Two swift actions in one round

[Darklone]

I do. If my DM wants to sent a horde of bards after me instead of a horde of demons, bring it on.

Where's Firebeetle when you need him ?

If several bard songs bonuses would stack, a horde of bards would be sooooooooo deadly.

 

[Artoomis]

...It does not add an extra action into a round. You always had that action. It's one swift, one move, and one standard. Same number of actions.

The difference is you add a potential host of possibilities to the Move Action. NOT a good idea. The more actions (other than actually moving) you grant the more deadly each round becomes. This is NOT a good idea as a bad choice for one round becomes more unrecoverable than it is already.

Overall, it is not a good idea to allow Move Action to be used for actions not intended to be related to moving in some way or already defined as a move action (you currently can use move actions for drawing a weapon, for example).

I am certain if you allowed this you'd be the victim of all sorts on unintended consequences as a result of allowing that move action to be used for many things not already defined.

The real answer for this is to choose one of the following:

1. Not allow Swift/Immediate actions to be used in place of a Move or Standard Action. This does not seem to me to be a very good choice as being unreasonably restrictive.

2. Define (perhaps as it comes up each time) every Swift/Immediate Action as doable either in the place of a Move Action or in place of a Standard Action. Careful, though - Move Actions may be done twice a round! Odd things may happen in some cases. This way carries extra administrative burden and some very significant risk of unintended consequences.

3. Allow Swift/Immediate actions to also be taken as a Standard Action, but not as a Move Action. This seems to be to be an excellent way to go. It's very simple and easy to adjudicate and solves the weird problem of a Swift Action not being allowed to be done more "deliberately," as it were.

As for the badge and spell under discussion, they are both Swift Actions precisely so only one may be used - else one or the other could have been a "Free Action." Under my proposal you could use both, but that would be useless.

Swift Actions are designed to force you to choose one. Once you've done one, you do not get another (or an Immediate Action). Free Actions are for when you do not care if it gets done more than once in a round, or in addition to a Swift/immediate Action. Allowing one to give up a Standard Action to do a Swift Action seems only slightly generous. Allowing one to give up a Move Action to do so seems like being overly generous.

 

[SlagMortar]

Edit: My point had been raised.

 

[Dimwhit]

Except I would never, ever allow a normally Swift action to be taken instaed of a Move Action. That way lies abuse in creating a trivially easy opportunity for a third action (be it a spell or other action).

To use up a Standard Action is no big deal. To use up only a Move Action would be very, very bad. You would NOT want to face bad guys who could do Quicken spells "at will." Suddenly they would do two of these plus a standard action every round - very deadly.

There are plenty of monsters that get a "quickened" spell or spell-like ability at will. I, for one, would NOT want them to get another opportunity for a free shot at the group.

That's actually a good point. I'd probably go with that...sacrifice a standard action, but not a move action.

 

[Mistwell]

As for the badge and spell under discussion, they are both Swift Actions precisely so only one may be used - else one or the other could have been a "Free Action." Under my proposal you could use both, but that would be useless.

On the rest, I can handle the overly cautiousness. But on this one...WHAT? You know they are both swift actions precisely so you can only use one? How on earth do you know something like that with precision? Seriously...what's with the hyperbole? I really doubt they were made swift actions precisely because you could only use one in the same round relative to each other...

Swift Actions are designed to force you to choose one.

I actually think they are designed to be quick one-round abilities, and the "one per round" is very secondary to them. The times it becomes an issue is quite rare really.

Once you've done one, you do not get another (or an Immediate Action). Free Actions are for when you do not care if it gets done more than once in a round, or in addition to a Swift/immediate Action.

From what I can tell, WOTC is making everything a swift action instead of a free action if it could go either way, by default. I don't think they are thinking that much about that decision either. But both of us are wildly speculating on that issue...

Allowing one to give up a Standard Action to do a Swift Action seems only slightly generous. Allowing one to give up a Move Action to do so seems like being overly generous.

Given the other opinions in this thread, I suspect you are in the vast minority on this issue. Taking longer to cast a spell should not, generally, be that big a deal for most DMs.

 

[IanB]

Swift->Standard, OK in my book.

Swift->Move, not even *close* to OK. I'm not letting a B9S class use two boosts and a strike in the same round. I'm not letting a character using MIC activate two swift action items and attack/cast in the same round. I'm *certainly* not letting a character cast 3 spells in a round doing it, whether or not the spells are powerful individually.

Bardic inspiration + 2 separate boosts to bardic inspiration falls into the same territory as those other possibilities to me. Major class ability + spell + item that essentially duplicates that spell.

 

[billd91]

Swift->Standard, OK in my book.

Swift->Move, not even *close* to OK. I'm not letting a B9S class use two boosts and a strike in the same round. I'm not letting a character using MIC activate two swift action items and attack/cast in the same round. I'm *certainly* not letting a character cast 3 spells in a round doing it, whether or not the spells are powerful individually.

Bardic inspiration + 2 separate boosts to bardic inspiration falls into the same territory as those other possibilities to me. Major class ability + spell + item that essentially duplicates that spell.

I have to say I think I'm with you on this one. Three spells per round, or swift abilities, is getting to be too much and ripe for abuse.
And, Mistwell, it's pretty much evident that swift abilities are designed to force the player into choosing only one per round. They're based on the idea of only gaining one "freebie" action per round that costs little time and effort and is thus hard to counter. Whether or not two bard inspiration buffers were explicitly considered or not is immaterial for the general idea of limiting cheap actions in general.

 

[Mistwell]

Whether or not two bard inspiration buffers were explicitly considered or not is immaterial for the general idea of limiting cheap actions in general.

Whether or not two bard inspiration buffers were explicitly considered was an issue not raised by me, but by the claim that two bard inspiration buffers were explicitly considered! Read what Artoomis said - he said it was precise to the badge and spell in question.

We have an established class (Ruby Knight Vindicator) that lets you use more than one swift ability per turn, and a related d20 game (Star Wars) with updated rules that allows it. And the example of the two bard ones is an example where both abilities WILL be used simultaneously, because they are not 1 round duration abilities to begin with.

All this sky is falling nonsense just doesn't hold up under examination. 99% of the time it's not going to be unbalancing in any way to allow a spell or magic item that is normally a swift action to instead be a move or standard action. Because it makes logical sense that you can take LONGER to do something, and because swift actions tend to not be all that powerful in general when combined with another swift action that eliminates a full round action thereafter.

And of course there will be exceptions...just as there are exceptions for everything in the game (even RAW core). But I don't think rules decisions should be based purely on the lowest common denominator way-out possibilities. It's easier to say what all DMs say "clear it with me first" and handle it that way. There is no administrative nightmare, as it won't come up often to begin with, and if it does it will generally be really easy to decide.

 

[KerlanRayne]

Wraithstrike (swift action) + Shadow Blink (standard action to swift action) + Shadow Pounce (full attack against adjacent foe when you teleport next to them) + Shadow Jaunt (move action) + Shadow Pounce again

I think you mean Wraithstrike (swift) + Shadow Jaunt (standard) + Shadow Pounce (full attack) + Shadow Stride (move) + Shadow Pounce again (full attack).
There is already a standard action maneuver for this so it can be done without the proposed rule. In other words, this combo is RAW.

KerlanRayne

 

[Arkhandus]

This pokes an interesting whole in the whole "action" issue.

It seems like, if a swift action takes less time than a standard action or a move action, especially since it's quite common for someone to take all three in one round, that taking two swift actions shouldn't be a problem (in terms of time).

It's not so much a matter of time as effort, though. A swift action is just a free action that involves more effort and focus, so it's like a standard action compacted into a more sudden burst of speed/activity. Whereas a move action is relatively effortless; you can jog around while swinging a weapon or whatnot, y'know, but the jogging part doesn't take much thought or any of your concentration.

In other words, a move action doesn't equate to just 'a briefer standard action', it's a 'minimal-effort but slightly time-consuming' action. A swift action though is just a standard action compacted down into a single, sudden moment of intense focus and effort.

You could pull back a greatsword and then swing it full-force as a standard action, but if you got some kinda crazy reflexes, you might snap that sword across in a second without any of that extra muscle-preparing time; but either way your muscles are going to be strained with effort for a moment, and that instant strike is likely to put more stress on your muscles, so you can't really do that again right away; your muscles might need at least a few moments before they could do that sudden attack again without tearing or something.

Just felt like saying something on that point.