immediate and Swift actions

[Nagol]

Thank you mt point exaclty my point is that a ROUND starts on the highest INIT so thank you Nagol

I miss-typed and have since corrected my statement..

 

[kexmal]

I did not misquote. I gave the quote in full and provided a link to the original source. You are ignoring the final paragraph -- which happens to be the one where the description of what the typical usage of the term means in the rules.

Your interpretation (rounds are discrete units with a beginning and an end without crossover) is simplistic and introduces several anomalies into the system that do not exist if the typical usage of the term is used. Notably, characters with high initiative have a much more likely chance to receive AoO under this system than using the typical usage.

HAHA yes so simplistic in the eyes of you apparently what do you see that I dont how is that NOT clear as day to you? Im really wondering about you at this point... can you not read simple text... not trying to be rude I mean come on rounds are rounds spell rounds are spell rounds... please DONT deny ROUNDS start at highest INIT and AoO's DONT reset at your TURN obviously fight it all you want and have a crazy follwoing that backs you HAHA

 

[kexmal]

You guys OBVIOUSLy have a 'deeper' understanding of simple rules than i right? i bow to your majesty... Yes of course im not the most educated of the bunch no no you are my king right you know how to read simple text and read into it right???

 

[Morrus]

@kexmal, calm the hell down, please. If discussing D&D rules is making you angry, try taking a break. It's just a game. And knock off the profanity. Thank you.

 

[kexmal]

@kexmal, calm the hell down, please. If discussing D&D rules is making you angry, try taking a break. It's just a game. And knock off the profanity. Thank you.

NP morrus sorry about that.

 

[NuSair]

I'm looking at true strike. It lasts 1 round. You're suppose to cast it, and then attack someone the next round. If a round ended at the beginning of your turn you could never use that spell, so the round clearly ends at the end of your turn.

Just replying on both threads:

That is incorrect, here is the text on true strike:

You gain temporary, intuitive insight into the immediate future during your next attack. Your next single attack roll (if it is made before the end of the next round) gains a +20 insight bonus. Additionally, you are not affected by the miss chance that applies to attackers trying to strike a concealed target.

It doesn't last one round, it last until either your next single attack roll or the end of the next round. It doesn't say the end of this round, it says the end of the next round.

 

[NuSair]

Just for completeness:

I disagree with the DMs reasoning (but, honestly, it is his game and what he says goes. I think it bad form for players to argue things past a certain point), but I feel there is a point there, which I made on the other thread. That is, when do actions reset?


Most of the people I've seen post, say that if you use a swift action during your turn, that immediately after your turn is over, you can take an immediate action. The quote the DM was making is the right one, but he was arguing the wrong point. It's here:

During a normal round, you can perform a standard action
and a move action, or you can perform a full-round action.
You can also perform an immediate action or a swift action,
and as many free actions as your DM allows.

That is a direct quote from the Rules Compendium. This is just the start of the issue. If you read in the PHB and other sources, there appears to be two different definitions for round.


The first is from the highest initiative to the lowest initiative. (Normal Round?)


The second is given more as an example, but is from the start of your initiative in a round to the start of your initiative in the next round.


The problem I am having with looking at these rules, is that taking a swift action during your turn and immediately following with an immediate action isn't allowed with either version. And honestly, I am mildly surprised with all the rules lawyers running around, this hasn't come up before.


For me, I am trying to simplify it more than that, and just worry more about when a players actions reset. Attacks of Opportunity are similar and worded that you can make one AoO per round.


For a player to take a swift action during his turn and then take an immediate action after his turn is up, would require a players actions to reset after his turn was done. None of the ways a round is described in any book that I can fine does that. Even in the start of combat. You are considered flat footed until your first initiative. That would seem to reinforce the idea that a players action pool (for lack of a better term) is reset at the start of each players turn and not at the start of a round. (NOTE: some characters are never flat footed, to me, that would just give them in essence a free immediate action before their 1st initiative, allow them to AoO, ect).


So, how do you define a 'Normal Round'. It's referenced, but isn't really defined. Because if you didn't take a swift action during your turn in a round, in the next round before your turn, if you were to take an immediate action, then when your turn comes up, you couldn't take a swift action because you already took an immediate action that round (refer back to text- During a normal round, you can perform ....an immediate action or a swift action...). It's clear from the Rules Compendium that you cannot take an immediate and swift action in the same round. Honestly, that point really can't be refuted.


So, the question comes down to, is a NORMAL ROUND from highest to lowest init or is it the start of a players turn to the next start of a players turn.


In either case, a player cannot take a swift action during their turn and take an immediate action after their turn (UNLESS they are the lowest initiative and you consider a normal round to be highest to lowest initiative).

 

[Nagol]

Whether you reset at the start of the character's turn (round running from N to N + 1 initiative) or at the end of the character's turn (round running from N - 1 to N initiative) isn't discussed.

Using an immediate action on your turn is the same as using a swift action, and counts as your swift action for that turn. You cannot use another immediate action or a swift action until after your next turn if you have used an immediate action when it is not currently your turn (effectively, using an immediate action before your turn is equivalent to using your swift action for the coming turn). You also cannot use an immediate action if you are flat-footed.

There is an implication from the text on Immediate Actions that the N - 1 to N is favoured since Immediate Action use is reactionary in nature and will be "paid" during the next turn and the reset coming "after your next turn". This is pretty much the opposite of being locked out by the use of a Swift action on your last turn. I would suggest the text would read something like this otherwise:

Using an immediate action on your turn replaces your swift action for that turn. You cannot use an immediate action if you have used a swift action until your next turn starts (effectively, using an immediate action before your turn is equivalent to using your swift action for the last turn). You also cannot use an immediate action if you are flat-footed.

Since the rules do not mention any form of lock out on the use of Immediate Actions other than the one caused by using an Immediate Action, I suggest you shouldn't add one.

 

[Nagol]

A simpler way to look at it is this.

Assume a character doesn't use a Swift action on his turn and uses an Immediate action before his next. He still sacrifices his next Swift action.. The Immediate Action consumes the next Swift Action as its price for use. The two action types do not share a lock out. One consumes the future instance of another to manifest.

The easiest interpretation is all action types reset at the start of a character's turn and no action type is related to any other save through the interactions that are explicitly defined (Standard + Move = Full, Immediate consumes the following Swift, et al.).

 

[captnq]

HO-LEE CRAP!

LOOK FOLKS...

I'm right. 100% right. Everything you are arguing can be solved by just reading the second post in this thread and accepting it. Why? Because I've already had all these arguments and hashed it out. I spent 3 days just figuring out the difference between 3.0 full-round and 3.5 full-round ACTIONS. Why? Because I've written 106 handbooks as of this point and one of them is EVERY FRICKIN' SPELL EVER. You need to know how actions work in order to know spells.

Here's the EVD.

Go marvel at it's completeness.

In the meantime, allow me to settle this thread:

On page 7 of the rules compendium there is a paragraph that a DM has a problem with. That paragraph was written BEFORE the paragraph on immediate actions in the next column.

I have spent YEARS dissecting contracts to screw people over. IN A COURT OF LAW, the LAST thing written always superceeds the first. Therefore, if the paragraph on immediate actions contradicts the paragraph at the start of the section, what ever was written last is CANNON.

Immediate Action paragraph Wins. Ignore that poorly written crap at the start of page 7.