Swift spell as Standard Action?

[MarkB]

Inability to use more than one swift action per round seems to have been taken into account as a balancing factor when creating some of the swift-action spells. I'd have to take a closer look at some of the swift and immediate spells (and see if I can find the recent thread compiling all of them), but I think there would definitely be balance concerns associated with allowing some of them to be cast more than once a round, even with extended casting time.

 

[shilsen]

Yep, but this is a case where reason needs to take over.

We're talking about magic. Reason is completely irrelevant here (not to mention that reason is subjective).

 

[Artoomis]

So, by the rules, it seems it is not possible to slow down a "Swift" spell to cast it as a Standard Action.

Too bad.

My character missed a Reflex save to get swallowed whole (with LOTS of damage) and then a Concentration check to Dimensional Leap to safety.

Now there is not even enough left for a Raise Dead, but Ressurection remains a possibility.

My hope is that our current benefactor will have a True Ressurection available - but that would likely be a scroll where our cleric would have a chance of not being able to cast it properly. <sigh>

With the ways things are going, it would be just my luck that we'd get the scroll and then fail the roll to use it.

 

[pawsplay]

PHBII defines a feat called "Short Haft". (P82) In it, you use a swift action to change your grip on your weapon so that you attack squares adjacent to you. It requires a swift action to undo as well.

Lets say you "Short Haft" as a swift action. Then, you move and discover that it's tactically more sound to have your weapon at reach. So, you opt to give up your ability to take any other action that round, including attack, in order to switch back to reach.

In your ruling, and per RAW, I could not.

In that case you could still ready a weapon as a move action. No problem there. While changing your grip is an option offered by the feat, readying a weapon is always an option.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Besides my desire to go with the RAW whenever possible in my games, I prefer not to allow Swift spells to be cast as Standard Actions for the simple reason that if it takes X time to cast a spell, you shouldn't just be able to decide you're going to slow down the process. I see spell casting as a very complicated procedure that you can't just draw out because you want to. I would also not allow someone to cast fireball for two rounds or levitate as a full round action for these reasons.

 

[airwalkrr]

Why can't the intent of "You can't cast more than one quickened spell in a round" be "You can't cast more than one quickened spell in a round"?

If that was what they set out to achieve, they managed it admirably.

Assuming the intent to be otherwise presupposes that contradiction. If we assume that what they wrote is what they intended, the contradiction doesn't exist.

-Hyp.

What would be the reason for such a restriction? Obviously, they don't have to say you can't cast more than one spell in a round because spells already take at least a standard action in most cases. But before they defined swift actions, quickened spells were merely a free action. Thus, if they had not included a limitation, then one could theoretically cast as many quickened spells per round as he had prepared. I cannot see a rationale for including that rule otherwise. I really doubt the designers were worried about someone casting two quickened magic missiles. I think it makes far more sense if they were worried about someone casting two quickened magic missiles AND cone of cold. They obviously weren't worried about someone casting one quickened magic missile and cone of cold. So why would two quickened magic missiles bother them?

 

[Dracorat]

Im not saying the process of casting would be longer, but that same person, if he started on one round and said "Im casting fireball, and thats all my action for the round" would you force him to move anyway? No. Because there is no requirement to "fill the space". I feel the same regarding swift actions.

Yes, it's not RAW. But it's well within reason. As for the magic argument, that's why I used a nonmagic example. And its not really the magic in question. It's swift actions.

 

[airwalkrr]

Besides my desire to go with the RAW whenever possible in my games, I prefer not to allow Swift spells to be cast as Standard Actions for the simple reason that if it takes X time to cast a spell, you shouldn't just be able to decide you're going to slow down the process. I see spell casting as a very complicated procedure that you can't just draw out because you want to. I would also not allow someone to cast fireball for two rounds or levitate as a full round action for these reasons.

Yes, but would you allow someone to cast fireball in one round and then forego their action next round? What about casting levitate as a standard action and then forgoing their move action? You see, it isn't that the casting time is necessarily extended. With casting a swift spell as a standard action, it is not presumed that the casting time actually takes the entire standard action, merely that it takes enough time to leave the character incapable of completing another standard action during that round. I don't see why that wouldn't be balanced.

 

[Dracorat]

You and me agree Air.

Now for all ye rules junkies, we aren't saying you are wrong, just that what we have argued is well justified in a real-world sense. Again, at an RPGA event, I would tell people they couldn't because I have an utter responsibility to do Rules as Written, only.

But at my personal table, I would say "yes that's fine" without a second thought.

 

[Someone]

I'd allow it too (though is evident that by the raw it isn't possible). There are after all other instances of free action becoming something other than free actions: you can talk as an immediate action, but if you talk too much (DMm's discretion) you start using move and standard actions -you're not merely impeded to talk when the Dm feels you've reached your limit of free talking- Similarly, quickdrawing weapons is a free action, but if you happen to have on you a huge number of weapons, and the Dm decided you've drawn enough of them as a free action, you're not compelled to not draw any more of them and instead do something else; instead, if you draw more of them, you harm your ability to do something else (in other words, use move and standard actions)