Swift spell as Standard Action?

[Justin Bacon]

Perhaps #1 is true. But, it is #2 we are arguing. It makes even less sense to allow you to use up a standard action for a free/swift action spell and not a move action. Any 'common sense' used in restricting the time in the first place would tossed out the window to allow such a rule change. It is completely illogical to do what you desire.

Again: Your "logic" requires that the game system not allow characters with a speed of 30 feet to move only 15 feet in a round, since (according to you) there's no rules support for allowing you to stretch out your action like that. Your "logic" is completely nonsensical.

It should be noted, too, that a move action can never be used to cast a spell. The things you can do with a move action are, quite sensibly, limited to various forms of movement. A move action is distinguished by a standard action by the FORM of action it specifically allows.

A swift action, OTOH, is explicitly distinguished from a standard action by the amount of TIME it takes to accomplish the swift action.

It is quite logical to conclude that you can use a "larger" action (in terms of TIME) to accomplish a "smaller" action (in terms of TIME), without concluding that you should be able to use a completely different FORM of action.

Hopefully, that's cleared up your conceptual problem here.

More generally, the conceptual relationship between actions is pretty explicit:

- A Full Action represents the maximum amount of activity you can perform in one abstract "round". Anything requiring a Full Action basically takes up so much time that you don't have any time left over to do anything else (other than some minor adjustments, such as 5-foot step).

- A Standard Action doesn't take up as much time as a Full Action. As a result, it leaves you with enough time to move around in some fashion (which is represented by a Move Action). But it does require you to focus your attention, which is why you can't take two Standard Actions instead of a Standard Action and a Move Action: The stuff represented by a Move Action doesn't take your full attention.

- A Free Action can either be done in conjunction with a Full, Standard, or Move Action or it takes almost no time at all to accomplish. You can talk while swinging a sword, for example. Therefore, you can take as many Free Actions as you want.

- A Swift Action, like a Free Action, takes almost no time at all to accomplish, so you can squeeze in a Swift Action even if you're taking a Full Action. But a Swift Action requires at least some attention and focus, so you can only take one of them during a round (since taking a second would distract you from the other actions you're taking).

 

[FireLance]

You can already take a move action in place of a standard action, so you can take two move actions in one round.

I see no problem with a rule that stated you could take a second swift action in place of a standard action, so that you could take two swift actions in one round.

I think a lot of the current dissonance arises from the fact that a swift action is supposed to take less time to complete than a move action, but is generally more valuable. So, even if a DM is prepared to allow a PC to take a second swift action as a standard action, he might not be willing to allow a second swift action as a move action.

One way to circumvent the argument that if you could slow down a swift action, you might as well slow it down to a move action is to rule that the second swift action isn't being slowed down. Using a swift action requires a small bit of effort, so you normally have to wait till your next turn to use another one. However, as a standard action, you can regain the ability to use a swift action. I guess we can call this "refocus" since there is no longer a "refocus" in 3.5e (rolled into "delay"). What you're doing with your standard action is not specified - you could be clearing your mind, catching your breath, whatever. So, if the distinction is important to you, you're not slowing down a swift action. You're using a standard action to prepare yourself to take another swift action in the same round, and it has to be a standard action because it requires more effort than what you can accomplish with a move action.

Works for me.

 

[Question]

A move action takes less time than a standard action, yes?

You have 2 move actions a round and can substitute one for a standard action, or both for a full round action.

So the reason for not being able to substittue a standard action for a swift action for spellcasting purposes seem to be RAW.

 

[Hypersmurf]

You have 2 move actions a round and can substitute one for a standard action...

Other way around. You have a move action and a standard action a round, and can take a move action in place of your standard action.

Or you can take a full round action, instead of both the move and standard action.

-Hyp.

 

[Venator]

Nobody in this thread arguing for the ability to cast a second "swift" action spell actually wants the second spell to be treated as "swift", they just want to cast it in place of the normal standard action, and pay for it as if they had memorized it as swift (when that applies, quickened without the quicken). If anything this hurts the player, just like they said.

Its simply not resonable to *be able to cast a spell* whos casting time is longer than a swift action as a standard action, but not be able to cast the swift action spell as a standard action.

You can not use standard actions at all on a move action, so, you cant cast spells as if they were standard actions in place of your move.

Youve already allocated your "effort and energy" for swift (or immediate) actions for the round, so you cant take any more "swift" actions that are treated as such. But thats not what we are arguing for.

 

[irdeggman]

What about all of those "other" spells (and powers, let's not foget the psionic aspect of this) that have a casting/manifesting time of 1 swift action?

Can they be done as a standard action instead?

How about those with "immediate action" times?

IMO this opens up a real large can of worms that causes many other things to to be changed to match. Basically it reinforces what I have observed pretty much all the time - once you make one house rule to change something "minor" it forces numerous other changes to match it. A sort of dominor effect occurs because of how almost everything in the 3.x rules are interrelated.

 

[Venator]

What about all of those "other" spells (and powers, let's not foget the psionic aspect of this) that have a casting/manifesting time of 1 swift action?

Can they be done as a standard action instead?

How about those with "immediate action" times?

IMO this opens up a real large can of worms that causes many other things to to be changed to match. Basically it reinforces what I have observed pretty much all the time - once you make one house rule to change something "minor" it forces numerous other changes to match it. A sort of dominor effect occurs because of how almost everything in the 3.x rules are interrelated.

RAW treats Immediate Actions the same way it treats swift actions except that you can use Immediate actions at any point in the round, even when its not your turn.

If a player wanted to use his standard action to manifest a swift power, or use a swift ability I would have no problem with that whatsoever.

I think the best analogy so far has been the guy who compared creatures with 30 foot speeds who spend move action only going 15 feet. I dont see it differently at all.

If you want to take a swift action as a swift action thats fine. If you want to use your standard action to use something with a casting time of "1 swift action" instead of something that says "1 standard action" thats fine as well.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Dracorat, I agree with you. I haven't seen one argument from the other side of the debate that makes any sense to me... besides the "it's not supported by the rules" argument. You're saying: "yes, it's not supported by the rules, but it's balanced, it makes sense, and follows the spirit of the rules" and I agree with you 100%. The intent of the rules is to not allow more than 2 spells per round; you are not violating that rule, so there's no problem.

 

[Hypersmurf]

RAW treats Immediate Actions the same way it treats swift actions except that you can use Immediate actions at any point in the round, even when its not your turn.

If a player wanted to use his standard action to manifest a swift power, or use a swift ability I would have no problem with that whatsoever.

If you use an immediate action outside your turn, you can't use a swift action on your turn.

Would you allow two immediate actions outside your turn, if you didn't use a swift action or a standard action on your turn? Or would the second immediate action have to be on your turn?

I know what the rules say, but I'm not certain which of those two this common sense thing allows.

-Hyp.

 

[Venator]

If you use an immediate action outside your turn, you can't use a swift action on your turn.

I know this. What lead you to believe i didnt?

Would you allow two immediate actions outside your turn, if you didn't use a swift action or a standard action on your turn? Or would the second immediate action have to be on your turn?

No, i wouldnt allow them to use two immediate action outside of their turn... Again, i have no idea what leads you to believe i would... If you use an immediate action outside of your turn you can no longer take a swift action on your turn, just like the rules state. Nothing is changing here expect for the amount of time it takes to use a given spell / ability / power.

I would defiently have no problem allowing the player to use something that has a casting time of "swift action" or "immediate action" in place of his standard action though. I dont understand whats so difficult about this... The spell / ability / power effectively becomes Casting Time: Standard Action.

Basically, if the player or monster has his standard action available to him, he can always use it to do something that requires less effort / energy / time than a normal standard action does. Thats it, nothing more and nothing less. Hes trading down.

The only thing thats changing is that the player is electing to use a standard action to accomplish something that requires less effort / energy / time than a standard action. Just like someone with a 30 foot movement electing to only move 15 feet. In this case his movement effectively becomes: Speed 15. Or how about an Archer who decided to use his full round action to use Many Shot and then just stand there because he liked his spot? This Many Shot is effectively a Full Round Action.