Can a Swift/Immediate Action be Used as a Standard Action?
Darkwolf71
First Post
I don't know about RAW, but I don't see why you couldn't.
Are their specific actions in question? That may make it a little clearer.
Are their specific actions in question? That may make it a little clearer.
Hypersmurf
Moderatarrrrh...
Atavar said:
You can only take a single swift action in a round, and using an immediate action counts as your single swift action for the round.
So there's never a reason to use a standard action for a swift action, because either:
a/ you have already used a swift action this round, so you may not take another swift action even by expending a standard action, or
b/ you haven't already used a swift action this round, so there's no need to use a standard action to do it, as you still have a swift action available.
-Hyp.
Darkwolf71
First Post
I stand corrected. 
There is an item in the Magic Item Compendium (belt of battle perhaps?) that uses charges (as a swift action) to give yourself extra actions in a round. I believe one charge gives you a move equivalent action, two charges give you a standard action, and three charges give you a full-round action.
So, for example, in one round you could:
1. Move into position (move action)
2. Cast a spell with a casting time of one standard action (standard action)
3. Spend two charges on your belt to give yourself another standard action (swift action)
4. Cast another spell with a casting time of one standard action (standard action)
But one of my characters wants to cast a spell requiring a swift action at step four, not a spell requiring a standard action. His argument is that a standard action takes longer than a swift action, so the belt should allow him to take a swift action at step four rather than a standard action.
However, the item doesn't explicitly allow a user to grant himself a swift action--only a move, standard, or full-round action. I argued that swift actions are not interchangeable with standard actions, and thus I ruled against him originally.
So, given all of the above as an example, does the RAW support the player's being allowed to use a swift action at step four, and if not, would you still allow it, and why?
Thanks again,
Atavar
So, for example, in one round you could:
1. Move into position (move action)
2. Cast a spell with a casting time of one standard action (standard action)
3. Spend two charges on your belt to give yourself another standard action (swift action)
4. Cast another spell with a casting time of one standard action (standard action)
But one of my characters wants to cast a spell requiring a swift action at step four, not a spell requiring a standard action. His argument is that a standard action takes longer than a swift action, so the belt should allow him to take a swift action at step four rather than a standard action.
However, the item doesn't explicitly allow a user to grant himself a swift action--only a move, standard, or full-round action. I argued that swift actions are not interchangeable with standard actions, and thus I ruled against him originally.
So, given all of the above as an example, does the RAW support the player's being allowed to use a swift action at step four, and if not, would you still allow it, and why?
Thanks again,
Atavar
Okay, here's a simpler example:
1. Hero spellcaster moves around a corner and sees an enemy spellcaster (move action)
2. Hero spellcaster wants to cast a spell to interrupt the enemy spellcaster, so he readies an action to cast a spell if the enemy spellcaster begins casting a spell (standard action)
3. Enemy spellcaster begins casting a spell, so hero spellcaster casts his standard-action spell (standard action)
The above is all allowed per RAW. However, what happens if the spell that the hero spellcaster wants to cast at step three requires a swift action rather than a standard action? Per RAW a character can only ready a standard, move, or free action. He can ready and then cast a standard action spell, and he can ready and then cast a quickened spell (free action); does the RAW say that he can ready and then cast a swift action spell? If not, should he be allowed to anyway?
Thanks,
Atavar
1. Hero spellcaster moves around a corner and sees an enemy spellcaster (move action)
2. Hero spellcaster wants to cast a spell to interrupt the enemy spellcaster, so he readies an action to cast a spell if the enemy spellcaster begins casting a spell (standard action)
3. Enemy spellcaster begins casting a spell, so hero spellcaster casts his standard-action spell (standard action)
The above is all allowed per RAW. However, what happens if the spell that the hero spellcaster wants to cast at step three requires a swift action rather than a standard action? Per RAW a character can only ready a standard, move, or free action. He can ready and then cast a standard action spell, and he can ready and then cast a quickened spell (free action); does the RAW say that he can ready and then cast a swift action spell? If not, should he be allowed to anyway?
Thanks,
Atavar
Last edited:
Atavar said:
If you are using swift actions (for spells) then a quickened spell is a swift action and no longer a free action. (CA {pg 86} which ntroduced swift and immediate action to casting spells).
RAW (per Rules Compendium pg 110) {Gotta love this book}
"You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action or a free action."
Hypersmurf
Moderatarrrrh...
Atavar said:
Yes; the rules for swift actions state that you can take a swift action any time you could take a free action - presumably to avoid having to go through and amend every instance of 'standard, move, or free' in the rules to 'standard, move, swift, or free'.
So for example, a character who is slowed can only take a single standard or move action; however, he may also take free actions. This rule means that "he may also take free actions" tells us a slowed character can also take a swift action in addition to his single standard or move action, as he can take a swift action any time he could take a free action.
Similarly, "only ready a standard, move, or free action" contains an implicit "or swift action" via the same rule.
Edit - obviously, RC gave them the opportunity to go through and amend all those passages
-Hyp.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
