Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Auldar 08-20-07, 10:46 PM	Hi all.. I have a bit of a problem and was hoping for some help. I'm playing an Illumian Cleric//Wizard gestalt with the Naenhoon sigils, and would like to add metamagic to a spell with a swift action cast time. Unfortunately, in order to do this I need to use 2 swift actions in one round. Both the act of adding the metamagic, and the casting time of the spell I wish to cast, are swift actions. Is there a way I can cast the swift spell with a standard action? Is there a way to increase the casting time of a swift spell as a wizard?
Auldar 08-20-07, 11:00 PM	Doh - looks like the boards are playing up today. I originally posted this in the CO forums, and when I checked for responses a few minutes later, the thread wasn't there (but other threads were updated). I thought it had been deleted, so I posted a similar thread here (but with less information in case I had infringed on the posting rules).. Sorry for the cross-posting.
Tempest Stormwind 08-20-07, 11:15 PM	No such method exists. There is exactly one method of gaining extra swift actions (apart from taking your next round earlier through powers like Anticipatory Strike or granting yourself additional turns through effects like Time Stop), and that is the Ruby Knight Vindicator in the ToB. Incidentally, it's also considered one of the more broken elements of that book (mostly for its abilites based on Turn Undead attempts, including this one).
sparkster4242 08-27-07, 03:06 PM	that being said, it is not an unreasonable houserule to allow expending a larger action in place of a smaller one - moving your speed as a standard action is actually covered in the rules, for example. if you wanted to spend a standard action to cast a swift spell, i would certainly allow it.
Zarreth_Nessad 08-27-07, 03:16 PM	Personally, I thought that was already allowed (due to above stated move rules, probably). Kind of like expending a Quickened spell as your swift action and then a Quickened spell for your standard action... you basically wasted a higher level slot, but if you needed that spell right then, then it's your loss of spell level. Never saw anything wrong with someone doing that sort of thing. Also, then, if you have the epic feats Automatic Quicken Spells 3 times, and you couldn't use a Quickened spell as a standard action, then you've just about wasted a feat.
jaelis 08-27-07, 04:53 PM	RAW you can't do it. But I've never seen anything to suggest it is a problem as a houserule.
Seeker95 08-27-07, 05:41 PM	I allow it. A houserule in that there is nothing in the rules that explicitly indicate you can. However, I would rule that this is not so much a houserule (meaning a made-up rule) than a reasonable ruling. Similarly, nothing in the rules indicates you can move less than 3x your speed when running, either, and I would certainly allow someone to slow down how quickly they are running, if for no other reason than to let their short-legged companions keep up.
Salla 08-27-07, 06:15 PM	Personally, I thought that was already allowed (due to above stated move rules, probably). Kind of like expending a Quickened spell as your swift action and then a Quickened spell for your standard action... you basically wasted a higher level slot, but if you needed that spell right then, then it's your loss of spell level. Never saw anything wrong with someone doing that sort of thing. Also, then, if you have the epic feats Automatic Quicken Spells 3 times, and you couldn't use a Quickened spell as a standard action, then you've just about wasted a feat. It's not RAW in D&D, but it is in Star Wars Saga Edition (you can expressly 'downshift' your standard and move actions to Swift actions). I suppose I can't see why you couldn't ...
runestar 08-27-07, 08:57 PM	Doesn't arcane spellsurge supposedly set some sort of precedent that actions cannot be downsized?
bigbythewise 08-27-07, 09:25 PM	Also, then, if you have the epic feats Automatic Quicken Spells 3 times, and you couldn't use a Quickened spell as a standard action, then you've just about wasted a feat. Multispell feat, dude. Otherwise, you can cast only one quickened spell per round. That's the RAW and a precedens as well for disallowing both standard and swift action's use for a quicken spell.
Zarreth_Nessad 08-28-07, 04:31 PM	Even with Multispell, you still have a standard action that isn't being used to cast a spell due to all your spells being quickened. As an alternative thought to make the point more clear: what if you want to make two swift actions (ie a quickened spell and something else that requires a swift action)? The point is whether or not you can use the standard action to cast the quickened spell? Logically speaking, there shouldn't be a problem with it, even though the rules don't seem to call it out specifically as something you can do.
bigbythewise 08-28-07, 05:00 PM	Even with Multispell, you still have a standard action that isn't being used to cast a spell due to all your spells being quickened. As an alternative thought to make the point more clear: what if you want to make two swift actions (ie a quickened spell and something else that requires a swift action)? The point is whether or not you can use the standard action to cast the quickened spell? Logically speaking, there shouldn't be a problem with it, even though the rules don't seem to call it out specifically as something you can do. Man, I dunno. The only action that can be replaced is standard -> move. Nothing more in RAW.
runestar 08-28-07, 10:06 PM	I wouldn't allow me. My rationale is that this "perceived self-nerfing" will only be used when you have no other alternative, and it ultimately lets you perform something which is technically not allowed under the current rules. Thus, while it certainly sounds noble that you are deliberately shortchanging yourself, you would likely do so only when it would be advantageous to do so in the current situation, and thus should not be perceived as a nerf, but as a boon. Similarly, nothing in the rules indicates you can move less than 3x your speed when running, either, and I would certainly allow someone to slow down how quickly they are running, if for no other reason than to let their short-legged companions keep up. I would say that a more apt analogy would be if you could move less than your speed while running and use the remaining time to acquire another move or perhaps even a standard action to perform something else.
Mandarbgrim 08-28-07, 10:25 PM	It has always seemed odd to me that whenever people go on about RAW that there seems to be a concentration on "the rules don't say you can" instead of "the rules say you can't". They don't mean the same things at all. Not that I'm for either side, but it just reminds me of some oddities that I have noticed in philosophy classes, as well. I've been playing for awhile using this house rule. It actually seemed implied by other rules, but just not touched upon. I understand that "It seems rational" doesn't go very far, but not allowing it doesn't seem very consistent with the rest of the game, or my own percieved goal of the game simulating a fantasy reality.
Grumman 08-29-07, 01:38 AM	Doesn't arcane spellsurge supposedly set some sort of precedent that actions cannot be downsized? An illogical precedent with undesirable in-game consequences, but a precedent none the less. :rolleyes:
Corlindale 08-29-07, 02:45 AM	It does have some consequences that might be undesirable. For example it makes the Seeker of the Song prc much more powerful, since that class gets a lot of blasting abilities restricted by them being swift actions and such 1/round. Being able to fire another would probably be more than worth the standard action slot, and likely more effective than whatever standard action you might otherwise be performing(probably firing a bow with your only mid-BaB compared to firing another 10d6 - lingering for 10d6 more in the following round - ray of acid. It could possibly be argued that the class isn't among the most powerful to begin with, and the change might not be extremely unbalanced, but it is a quite substantial power boost gained by the ability to convert swift to standard. There might be other classes out there with similar issues.
Seeker95 08-29-07, 08:25 AM	I would say that a more apt analogy would be if you could move less than your speed while running and use the remaining time to acquire another move or perhaps even a standard action to perform something else.I do not believe it is an apt analogy. Using a swift spell *as your standard action* uses up your standard action. Using a swift spell *as your standard action* does not give you extra time to do anything else. It does not give you an extra standard action. It does not free up your time.
jaelis 08-29-07, 08:50 AM	It does have some consequences that might be undesirable. For example it makes the Seeker of the Song prc much more powerful, since that class gets a lot of blasting abilities restricted by them being swift actions and such 1/round. Being able to fire another would probably be more than worth the standard action slot, and likely more effective than whatever standard action you might otherwise be performing(probably firing a bow with your only mid-BaB compared to firing another 10d6 - lingering for 10d6 more in the following round - ray of acid. It could possibly be argued that the class isn't among the most powerful to begin with, and the change might not be extremely unbalanced, but it is a quite substantial power boost gained by the ability to convert swift to standard. There might be other classes out there with similar issues. I don't have the class. They really get swift action abilities that are more potent than their spells/songs? Weird, but good to know.
runestar 08-29-07, 10:16 PM	I do not believe it is an apt analogy. Using a swift spell *as your standard action* uses up your standard action. Using a swift spell *as your standard action* does not give you extra time to do anything else. It does not give you an extra standard action. It does not free up your time. True that - I do suck at analogies.:embarrass Basically, my point was that it only seems like a disadvantage because you seem to be voluntarily nerfing yourself, but it really is not a drawback at all, as you would be using this option only when it would be more advantageous to you anyways (ie: when you typically have no other alternative). For example, if I had something better to do with that standard action, I would do that instead of wasting, say, a quickened spell. But in this case, you have no choice. How is that considered a trade-down?
Nathreet 08-29-07, 10:58 PM	IMO obvious common sense (not supposed "common sense") >> rules. DM should allow it whenever it makes perfect sense (most of the time), but disallow it otherwise. For example, the Marshall can start his aura by shouting orders, etc. as a swift action. It wouldn't make sense to allow him another swift action that involves speaking more than a few words, as he needs to spend the entire round barking out orders/encourangement/etc. (while he does other things at the same time). But casting swift spells as a standard action should almost always be allowable, unless the spell descriptions imply that the spells are actually cast semi-simultaneously with other actions and therefore could not both be cast in the same round (like the above example).
kab 08-30-07, 12:25 AM	Even with Multispell, you still have a standard action that isn't being used to cast a spell due to all your spells being quickened. now now, do read carefully You 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 you may cast per round applies. Spells with a casting time of more than 1 full round can’t be quickened. nobody said that you must, you simply may
Seeker95 08-30-07, 08:13 AM	For example, if I had something better to do with that standard action, I would do that instead of wasting, say, a quickened spell. But in this case, you have no choice. How is that considered a trade-down?runestar, thank you for additional explanation. I understand now.
goawayugh 08-30-07, 08:26 AM	I'm with runestar on this one. At first glance, it seems like you're shortchanging yourself. But, the only time one would probably do this is if it would be better for them to do it than to not. I might allow it in certain circumstances, but the general rule with me is "no you cannot use a standard action to do a swift action".
Seeker95 08-30-07, 11:31 AM	but the general rule with me is "no you cannot use a standard action to do a swift action".I do not understand why you feel the need to have the general rule be restrictive. You say you would allow it "in certain circumstances"; what circumstances would you allow it? What distinguishes these from the general? What is your reason for saying you cannot spend six seconds doing what would normally take a negligible amount of time, except in certain circumstances?
Zarreth_Nessad 08-30-07, 03:18 PM	@Kab: Ah, yes, I missed that wording. Thanks for pointing it out. @Seeker95 & Runestar & Goawayugh: While casting two quickened spells in one round using your swift & your standard action is out, since the feat specifically prohibits it, but there shouldn't be anything wrong with using your standard action to cast a spell that has been prepared to be cast quickened, but lose the effects of having it quickened (ie the standard action spell is subject to attacks of opportunity, etc). It seems to me that the wording is just to prevent people from using all quickened spells to avoid AoO's. Personally, I agree with Seeker95. Even if you don't allow two spells to be used in the same round that were prepared as quickened spells, with one of them losing the benefits of being quickened, it doesn't make any sense that something that takes a negligible time can't be done within 6 (or 4, or whatnot) seconds. It doesn't make sense for the general rule to be that restrictive. That said, if you don't allow two quickened spells in that manner, what about when you want to cast a "swift action" spell and a quickened spell in the same round? Are you saying that isn't allowed either? If so, please explain.
Istaran 08-30-07, 03:55 PM	The only clearly spelled out rules on the issue are annoyingly buried within the text of a spell in a splat book, namely Arcane Spellsurge. That spell clearly points out that you cannot (under any circumstances, not just under the spell) use two swift actions in the same turn, even by using up your standard action. They point out that under the spells effects, which speed up all spells you cast, you would need to use a full round casting time spell (such as a spontaneous spell with metamagic applied) (which speeds up to standard action) plus a standard action or faster spell (which speeds up to swift action) if you wish to cast two spells in one round. Keep in mind that swift actions are not free actions; they are as fast as free actions but require a significant mental effort (on the order of a +4 to spell level) and your brain just can't switch gears that fast/easily. It isn't about the time, it's about the focus. Swift actions cannot (at least not by their nature) be slowed down to make them easier and more manageable.