Spell Selection for a Bard/Sublime Chord

[Empirate]

Okay, consider the situation: You're in a melee situation, unarmed, and being guarded by an ally. You want to step out of that ally's way. Unless you "take an action", however, you can't move 5 feet without drawing an Attack of Opportunity. It's impossible to move carefully, tactically, unless you're distracted by preparing a weapon or a spell.

Does that still make sense to you? Recall that a Move action to leave a threatened square draws AoO, even if hat movement is only five feet.

As for 5 Ft Step being "not an action", as per the definition you quoted: Look a few lines lower in that same section of the SRD. 5 Ft. Step is explicitly listed as "Not an Action". And whatever your reasoning, specific trumps general.

As for the first part, the action you combine with your 5-foot step doesn't have to be casting a spell, or using a weapon. It doesn't have to be anything that "distracts" you. In fact, while we all know turn-based combat is a huge abstraction, I like to imagine a character's combat turn as the moment when you gain focus, and can make snap decisions about your next move. Moving out of an ally's way using a 5-foot step is part of this moment, and you can immediately follow this up with readying a scroll and using it, for example.

I'm not distracted in any way; in fact, for a moment there, I call the shots on the battlefield (i.e., I have some say over relative positioning on it, where I myself am concerned). I take "initiative", meaning I can do any number of things instead of merely reacting to the flow of combat around me. One thing I can do is move around relative to others, getting closer to/farther away from some of them etc. If I do this too quickly, this may leave me open to counterattack by opponents (move action --> AoO). But if I carefully judge the distance and step purposefully out of harm's way, they can forget about that (5-foot step).

If I'm dazed by a maw of roiling purple energy that saps away my lifeforce and distorts the very gravitational field within my body (Maw of Chaos), there's no way I can take that kind of initiative. This also means that any purposeful and precise movement (indeed movement of any kind) is impossible, even if it would normally become a natural part of what else I'm doing - because there is nothing else I'm doing, I'm just standing around in pain, trying to keep my cells from exploding, all the while defending as best I can against other threats, but in no condition at all to make any decisions on what to do myself.


I don't say that you have to buy this. It's just the fiction as I imagine it. As far as I'm concerned, while the rules aren't entirely clear, they can be interpreted in an unambiguous (and moreover sane) way, as I hoped to demonstrate earlier: "Any actions for you this round? If yes, you may also take a 5-foot step, if certain other conditions are met. If no, you may not take a 5-foot step either."

This is a purely rules question, and has nothing to do with the fiction I provided above. My way of looking at it does offer the advantage of chiming with the fiction - always and strictly IMO, of course.



As for the purely academical question whether a 5-foot step is a kind of action, is "not an action", or neither: Sorry, I can't seem to find anything else on this.



Completely random thought to derail the thread even further: How would the game change if you could take a 5-foot step as a swift action (but not otherwise)?

 

[Greenfield]

Okay, but in the version you just described, you have to do something after the careful step. You can't just take the careful step.

To me, that's wrong. You should be able to move five feet, carefully, and not be compelled to take some other action in order to be safe from AoO. It should, in fact, be easier, since you can give your full attention to when, where and how you take that step.

Strictly as a rules question, the rules say 5 ft. step is "not an action". And while that step doesn't take "literally no time at all", it's still listed in that category.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

Some time ago, someone shared a video that explained the 5 foot step. I found it helpful then, however my google fu is weak and I cannot locate it now.

 

[Greenfield]

My initial thought was to respond with something like, "Some time ago a rule book was published that explained the five foot step." That's more than a little bit argumentative though, so let's not and say we did, okay?

The fact is, I understand the concept of the five foot step perfectly. But the idea inherent in your position, that you can't take that careful, tactical shift unless you're also doing something else, just doesn't sit right.

Now we can go back and forth over this, with you listing all the other things you could do to make that 5 foot step part of another action, and me continuing to ask why you can't be careful unless distracted/multi-tasking. Then you'll cite some other source again, and I'll cite the RAW again, and we'll go no place.

So instead of spinning our wheels like this, let's move on. Either get back on the original topic, or close this down all together.

 

[Empirate]

My initial thought was to respond with something like, "Some time ago a rule book was published that explained the five foot step." That's more than a little bit argumentative though, so let's not and say we did, okay?

The fact is, I understand the concept of the five foot step perfectly. But the idea inherent in your position, that you can't take that careful, tactical shift unless you're also doing something else, just doesn't sit right.

Now we can go back and forth over this, with you listing all the other things you could do to make that 5 foot step part of another action, and me continuing to ask why you can't be careful unless distracted/multi-tasking. Then you'll cite some other source again, and I'll cite the RAW again, and we'll go no place.

So instead of spinning our wheels like this, let's move on. Either get back on the original topic, or close this down all together.

I agree with your sentiment (although I never argued you have to take another, potentially distracting, action - only that you have to be able to act at all). So what now, you any closer to deciding which spell it'll be? Do you lean more toward general applicability, combat power, or a bit of both?

 

[Greenfield]

Unless the group decides to go Epic, he'll get a total of two 9th levels spells in his career.

The Ultimate Destruction globe looks like one hell of a combat spell, and I might choose that for number two. I'm still leaning towards Gate for the first one.

Some have suggested Prismatic Sphere, and it makes a formidable defense/fortress, but I see little actual use for it in our campaign.

We're a funny group. Tactics that are common with most groups, such as opening with a Greater Dispel, are more or less unheard of. Stoneskin was a shock and a surprise when I used it in character (different character), and our "I can hide from anything" Scout/Hexblade/Shadowdancer/Ranger just about turned inside out when he got painted with Glitterdust last session. ("You mean a first level spell can just shut me down?" And yeah, I corrected him that it was a second level spell. ) I don't think I've seen any kind of Globe spell. Our Barbarian/Wizard ws tremendously put out when his Scorching Ray was shut down by a simple ring of Fire Resistance. C'mon people, fire is one of the most common energy type around, why is it a shock to find that somebody has a common defense against it? And I don't think there's a Cloak of Resistance in the party.

 

[Greenfield]

I've just looked over Maw of Chaos again, and I have to admit I was misinformed about what it did. For some reason I thought it did 1 point of damage per caster level, not 1 D6 points of damage.

Huge difference.

I may have to reconsider what my second 9th will be.