Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Infiniti2000" data-source="post: 3114215" data-attributes="member: 31734">It can't be worth more in this scenario because you aren't even using it.&nbsp; How is something that you can't use worth more than something you want to use but can't?Speaking generically, what you say might be true, but it then presupposes that Swift actions can be performed in a Standard Action.&nbsp; If not, as the rules say, then a Standard Action may or may not be worth more than a Swift Action, depending on what actions you want to take.&nbsp; Just like Move Actions as FireLance points out (which is an admirable argument for the Con side).&nbsp; In other words, a particular action is only 'worth' it if you can take it and it's a better choice than other action types.So, the mere fact that the rules allow only one Swift Action per round skews the worth of such actions.&nbsp; Changing that rule changes the worth and any such discussion around it is nearly rendered moot.&nbsp; So, a Swift Action is extremely valuable by definition.&nbsp; Although time is not a factor (arguably), only one can be performed per round.&nbsp; That makes them valuable, at least as much as any other actions of which only one can be performed per round.&nbsp; Saying you can swap it into a Standard Action is, by this definition of worth (but not time), no different than trying to get two Standard Actions (without additional cost) by swapping in the Standard Action in place of the Swift Action.&nbsp; But, that requires a cost of +4 spell levels (or a Rod, et al) if it can be done at all.&nbsp;No, I did not say full round, I said full round action.&nbsp; Quicken reduces a full round action spell (or less) to a Swift (free) action.&nbsp; There's a feat call Rapid Spell or something that reduces full round spells to a standard action for +1.&nbsp;This whole debate can be held without the Swift rule.&nbsp; Just think of Quickened Spells.&nbsp; So, no, I don't agree with your dismissal of the intent.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Infiniti2000, post: 3114215, member: 31734"] It can't be worth more in this scenario because you aren't even using it. How is something that you can't use worth more than something you want to use but can't? Speaking generically, what you say might be true, but it then presupposes that Swift actions can be performed in a Standard Action. If not, as the rules say, then a Standard Action may or may not be worth more than a Swift Action, depending on what actions you want to take. Just like Move Actions as FireLance points out (which is an admirable argument for the Con side). In other words, a particular action is only 'worth' it if you can take it and it's a better choice than other action types. So, the mere fact that the rules allow only one Swift Action per round skews the worth of such actions. Changing that rule changes the worth and any such discussion around it is nearly rendered moot. So, a Swift Action is extremely valuable by definition. Although time is not a factor (arguably), only one can be performed per round. That makes them valuable, at least as much as any other actions of which only one can be performed per round. Saying you can swap it into a Standard Action is, by this definition of worth (but not time), no different than trying to get two Standard Actions (without additional cost) by swapping in the Standard Action in place of the Swift Action. But, that requires a cost of +4 spell levels (or a Rod, et al) if it can be done at all. No, I did not say full round, I said full round action. Quicken reduces a full round action spell (or less) to a Swift (free) action. There's a feat call Rapid Spell or something that reduces full round spells to a standard action for +1. This whole debate can be held without the Swift rule. Just think of Quickened Spells. So, no, I don't agree with your dismissal of the intent. [/QUOTE]

Verification