Does Divine Might require an action to use?

[Hypersmurf]

I strongly suspect that all the Divine feats were intended to be 'free actions' or 'at will'.

Explicitly stating that they require a standard action and can't be Quickened is an odd way of conveying that intention, don't you think?

-Hyp.

 

[jgsugden]

I dunno. Of the 6 Divine feats in DotF, 3 of them (D.Cleasnsing, D.Resistance, D.Vengeance) look hopelessly stupid if they require an action to activate -- hasted or no. They all have substantial prereqs. The Divine feats are the only feats I know of where the method of activation are described outside of the feat itself.

This was the second splat book. The early ones were not as well planned as they could have been.

Plain and simple: This feat might be a bit weak if it takes a standard action and your charisma is less than ridiculous. On the other hand, it is far too strong as a free action if you even have an 18 charisma.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Explicitly stating that they require a standard action and can't be Quickened is an odd way of conveying that intention, don't you think?

-Hyp.

Failing to include critical information about how to use a feat within the feat text is also an odd way to convey intentions.

I am not disagreeing with you with respect to the letter of the law. But the execution of the Divine feats was very sloppy, and it invites second-guessing about the half-baked ideas behind them.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Failing to include critical information about how to use a feat within the feat text is also an odd way to convey intentions.

Hmm?

Every metamagic feat doesn't need a note that a sorcerer, bard, or spontaneously-casting cleric increases casting time to a full round action. That's covered by a note on Metamagic Feats at the start of the Feats chapter.

If every Divine Feat requires a standard action to activate, is it really necessary to say "Activating Divine Might is a standard action", "Activating Divine Vengeance is a standard action", "Activating Divine Shield is a standard action"... when a note on Divine Feats at the start of the Feats section covers all of them in one go?

-Hyp.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

This was the second splat book. The early ones were not as well planned as they could have been.

Plain and simple: This feat might be a bit weak if it takes a standard action and your charisma is less than ridiculous. On the other hand, it is far too strong as a free action if you even have an 18 charisma.

I agree on all counts.

I stopped buying splat books after DotF because I was very disappointed with the effort (as well as SF).

It is a pretty bizarre feat that more or less requires a 22 stat to consistently gain meaningful advantage from it. It is too easy as a free action.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

If every Divine Feat requires a standard action to activate, is it really necessary to say "Activating Divine Might is a standard action", "Activating Divine Vengeance is a standard action", "Activating Divine Shield is a standard action"... when a note on Divine Feats at the start of the Feats section covers all of them in one go?

Legalistically speaking, no. But empirical evidence says yes.

I have seen half a dozen posters on this board naively read the feat to find out how to use the feat. I would dare hypothsize that this is also the source of the official "clarification" making Divine Might a 'non/free-action' or whatever.

(The confusion on metamagick is even more rampant.)

It would really cost all of four little words: "As a standard action spend one of your turn/rebuke undead attempts...

 

[Darklone]

I agree on all counts.

I stopped buying splat books after DotF because I was very disappointed with the effort (as well as SF).

It is a pretty bizarre feat that more or less requires a 22 stat to consistently gain meaningful advantage from it. It is too easy as a free action.

I'm a bookwhore, I bought them but don't use them.

Can't say a certain halfling paladin with TWF does not love Divine Might with "only" Charisma 18