Swift spell as Standard Action?

[Musrum]

Why is it unreasonable, othee than because the rules say so?

This is the crux of it. I remember when 3.0 PHB was released and there was an item that was overpriced by a factor of 10. However there where a minority of people on the forums defended the RAW price. Some people appear to get invested in a rule simply by reading it...

 

[Mytiope]

Sorry, for coming in late to the discussion, but I've found it quite interesting.

It seems to me that allowing the actions to be defined only in terms of time is central to the issue. If we say that swift actions take 1 unit of time and standard actions take 2 units of time, then why couldn't we do a swift actions as a standard action? Really, it seems to make sense. However, what if time is not the only variable? What if there is something else at work behind the scenes?

Lets introduce another variable called effort, for example. Then lets say that doing a swift action cost 1 unit of time and 3 units of effort, a move action costs 2 units of time and 0 units of effort, and doing standard action cost 2 units of time but only 2 units of effort. Now we can see how these types of actions cannot so easily be substituted for one another. Also, makes sense now why you cannot use a move action to attack.

I realize that these number smight not add up if you start totalling effort and time each round, then divide it back up, but I was never really that good at math. Anyway the theory seems to stand that there are likely more variables at play in the definition of a round then simply time. Therefore, allowing the RAW to remain seems the best bet to me.

Right on demadog... this is the same thing I brought up a page ago. I tried to avoid putting real numbers in there, since I agree that would lead to oblivion. You just have to say Swift Actions take more effort than Standard Actions. Of course most people just ignored my post. But it's still the only explanation I've seen that works in-game.

How does one wizard explain it to another? Hmmm...

Apprentice Wizard: Master, you cast that spell really, really quickly!
Master Wizard: Yes, I did... it's called quickening the spell.
Apprentice Wizard: Why don't you quicken a whole bunch, fire them one after another, and nuke your enemies in a split second?
Master Wizard: Because, young one, people would say I'm too powerful if I did that. We need to make sure we give our enemies a fair chance against us. That's why I pause and twiddle my thumbs every so often.
Apprentice Wizard: That's silly.
Master Wizard: I know... but MY master told ME not to do it... and I'm telling you. It's the rules.

Or maybe it'd go something like this...

Apprentice Wizard: Why don't you quicken a whole bunch, and nuke your enemies in a split second?
Master Wizard: Because it takes a lot of effort to wield such powers that quickly... I can only manage that conentrated effort every five or six seconds.
Apprentice Wizard: Dang, that's a bummer.
Master Wizard: Yeah, but at least I've got enough of my wits about me to do something else before I get recomposed enough to try another quickened spell.

 

[MarkB]

This is the crux of it. I remember when 3.0 PHB was released and there was an item that was overpriced by a factor of 10. However there where a minority of people on the forums defended the RAW price. Some people appear to get invested in a rule simply by reading it...

The rules on swift actions have been around for about three years now, and have been re-published in several books. By this point, I think we can assume that the way they're written is the way they're supposed to be used.

 

[Marshall]

To assume that the two are not the same seems rather dismissive of the writers' communication skills.

-Hyp.

What experience, in 3.e or 3.5, do you have that leads you to be NOT dismissive of the writers communication skills?

Isnt the existance of these boards, and the others like it, indicative of the ease of dismissing said communications?

In this case, its clear to the "pro" side that the rule says "You can only take one swift action a round" NOT "You can only take one action that is Swift a round".

Short of making the PHB resemble the US Tax Code, there are always going to be distinction like that that need to be made by the reader.
Since we already have a ruling that says that you CAN use a Standard action to cast a Quickened Spell(a swift action), it seems logical that that is the intent of the rule.

 

[irdeggman]

Since we already have a ruling that says that you CAN use a Standard action to cast a Quickened Spell(a swift action), it seems logical that that is the intent of the rule.

Where is this ruling?

The entire gist of this discussion has been about using House-Rules and the logic in doing so. After about the 2nd or 3rd post it became clear the "rules" don't allow this.

 

[Artoomis]

Where is this ruling?

The entire gist of this discussion has been about using House-Rules and the logic in doing so. After about the 2nd or 3rd post it became clear the "rules" don't allow this.

He may be referring to the 3.0 FAQ entry, which is technically still valid, but only for the Automatic Quicken feat.

The FAQ entry says you can decide at the time of casting whether or not to apply Quicken to that spell. That probably does not apply in general, but only to the Automatic Quicken feat, though one could argue a general applicability since without the FAQ entry you'd have to prepare spells as either Quickened or regular at the time of preparation.

Even if this does apply, it only means that a Quickened spell can be cast normally if you so desire and does not apply to Swift spells in general.

In this case, its clear to the "pro" side that the rule says "You can only take one swift action a round" NOT "You can only take one action that is Swift a round".

That's an interesting distinction. I had not thought of it that way, but I think you are right and it does leave the door open (just a crack) for allowing a Swift spell (or other swfit action) to be done as a normal action instead. That's pretty easy for a Quickened spell, of course, but a little trickier for actions that defined as Swift ONLY, as you have to decide what kind of action it should be when "normal" versus Swift.

Most of the time this would be a Standard Action, naturally, since most actions are Standard Actions.

 

[irdeggman]

He may be referring to the 3.0 FAQ entry, which is technically still valid, but only for the Automatic Quicken feat.

The FAQ entry says you can decide at the time of casting whether or not to apply Quicken to that spell. That probably does not apply in general, but only to the Automatic Quicken feat, though one could argue a general applicability since without the FAQ entry you'd have to prepare spells as either Quickened or regular at the time of preparation.

Even if this does apply, it only means that a Quickened spell can be cast normally if you so desire and does not apply to Swift spells in general.

Ahh thank you.

I found it.

When do you apply the automatic metamagic feats in the Epic Level Handbook (Quicken Spell, Silent Spell, and Still Spell)? Do you have to apply them when the spells are prepared, or can you wait until they are about to be cast? For example, suppose I’m a wizard with Automatic Quicken Spell. If I prepare two magic missile spells, are both of them quickened? This distinction could be important because a character is still allowed only one quickened spell per round, right?

When you have one of the automatic metamagic feats, you acquire your daily spells normally. You also cast them normally, but any spell of the appropriate level can have the feat applied (or not applied) upon casting, as you desire. For example, if you have taken Automatic Quicken Spell once, any 3rd-level or lower spell you cast can be quickened, provided that it doesn’t have a normal casting time of more than 1 full round. However, you are not obligated to cast all of your qualifying spells as quickened spells. For example, you could cast a quickened magic missile and a regular magic missile during your turn, provided that you had two magic missile spells available to cast. Both would take up their normal 1stlevel spell slots.


AUTOMATIC QUICKEN SPELL [EPIC]
Prerequisites: Quicken Spell, Spellcraft 30 ranks, ability to cast 9th-level arcane or divine spells.

Benefit: The character may cast all 0-, 1st-, 2nd-, and 3rd-level spells as quickened spells without using higher-level spell slots. The normal limit to the number of quickened spells a character may cast per round applies. Spells with a casting time of more than 1 full round can’t be quickened.

Special: A character can gain this feat multiple times. Each time a character takes the feat, the spells of his or her next three lowest spell levels can now be quickened with no adjustment to their spell slots. This feat doesn’t increase the casting time for those spells that normally become full-round actions when cast in metamagic form.

But that ruling clearly does not apply except in the case of the epic feat being referenced. Why do I say that - because the feat allows you to cast the quickened spell without using a hgher level slot (hence no actual reason to memorize it as such anymore).

 

[Artoomis]

But that ruling clearly does not apply except in the case of the epic feat being referenced. Why do I say that - because the feat allows you to cast the quickened spell without using a hgher level slot (hence no actual reason to memorize it as such anymore).

Perhaps, perhaps not. Applying metamagic to a spell is not done "on the fly" except for spontaneous casters. This ruling allows one to do just that and, furthermore, at no penalty of changing it to a ful-round action.

Nothing about the feat changes the basic rule about applying metamagic at preparation time. Other Metamagic exists that does not use a higher slot, but still the spell must be prepared with metamagic applied if that is the desired casting.

This still-valid FAQ sets a precedent for being able to remove a metamagic on the fly - at least for Quicken. It might apply ONLY to Automatic Quicken, or could be read as a precedent for Quicken as well.

I tend to think it only applies to Automatic Quicken, but I can see the validity of the opposing argument.

 

[irdeggman]

Well with the advent of the Sudden Metamagic feats I think the argument that this only applies to the feat in question fits well with the development of the rules.

 

[Artoomis]

Well with the advent of the Sudden Metamagic feats I think the argument that this only applies to the feat in question fits well with the development of the rules.

Perhaps - it does sort of depend upon whether you are REMOVING the Quicken at casting time or APPLYING the Quicken at casting time.