Ryby knight vindicator and Divine Impetus

[adriana]

I've heard people say how easy it is to break the action economy with this and quicken spell as a cleric/ crusader/ ruby knight. However; I'm only showing that you can only burn one turning to get one extra quick action that round.

Divine Impetus (Su): At 7th level, you learn how to use the divine power of the Stern Lady to quicken your reactions and act without hesitation. You can expend a turn or rebuke undead attempt to gain one additional swift action this round. For example, you could use this ability to both change your stance and initiate a boost maneuver in the same turn, or if you initiated a counter before your turn, you can activate this ability and then initiate a boost on your turn.

going buy the most strict ruling wouldn't this only allow one extra quick action? Especially since it says "one additional swift action."

That's a good ability but I'm not seeing it break the action economy. I don't see where it says you can blow as many rebukes/turns to get more swift actions. I'm just seeing one. what am I missing?

[Muggins]

To my knowledge, any claims of "breaking the action economy" are the result of poor editing to the skill and willful misreadings of the ability. With no listed action cost, some people assume that it can be used repeatedly and that you can trade turn/rebuke attempts for swift actions on a 1:1 ratio.

However, Divine Impetus is a Supernatural ability. Using a supernatural ability is a standard action unless noted otherwise (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#supernaturalAbilities). Thus, you are trading a standard action and turn-rebuke attempt for a swift action; a rare ability, but not one which sees much practical use.

[adriana]

To my knowledge, any claims of "breaking the action economy" are the result of poor editing to the skill and willful misreadings of the ability. With no listed action cost, some people assume that it can be used repeatedly and that you can trade turn/rebuke attempts for swift actions on a 1:1 ratio.

However, Divine Impetus is a Supernatural ability. Using a supernatural ability is a standard action unless noted otherwise (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#supernaturalAbilities). Thus, you are trading a standard action and turn-rebuke attempt for a swift action; a rare ability, but not one which sees much practical use.

If that is the case then that severely diminishes the class as that is the most bragged about part of the class. The bab is nice but you lose caster levels and divine power makes up for the bab anyways. I may kick that from my build and go strait cleric/contemplative as it might be better. that is a weird text goof if it is as you say.

Kinda sad as I was looking forward to doing a little nova action with some DMM quicken spells. Too bad clerics can't get greater celerity.

[shadowseve]

To my knowledge, any claims of "breaking the action economy" are the result of poor editing to the skill and willful misreadings of the ability. With no listed action cost, some people assume that it can be used repeatedly and that you can trade turn/rebuke attempts for swift actions on a 1:1 ratio.

However, Divine Impetus is a Supernatural ability. Using a supernatural ability is a standard action unless noted otherwise (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#supernaturalAbilities). Thus, you are trading a standard action and turn-rebuke attempt for a swift action; a rare ability, but not one which sees much practical use.

Interesting. I think this may fall into more RAI then RAW. yes SU is a standard action, however; I don't think there intend was to burn a standard action for a quicken action. That's kinda lame. More likely they ment you gain an additional quick action plus your normal action after that. So you could quicken siad spell and still have your standard action to cast again or make one attack. If going by that RAI it's not a bad ability but hardly game breaking.

[Muggins]

Interesting. I think this may fall into more RAI then RAW. yes SU is a standard action, however; I don't think there intend was to burn a standard action for a quicken action. That's kinda lame. More likely they ment you gain an additional quick action plus your normal action after that. So you could quicken siad spell and still have your standard action to cast again or make one attack. If going by that RAI it's not a bad ability but hardly game breaking.
RAW is that you exchange a standard action and turn/rebuke attempt for an extra swift action.
RAI suggests that it was a 1/round free action to trade a turn/rebuke attempt for an extra swift action.
TO says that "hey, there's no 1/round restriction on this! I can use this as many times as I want!"

I mean sure, they're still swift actions, but I'd say that swift actions are better than turn/rebuke attempts in most situations.

[Vaz]

There is currently very few methods of generating additional Swift Actions in the game, meaning it's hard to get additional Swift Action spells off. There's no way to use a Standard Action for a Swift Action that I can think of. Trading Standard for Swift is a niche ability, but it's useful in it's own area - especially with a DMM Quicken build.

[gorfnab]

One trick with this is to gain some swift action teleportation, like the Dimension Hop psionic power, and some levels in Telflammar Shadowlord for Shadowpounce. This would allow you to burn a turn undead for a full attack.

[shadowseve]

RAW is that you exchange a standard action and turn/rebuke attempt for an extra swift action.
RAI suggests that it was a 1/round free action to trade a turn/rebuke attempt for an extra swift action.
TO says that "hey, there's no 1/round restriction on this! I can use this as many times as I want!"

I mean sure, they're still swift actions, but I'd say that swift actions are better than turn/rebuke attempts in most situations.

yeah unless your rebuking some undead. though If your wasting a standard action for a quicken action then I don't see the point.

[Kazudo]

There are so few ways (if any) to transmute a Standard Action to a Swift Action, and even fewer (again, if any) ways to make an action take a Standard Action instead of a Swift Action. Divine Impetus is one of those ways to grant another Swift Action during a turn at the expense of a Standard Action. This is very useful since many Tome of Battle applications use Swift Actions. The examples given in the class feature make it obvious that it's for maneuver and stance usability, not necessarily for granting extra actions.

The feature is "broken" due to unfounded RAW claims.

[shadowseve]

There is currently very few methods of generating additional Swift Actions in the game, meaning it's hard to get additional Swift Action spells off. There's no way to use a Standard Action for a Swift Action that I can think of. Trading Standard for Swift is a niche ability, but it's useful in it's own area - especially with a DMM Quicken build.


could you not just simply dmm a quicken then take your normal standard action to use another spell or attack? I figured the whole purpose for Divine impetus was to burn as a free action to rebuke/turn to get one aditional swift action and a standard action.

[Segev]

I'm highly suspicious of any claim that relies on the idea that a standard action converting to a swift action would enable you to do something you couldn't do with the standard action, particularly when RAI is being brought in as part of the discussion.

[shadowseve]

There are so few ways (if any) to transmute a Standard Action to a Swift Action, and even fewer (again, if any) ways to make an action take a Standard Action instead of a Swift Action. Divine Impetus is one of those ways to grant another Swift Action during a turn at the expense of a Standard Action. This is very useful since many Tome of Battle applications use Swift Actions. The examples given in the class feature make it obvious that it's for maneuver and stance usability, not necessarily for granting extra actions.

The feature is "broken" due to unfounded RAW claims.

Now this does make more sense if it's meant to use it for an manuever that is specifically a quicken action then trying to break the action economy.

I might then agree with her sense her focus is necromancy just to go strait cleric/contemplative.

[adriana]

Now this does make more sense if it's meant to use it for an manuever that is specifically a quicken action then trying to break the action economy.

I might then agree with her sense her focus is necromancy just to go strait cleric/contemplative.

I think i may agree with shadows eve sence I'm def more necormancy focused and DMM persist focused. It may not be worth the three caster levels I would lose. Though I'm def interested in more imput. For now it's bed time. thanks for the replies. Would love to here more thoughts though for when I woke up. this does confirm my initial suspicion about breaking the action economy.

[Rebel7284]

As pointed out before, there are three ways to read the ability.

However, even with the conservative reading of only being usable 1/turn, it's still another action every turn...

Many powerful effects are achievable as a swift action, from casting spells (naturally swift or with quicken spell feat or with metamagic rod) to using maneuvers (Shadow Blink) to activating a good third of the items in the magic item compendium. If you have a Belt of Battle, you can even convert a swift action into a standard or full round action. You can also use immediate actions and still take a swift action next turn.

While taking an extra action is amazing, there are other reasons to use RKV. RKV combines the two best tanking classes in the game, the cleric and the crusader. Combining the delayed damage pool and maneuvers like healing strikes/shield block with Close Wounds and Channeled Divine Shield you can become ridiculously difficult to bring down. At the same time, Thicket of Blades and Vanguard's Strike makes it more difficult to attack your allies. Adding Persistent Spell via Divine Metamagic to make your cleric buffs last all day makes it even more silly.

And if that wasn't enough, you get access to shadow hand for some effective sneaky stuff if you want it!

So I would consider playing RKV even without Divine Impetus, but extra actions push it toward being one of the better classes in the game.

[adriana]

As pointed out before, there are three ways to read the ability.

However, even with the conservative reading of only being usable 1/turn, it's still another action every turn...

Many powerful effects are achievable as a swift action, from casting spells (naturally swift or with quicken spell feat or with metamagic rod) to using maneuvers (Shadow Blink) to activating a good third of the items in the magic item compendium. If you have a Belt of Battle, you can even convert a swift action into a standard or full round action. You can also use immediate actions and still take a swift action next turn.

While taking an extra action is amazing, there are other reasons to use RKV. RKV combines the two best tanking classes in the game, the cleric and the crusader. Combining the delayed damage pool and maneuvers like healing strikes/shield block with Close Wounds and Channeled Divine Shield you can become ridiculously difficult to bring down. At the same time, Thicket of Blades and Vanguard's Strike makes it more difficult to attack your allies. Adding Persistent Spell via Divine Metamagic to make your cleric buffs last all day makes it even more silly.

And if that wasn't enough, you get access to shadow hand for some effective sneaky stuff if you want it!

So I would consider playing RKV even without Divine Impetus, but extra actions push it toward being one of the better classes in the game.

So you would still recommend my original build of cleric 4/crusader 1/ ruby knight 10/ contemplative 5? vs cleric 10/contemplative 10. I've not really looked into the moves for the RKV I'm familiar with some of the crusaders at lower level. even though I'm def more necro focused. You think it's worth the loss of three caster levels? I mean I still get 1 9th level spell plus the domain spell.

Edit though with out the stance and maneuver that was mentioned above i still don't see how turning a standard action to a quickend one is beneficial since you could dmm a quicken then cast another spell as a standard. now if it gave you one extra quicken plus your standard, not that would be nice. Not game breaking but nice. but the SU cost a standard. To me it's a weird ruling. Any rate I'm def off to bed. Still open for more input but thanks guys for the responses so far.

[Vaz]

could you not just simply dmm a quicken then take your normal standard action to use another spell or attack? I figured the whole purpose for Divine impetus was to burn as a free action to rebuke/turn to get one aditional swift action and a standard action.

Quicken was a bad example, not thinking, sorry. But Quicken [FullRound spell], +Swift Action Spell gets you a Move Action as well.

[Anlashok]

Lol at people trying to defend this. Standard>Swift with a resource cost is one of the worst class features in the game that doesn't actually make your character worse and is clearly not RAI. Especially when you can argue action downgrading by itself is already RAI.

The intent is 1/turn extra swift action for spending a turn attempt as a free action, not the almost useless pile described here.

And the TO people are apparently really dumb because their theoretical version doesn't work on any level and I'm not sure why the idea that it did spread around so much.

[Vaz]

Not sure who you're insulting most here.

Those who are defending the RAW, or the TO people who allowed it to stack infinitely, or yourself by getting them mixed up.

[Red Fel]

And the TO people are apparently really dumb because their theoretical version doesn't work on any level and I'm not sure why the idea that it did spread around so much.

Not cool. Seriously, not cool. There is no need to insult anyone.

Yes. There is a general rule that unless stated otherwise, a (Su) ability is a standard action to execute. Yes, that would mean you burn a standard action to gain a swift, which many people agree is quite lame (unless you have really awesome swift action options).

However, many of the "apparently really dumb" TO people also feel that this was an unintentional editing issue (there are quite a few in this book), because frankly, it is silly that you spend a standard action to gain a swift. So many people have a house rule that Divine Impetus, which has no listed action cost, is a free action. A basis of comparison is the Factotum Cunning Surge ability, which lets you spend 3 IP to take an additional standard action. It has no listed action time, but many other IP-based Factotum abilities are listed as "as a free action." So there is some basis in this house rule. At that point, yes, Divine Impetus becomes highly desirable.

[Kazudo]

Show me RAW that you can make an action take a Standard Action rather than a Swift Action.

[cosmonuts]

Calling a group dumb is a vapid claim. We should turn the discussion back to more substantial things.

That said, I think the issue is cut pretty clear. There is no explicit ruling, and it is vague. By Rules as Written, clearly it's trading a standard action for a swift action. By Rules as Interpreted, such an ability would be terrible and never be used, so there is no way this is what WotC intended. Imagine if barbarian's rage typo'd on printing and gave Str and Con debuffs rather than bonuses. People would reasonably use it as though Str and Con were increased, not decreased.

No strict ruling one way or another. I think it's fine to go with the spirit of the rules. An extra swift action is spectacular, but in line with what we expect of these PrCs. Think eternal blade.

Edit

Also, while we're in the spirit of RaI, let's point out that no DM will allow infinity swift actions, just as no DM will allow factotums to cunning surge a million times. Once per round is sufficient.

[Firechanter]

Just to chip in my 2 cents:

Just houserule Divine Impetus to be permitted once per round as a free action. There, problem solved. It will be useful in a number of ways, powerful enough to make the PrC desirable, but not really break the Action Economy (unless maybe if paired with some further shenanigans).

Note the fine difference between "round" and "turn" here. If you allow it "once per turn", expect a pair of RKVs continually White Raven Tacticing each other and win the encounter before anyone else can act.

[Rebel7284]

So you would still recommend my original build of cleric 4/crusader 1/ ruby knight 10/ contemplative 5? vs cleric 10/contemplative 10. I've not really looked into the moves for the RKV I'm familiar with some of the crusaders at lower level. even though I'm def more necro focused. You think it's worth the loss of three caster levels? I mean I still get 1 9th level spell plus the domain spell.


It depends very much on what you want to do.

If you want to be on the front line, smashing faces and tripping anyone who tries to get away, RKV is amazing. However; you do have to wait to get the best spells.

If you want to stay in the back and cast every round, buffing up your allies or weakening your enemies, go with the second build (or a variant thereof, no reason to take cleric to 10.)



Edit though with out the stance and maneuver that was mentioned above i still don't see how turning a standard action to a quickend one is beneficial since you could dmm a quicken then cast another spell as a standard. now if it gave you one extra quicken plus your standard, not that would be nice. Not game breaking but nice. but the SU cost a standard. To me it's a weird ruling. Any rate I'm def off to bed. Still open for more input but thanks guys for the responses so far.

I am going with the interpretation that most people use that it's a free action usable once a turn. :)

For maneuvers, I am sure there is a crusader handbook somewhere.

Fun note:
Anyone can already turn standard actions into swift actions by using "Ready an action". Readying is always a standard action, but you can ready a standard, move, or swift action.

[VoxRationis]

Show me RAW that you can make an action take a Standard Action rather than a Swift Action.

I wouldn't put money on such a thing being explicitly written anywhere. Keep in mind that swift actions weren't part of the original ruleset; they got written into the rules in various sourcebooks. However, the core rules, under "Actions in Combat," say that you can always take a move action in place of a standard action, so there is precedent for "action downgrading," as it were. In the original core rules, there were no limits on free actions generally, just on specific free actions (like quickened spells), so there'd be no reason to extend that principle to free actions. I think it was an oversight that the matter was not clarified when swift actions were introduced.

[Anlashok]

Not sure who you're insulting most here.

Those who are defending the RAW, or the TO people who allowed it to stack infinitely, or yourself by getting them mixed up.

Two distinct groups I'm disagreeing with here:

1)The TO people who spread this idea that it's infinite swift actions

2) The people in this thread insisting that spending a turn attempt to turn a standard action into a swift action is still a good class feature.

Different groups entirely, don't like the position of either. Seems straight forward.


However, many of the "apparently really dumb" TO people also feel that this was an unintentional editing issue (there are quite a few in this book), because frankly, it is silly that you spend a standard action to gain a swift. So many people have a house rule that Divine Impetus, which has no listed action cost, is a free action. A basis of comparison is the Factotum Cunning Surge ability, which lets you spend 3 IP to take an additional standard action. It has no listed action time, but many other IP-based Factotum abilities are listed as "as a free action." So there is some basis in this house rule. At that point, yes, Divine Impetus becomes highly desirable.
The problem is that TO isn't about "reasonable house rules" it's really the exact opposite, explicitly ignoring reasonable assumptions and intent in favor of twisting the meaning of the words... and even if it were "take N swift actions per turn" isn't a reasonable house rule in the first place. So on at least one of those two counts it doesn't hold muster and I have no problem saying that the "ruby knight windicator" myth is dumb because of it.

[Vaz]

So your insults are down to your own personal houserules/ignoring the rules?

Glad that's sorted out, cheers.

[Anlashok]

I'm honestly not sure how you could come to that conclusion given that nothing mentioned my own house rules or anything of the sort.

I'm not even really sure it's an insult to call the idea dumb, because the whole premise of it is that it's a TO/raw abuse shenanigan that doesn't match the raw. Seems pretty straight forward and I'm not really understanding the anger here.

[Vaz]

If it is a non action, or free action as TO assumes (ignoring the RAW of Su defaulting to standard actions), then provided you have Turn Undead, you have Swift Actions equal to the amount burned.

If it is RAW then it is a standard action.

You are the one who brought up reasonable assumptions. You are the one who said the the TO crowd were dumb, and insulted them, not the idea.

Your attitude isn't welcome and when you're incapable of making your point clearly, let alone correctly, it does get up peoples backs.

[cosmonuts]

Rules as Written is standard action to swift action. (Supported by it being Su without an explicit action.)

Rules as Intended is free action turn undead to swift action. (Supported by the expectation that it being a standard action is a typo.)

Rules as Common Sense is once per round free action turn undead to swift action. (Supported by the use in the examples, and by what one might expect from similar class abilities.)

None of these points of view is "dumb". Indeed, that term falls into a catalog of empty arguments, and often inflames discussions because it carries an air of superiority.

Of course, people like to walk on eggshells in arguments. People have no fundamental reason to get annoyed if you use the term "dumb", but what do you know, people still do, because it's a slight on them.

So let's just move on like reasonable people and accept that the thing is vague but there are useful interpretations.

[adriana]

Rules as Written is standard action to swift action. (Supported by it being Su without an explicit action.)

Rules as Intended is free action turn undead to swift action. (Supported by the expectation that it being a standard action is a typo.)

Rules as Common Sense is once per round free action turn undead to swift action. (Supported by the use in the examples, and by what one might expect from similar class abilities.)

None of these points of view is "dumb". Indeed, that term falls into a catalog of empty arguments, and often inflames discussions because it carries an air of superiority.

Of course, people like to walk on eggshells in arguments. People have no fundamental reason to get annoyed if you use the term "dumb", but what do you know, people still do, because it's a slight on them.

So let's just move on like reasonable people and accept that the thing is vague but there are useful interpretations.

To me this makes the most sense and what both shadowseve and my original interpretation of this. I seriously think it was an editing issue. Let's take a look at the example, "For example, you could use this ability to both change your stance and initiate a boost maneuver in the same turn, or if you initiated a counter before your turn, you can activate this ability and then initiate a boost on your turn." To me this implies that you use it as a free action to give one quicken action a round. Though I agree with the above example it should be round and not turn due to white raven tactics shenanigans.

[adriana]

It depends very much on what you want to do.

If you want to be on the front line, smashing faces and tripping anyone who tries to get away, RKV is amazing. However; you do have to wait to get the best spells.

If you want to stay in the back and cast every round, buffing up your allies or weakening your enemies, go with the second build (or a variant thereof, no reason to take cleric to 10.)



I am going with the interpretation that most people use that it's a free action usable once a turn. :)

For maneuvers, I am sure there is a crusader handbook somewhere.

Fun note:
Anyone can already turn standard actions into swift actions by using "Ready an action". Readying is always a standard action, but you can ready a standard, move, or swift action.

My goal for this character is to be in the front lines and still have some very high level kick ass dragon zombies and dragon skellys. It's a gestalt build and since I'm a half shadow dragon my original intent was

cleric 4/crusader1/ RKV 10/contemplative 5//dragonfire adept 20(to further explore the whole dragon theme.)

[Gildedragon]

You're doing Gestalt?

Probably best go Cleric 5//Warblade 4 / Swordsage 1 (or viceversa) for the first 5 levels and lose fewer cleric levels.

[adriana]

You're doing Gestalt?

Probably best go Cleric 5//Warblade 4 / Swordsage 1 (or viceversa) for the first 5 levels and lose fewer cleric levels.

I'm wanting at least lv 17 caster lv so I can get 9th level spells. I'll also need the high caster levels for the best undead. Besides we have a character going crusader 16/warblade4// cloistered cleric/contemplative. She has the warblade covered so I wanted there to be some differences in concept. dragonfire isa good build and it complements the whole dragon theme too.


Edit:
If i could get full caster cleric I think it would be best. That's why I was contemplating dropping ruby knight and crusader but both of those have nice features that could still fit my theme. Dragonfire was recommended to me for the whole dragon theme.

[Gildedragon]

I meant crusader there. Freudian slip

[adriana]

I meant crusader there. Freudian slip

I think I see where you're going. So cleric 5/RKV 10/contemplative 5/crusader4/swordsage1/dragon aspect 15.

That would get me some maneuvers off the bat some shadow hand goodness plus quite a bit of the goodness from dragon aspect and 18th lv casting.


edit: that should give me plenty of melee options as well as almost 20th level casting. would also give me some damn good undead with the deathbound domain (with the errata version) plus desecrate. Def worth looking into. thanks for that perspective.