that FRA....

For this instance, there are no consequences either way as opposed to spellcombat which impose a restriction....

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I shall answer these with "yes" and "no"

I will also point out the other two threads instead of going through {reasons} here.

Johnny_Devo wrote:

@Yuri Sarreth

There's an ongoing debate spanning multiple threads now, and the issue outlined in this thread's topic isn't the only concern, so I'll summarize what questions are being, well, questioned. (assume magus character for all examples)

1) Can you use TWF(one-handed and unarmed), complete all your attacks, then as a free action switch your grip to two-hand your one-handed weapon?

Yes
Johnny_Devo wrote:

2) As an extension, can you use TWF(one-handed and unarmed), complete all your attacks, then swift action cast shocking grasp, then free action deliver it?

yes. I will add that the free action is unnecessary to add here, as the casting of the spell is already a swift action.
Johnny_Devo wrote:

3) Where the debate usually diverges: Can you TWF, then swiftcast a touch spell, then free action switch grip to two-handed, then free action deliver touch spell?

No, you would either hold the spell or use it before two handing the weapon. You can, however, use spellstrike to deliver the spell through one of the one handed weapons.
Johnny_Devo wrote:

4) To the tough meat of the issue: Can you spell combat(full-attack then cast a touch spell), then free action switch grip to two-handed, free action deliver the touch spell, then free action switch grip to one-handed, swiftcast another touch spell, then free action switch grip back to two-handed, and another free action to deliver touch spell? Assuming that the GM does not object to this number of free actions.

No.

Spell Combat needs that hand free, it is the off hand using the spell as the weapon. I assume that the character is at least 2nd level magus to use the spellstrike ability, otherwise two handing the weapon would make touching the target with a free hand impossible. You can deliver your attacks, then swift action the second spell and do it's attack, then two hand the weapon, likely to do two handed AoO's at that point.

The Spell Combat is the crux of this issue. I linked the first thread in the previous post, Here is the second one.

I went a little more than Yes or No.

Scarab Sages

Johnny_Devo wrote:

@Yuri Sarreth

There's an ongoing debate spanning multiple threads now, and the issue outlined in this thread's topic isn't the only concern, so I'll summarize what questions are being, well, questioned. (assume magus character for all examples)

1) Can you use TWF(one-handed and unarmed), complete all your attacks, then as a free action switch your grip to two-hand your one-handed weapon?

2) As an extension, can you use TWF(one-handed and unarmed), complete all your attacks, then swift action cast shocking grasp, then free action deliver it?

3) Where the debate usually diverges: Can you TWF, then swiftcast a touch spell, then free action switch grip to two-handed, then free action deliver touch spell?

4) To the tough meat of the issue: Can you spell combat(full-attack then cast a touch spell), then free action switch grip to two-handed, free action deliver the touch spell, then free action switch grip to one-handed, swiftcast another touch spell, then free action switch grip back to two-handed, and another free action to deliver touch spell? Assuming that the GM does not object to this number of free actions.

Ah.. I see. This really isnt about actions before then and seems more to be about actions after the FRA..

The only one of these I can see a problem with is 4. As stated if the GM allows that many grips and releases which I personally would not. As stated in the FAQ about it one release and regrip per rnd would be my ruling as well..


thaX wrote:
I will add that the free action is unnecessary to add here, as the casting of the spell is already a swift action.

It's still a free action though, regardless of if the spell is cast as a standard, swift, or 1 minute cast time spell, so long as it's a touch spell.

thaX wrote:
Johnny_Devo wrote:

3) Where the debate usually diverges: Can you TWF, then swiftcast a touch spell, then free action switch grip to two-handed, then free action deliver touch spell?

No, you would either hold the spell or use it before two handing the weapon. You can, however, use spellstrike to deliver the spell through one of the one handed weapons.

Wait, I'm a little lost. How is this situation different from this?

thaX wrote:
Johnny_Devo wrote:
thaX wrote:
Johnny_Devo wrote:
By your definition, can the magus two-hand the free attack after casting the spell as a standard action?
He can, though the only way to deliver the spell with the weapon in that way is through Spellstrike, as he already used his standard to cast the spell. I have see it done in this way, but you only get the one attack using it in this way, as some misunderstood what the magus does with his abilities.
So you're saying that the free action to deliver the touch spell is not part of the standard action to cast the touch spell?

When using the standard action, that action ends after the spell is cast. The caster then can use the attack afforded by the spell, or move to get into range then use it. This isn't in dispute, right?

The difference is I have stated it above. A full Round Action that spell combat uses changes the standard action to an off hand use.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I understand you want to ask me a question, but it is already answered in the quote.

The difference is between using a Standard action and the full round action use of Spell Combat.


What does spell combat have to do with the answer I quoted?

Scarab Sages

If as a GM you allow a character to 5-foot step(free action) and then full round attack... I don't understand how this can be a question.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Because I mention Spell Combat in my answer. TWF is the same, the off hand is being used in the attacks.

If you use both hands during a full round action with two different weapons, you are not going to be able to spellstrike through the weapon wielded with two hands. If you are not using spellstrike, you need the free hand to deliver that attack. (which an unarmed attack would provide)


The case you described Lorewalker is not an issue per say, because you can technically take a 5 foot step with a Full round action so in this case it has no impact. Actually, there is no issue with the 5-foot step at all...

But the specific case described by Johnny (spellcombat)would be impacted if the full round action takes the entire round or not....see the post of Johnny, thaX or my other post where I describec potential consequences depending on whether you can do free/swift before/after the Full Round Action.


thaX wrote:

Because I mention Spell Combat in my answer. TWF is the same, the off hand is being used in the attacks.

If you use both hands during a full round action with two different weapons, you are not going to be able to spellstrike through the weapon wielded with two hands. If you are not using spellstrike, you need the free hand to deliver that attack. (which an unarmed attack would provide)

So you're saying you can't even cast the swift action spell which requires somatic components?


Personal thoughts as a Frequent GM, occasional Player:

I think that if you do a full round action, all free/swift actions taken "before" or "after" roll into the full round action you took. So:

FA (Remove Grip) + SA (Cast Quickened Touch Spell) + FA (Touch from Spell) + FA (Re Grip) + First Attack + FA (Taunt Enemy) + Second Attack + FA (Laugh at Enemy)

is all part of a full round action even though the player didn't declare a full attack until after he touched with his quickened spell. This will leave some corner cases (such as does a magus who uses spell combat suffer the -2 on that first touch attack even though he didn't declare spell combat until after?) But those can be left up to the GM.

That's how I'd personally handle it, and I think that in the spirit of the game, none of this truly matters. At best a player is avoiding a small penalty on 1 attack, at worst they are suffering a small penalty on 1 attack.

Anyways, good luck with finding the "true answer".


I run it where swift/free actions can be done before, after, or/and during full round actions.

I don't really care if that's "right". It's at least simple and keeps the game moving.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

You read that in my response?

No, it is what you do with that swift action that matters, not if your able to. Using Quickened Spell will enable the casting, but while using Spell Combat or Two Weapon Fighting (TWF) you are not going to be able to wield the weapon with Two Hands until after you either hold the spell or use the attack from it. The character would likely shift the grip of the weapon so that he can Two Hand Attack of Oppertunities (AoO)after the attacks are completed.

Now, if you cast it as a standard, then two hand the weapon, you can spellstrike through the weapon in this way. You can even move to the target before you take your attack. This has not changed nor have I ever said that it did.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

People make my brain hurt.
You absolutely can take free actions either side of (and during) a full attack. Any attempt to rule otherwise is clearly wrong. To limit the more egregious issues you need to look at the specific rules. Some free actions taken during other actions will invalidate some aspect of specific full round actions - or vice versa.

For example spell combat specifically requires you to have a hand free when you make your attack, that expressly includes any attack roll required as part of the spell.

I can't see any reason you couldn't swift cast a spell free action 2 hand the weapon then attack.

If you are TWF you cannot make a two handed attack during any part of the round. You can free action two handed grip after you have made all your attacks, but not to make an attack, even a free one. While this is not expressly stated the hands of effort FAQ and nearly every ruling available makes the intention clear. I'll quite happily call shenanigans on anyone trying to pull that at any table I play at.


thaX wrote:

You read that in my response?

No, it is what you do with that swift action that matters, not if your able to. Using Quickened Spell will enable the casting, but while using Spell Combat or Two Weapon Fighting (TWF) you are not going to be able to wield the weapon with Two Hands until after you either hold the spell or use the attack from it. The character would likely shift the grip of the weapon so that he can Two Hand Attack of Oppertunities (AoO)after the attacks are completed.

Now, if you cast it as a standard, then two hand the weapon, you can spellstrike through the weapon in this way. You can even move to the target before you take your attack. This has not changed nor have I ever said that it did.

So why does the hand being occupied prevent two-handing the sword, but not prevent casting a spell with a somatic component? In addition, if the hand is occupied, why are you allowed to shift your grip to two-handed just before your turn ends?

What I'm trying to read into your responses is what you say is right or wrong, why you way it's right or wrong, and then I attempt to bring up another point that may follow those same principles.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

My belief is that if you can't do it TWF, you can't do it with Spell Combat. You can still cast the Quickened spell and deliver it through a weapon wielded one handed during Spell Combat (Using Spellstrike).

I had thought this before this "issue" with a Full Round Action came to light. The reading of it only confirmed my stance.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

In the example you stated, your using an unarmed attack to be able to have a free hand to do the other stated actions. Normally, one would either have to Quickdraw to sheaf the extra weapon (after the attacks) or drop it to have the free hand to be able to cast the Quickened spell.

You can shift your grip after the Full Attack is done, which happens within the Full Round Action.

I know you are being a stickler, but I go by the examples you gave.

The main point that needs to be clarified here is that the character is using all his hands of effort here, so using the weapon Two Handed after having done so is not normally allowed. I don't think the shenanigans with the free action attack going outside the Full Round Action will change that.

Scarab Sages

dragonhunterq wrote:
For example spell combat specifically requires you to have a hand free when you make your attack, that expressly includes any attack roll required as part of the spell.

You would think, but I made that argument for 6 pages in one of the previous threads only to be told repeatedly that I was wrong, and that the free action from the spell is completely separate from Spell Combat and is not limited to 1 hand (though Spell Combat does impose the -2 penalty to it).


I hoped that this thread could resolve at least part of it....

If the FRA takes the entire round as described in the CRB, then the free action cannot be seperated from the spellcombat but has to be within.

Unfortunately, if the FRA doesn't last the entire round, then you are allowed to take free action after the FRA, but doesn't resolve if it can be separated....


Ferious Thune wrote:
dragonhunterq wrote:
For example spell combat specifically requires you to have a hand free when you make your attack, that expressly includes any attack roll required as part of the spell.
You would think, but I made that argument for 6 pages in one of the previous threads only to be told repeatedly that I was wrong, and that the free action from the spell is completely separate from Spell Combat and is not limited to 1 hand (though Spell Combat does impose the -2 penalty to it).

Sometimes you just have to make your point about how to read class abilities and then let people believe what they want to believe.


well in this case it's more than that....

Honestly, people have brought good arguments on both sides and reached a stalemate....


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Cuttler wrote:

well in this case it's more than that....

Honestly, people have brought good arguments on both sides and reached a stalemate....

Any general argument that you cannot take free/swift actions either side or within a full action is inherently flawed. The rules are about as clear as they can possibly be - repeated clearly again and again and again. There cannot be ANY good argument in support of that.


The rules are very clear, they just aren't what most people think they are (specifically, when you can take a free or swift action). For most purposes it doesn't make a difference, for a few it does.

However, I had enough of the arguments in the magus thread, and I'm not repeating it all here.

1 to 50 of 290 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Can you take Free and swift actions before and after a Full Round actions? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.