Swift Action/Move Action/Standard Action Option

[Trasilor]

I am thinking of making the following change

During combat, a character (including NPCs) can take a swift action instead of a move action.

I know the rules regarding Immediate/Swift/Move/Standard action, but I was curios as to the playgrounders opinion of implementing this change.

[Sacrieur]

No, keep things how they are.

Swift actions are more valuable than move actions, limiting them to one per round is pretty important. Allowing someone to break down actions is going to break the game pretty badly.

[Trasilor]

No, keep things how they are.

Swift actions are more valuable than move actions, limiting them to one per round is pretty important. Allowing someone to break down actions is going to break the game pretty badly.

Can you give me an example of this? How would it break the game? Have you played in a game where this was abused to the point of breakage?

What if i just limit it to magical items - you can use a move action to activate a magical item with a swift action activation cost.

[OldTrees1]

Can you give me an example of this? How would it break the game? Have you played in a game where this was abused to the point of breakage?

What if i just limit it to magical items - you can use a move action to activate a magical item with a swift action activation cost.

Quickened Spell including Quickened wands.

However as long as you exclude spells I don't see a significant problem down the line.

[Trasilor]

Quickened Spell including Quickened wands.

However as long as you exclude spells I don't see a significant problem down the line.

I concede that could be an issue.

[Morcleon]

I'd let someone drop a standard action for a swift action (but not an immediate), if you wanna do this sort of thing.

[Sacrieur]

Can you give me an example of this? How would it break the game? Have you played in a game where this was abused to the point of breakage?

What if i just limit it to magical items - you can use a move action to activate a magical item with a swift action activation cost.

With initiator classes specifically it totally breaks it. So anyone who wants to play something from the Tome of Battle or Path of War (Pathfinder) it's going to be pretty overpowered, double strikes, double boosts, lots of game-breaking stuff there.

Quicken spell, which has already been mentioned, and any spells which already have the casting time of an immediate or swift action. I'd personally use a rod of quicken to cast three spells a round. That's pretty big right there.

There's also the unknown. Who knows what classes you'll be breaking which rely on the restriction of one swift action per turn. I think maybe some class which uses a ki pool may let you use it as a swift action and such, so there's always this.

[OldTrees1]

With initiator classes specifically it totally breaks it. So anyone who wants to play something from the Tome of Battle or Path of War (Pathfinder) it's going to be pretty overpowered, double strikes, double boosts, lots of game-breaking stuff there.

I thought Strikes were usually Standard or Full Round actions? Sure they will get the option of Move or a 2nd Boost but is that really game-breaking? I don't think so(overpowered?, maybe if there are no casters at all).

[Extra Anchovies]

I thought Strikes were usually Standard or Full Round actions? Sure they will get the option of Move or a 2nd Boost but is that really game-breaking? I don't think so(overpowered?, maybe if there are no casters at all).

In a system where boosts are balanced with the restriction that you can only have one active at a time, being able to double up on boosts unbalances them. Simple as that. It won't completely destroy your game, but it is a major blow to game balance.

[Sith_Happens]

I thought Strikes were usually Standard or Full Round actions? Sure they will get the option of Move or a 2nd Boost but is that really game-breaking? I don't think so(overpowered?, maybe if there are no casters at all).

Using two boosts at once is the Swordsage's capstone ability, that should tell you something about how good it is.

[Sacrieur]

I thought Strikes were usually Standard or Full Round actions? Sure they will get the option of Move or a 2nd Boost but is that really game-breaking? I don't think so(overpowered?, maybe if there are no casters at all).

Upon reading through some maneuvers I couldn't find a strike that was a swift action so you may be right there.

But dual or triple boosting sure is something. You can take multiple counters per turn, as well. And yes it is breaking the game. Some of them let you make an attack.

A Stalker with Veiled Moon could use Fade Through (7th Level Boost) three times in a single turn, teleporting six times his movement speed away. And we're just barely scratching the surface.

[Psyren]

This makes casters much more powerful - they can cast up to 4 spells in one turn (standard, swift, swift, immediate) or 3 spells + item, or 3 spells + class feature. The latter two can be done even if you prevent the second swift from working with spells, and work particularly well with gishes.

If you must do this, I'd recommend making it use up the next turn's swift + immediate or something.

[OldTrees1]

In a system where boosts are balanced with the restriction that you can only have one active at a time, being able to double up on boosts unbalances them. Simple as that. It won't completely destroy your game, but it is a major blow to game balance.


Using two boosts at once is the Swordsage's capstone ability, that should tell you something about how good it is.

We are also talking about a system for Martial characters that WotC designed (and thus evidence like restrictions and capstones is of questionable value). I would give double boosts the benefit of the doubt while still checking each combo as the PCs leveled up. I bet most are fine (I would still suggest checking them if one were to allow this).


Upon reading through some maneuvers I couldn't find a strike that was a swift action so you may be right there.

But dual or triple boosting sure is something. You can take multiple counters per turn, as well. And yes it is breaking the game. Some of them let you make an attack.

A Stalker with Veiled Moon could use Fade Through (7th Level Boost) three times in a single turn, teleporting six times his movement speed away. And we're just barely scratching the surface.

So a 13th level martial character teleporting 6x movement speed (so something under 600ft) using their entire turn(I am unfamiliar with PoW recharge but how are you recharging the same maneuver twice without actions?) is an example of imbalance? Give warriors nice things too. That better be just scratching the surface.

Also: No you can't use multiple counters since they take Immediate Actions and having Infinite Swift actions would not increase your number of Immediate Actions.

[Curmudgeon]

Also: No you can't use multiple counters since they take Immediate Actions and having Infinite Swift actions would not increase your number of Immediate Actions.
An immediate action on your turn is the same as as a swift action. If you're using counters against AoOs from provoking actions you took, it's your turn and you could use multiples.

[OldTrees1]

An immediate action on your turn is the same as as a swift action. If you're using counters against AoOs from provoking actions you took, it's your turn and you could use multiples.
I stand corrected, on your turn you could use multiple counters. Thanks for the correction.

[geekintheground]

correct me if im wrong, but even with multiple swifts, dont you only get 1 quickened spell/round? and arent they free actions anyway? like, yes, this will boost the power level of the game, but i think martials (specifically ToB/PoW users) benefit from it most, and thats the sign of a good power boost.
also keep in mind monsters would be able to do this too, so it wouldnt UNBALANCE the game. boosting everyones power equally results in the same balance... right?

[Curmudgeon]

correct me if im wrong, but even with multiple swifts, dont you only get 1 quickened spell/round? and arent they free actions anyway?
Your correction comes from page 86 of Complete Arcane:
SWIFT AND IMMEDIATE ACTIONS
Some of the feats, spells, and items in Complete Arcane and other DUNGEONS & DRAGONS supplements use two new action types: the swift action and the immediate action. A description of how each works follows.
...
Casting a quickened spell is a swift action (instead of a free action, as stated in the Quicken Spell feat description in the Player’s Handbook).
You can find an updated version of Quicken Spell here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#quickenSpell).

[geekintheground]

Your correction comes from page 86 of Complete Arcane:
You can find an updated version of Quicken Spell here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#quickenSpell).

so it does! thanks curmudgeon :)

[Hiro Quester]

Arcane Spellsurge (dragon magic, IIRC) makes standard action spells swift action, and full round spells standard actions.

So with that active, you could cast a quickened (free action) lightning bolt, a standard lightning bolt (swift), and an empowered (standard) lightning bolt all in the same round. That's enough action economy spamming right there.

With your suggested system, you could add yet another lightning bolt instead of a move action. This takes a potentially broken action economy, snaps it in completely into pieces.

[Psyren]

so it does! thanks curmudgeon :)

That still doesn't change swift-action item or class feature activation being even more beneficial to casters. The simple fact is that casters have less use for their move action than martials do and thus stand to gain much more from this rules change.

[marphod]

I've been in a game where this was allowed, and it didn't seem to break anything (more than it already is, at least).

You will want to read 'Quicken Spell' and 'Quicken Spell-like Ability' mutually-exclusive (only one Quickened action, not just one spell or one spell like) per round.

---

The worry that this will allow the ability to cast more than 2 spells per round is odd -- it already exists; something you can do with a stack of Belts of Battle, for one.

---

If you're Double-Boosting an attack, that means you're, at best, doing a standard action strike. I can't think of any double-boosted standard action strike that is that unbalancing, compared to if it could be only boosted once.

I'd love to hear cases where I'm wrong.

---


they can cast up to 4 spells in one turn (standard, swift, swift, immediate)

Ignoring the limitations of Quicken, How are you making a Standard, 2 Swifts and an Immediate action in a turn? A Swift action is the same as an immediate action on your turn (and uses up next turn's swift, if you use it on another player's turn). If you turned your move into a Swift action, that means you've got 2 swift and a standard. Where's the extra from?

---

I've actually been considering a house rule along these lines, but more systemic.

Each players actions in a round takes 6 segments of time; An immediate is 0, swift is 1 segment, a move is 2, a standard is 3, and a Full Round is 4. Each player gets one swift, one move, and one standard a round. Actions can be combined/transformed into a single action at the cost of one segment. So you can always turn a Move (2) and a standard action (3) into a Full (4 + transform cost). Or you can turn your Move (2) into a Swift (1 + transform cost). You can turn your Standard (3) into a Move (2 + 1 transform cost) or into a Swift (1 + transform cost, wasting 1). You could also transform your Move into a second Immediate (again, wasting a time segment).

This gets a little complex with things like the Marshal's Grant Move. An extra move Action means a PC could do a Swift (swift) and 2 standards (1 standard; 2 moves = 4 segments = 1 standard + transform cost) in addition to the Move-Move-Standard-Swift or the Move-Full-Swift options already available.

On the other hand, it (potentially) weakens the Belt of Battle's 3 charge expenditure (you can't break the granted Full Round down into a Move and a Standard).

Futzing with the action economy does mean that spellcasters may have an easier time. Which means I'll have to test this carefully.

[Psyren]

Ignoring the limitations of Quicken, How are you making a Standard, 2 Swifts and an Immediate action in a turn? A Swift action is the same as an immediate action on your turn (and uses up next turn's swift, if you use it on another player's turn). If you turned your move into a Swift action, that means you've got 2 swift and a standard. Where's the extra from?

I meant round, sorry - you would cast the immediate after your turn is over.

[AzraelX]

I stand corrected, on your turn you could use multiple counters. Thanks for the correction.
Well, it'd also depend on exactly how the action trades are handled. If you use an immediate action on your turn, it consumes the swift action for that turn; if you use an immediate action outside of your turn, it consumes the swift action from the next turn. They're the same action, just in some instances it can be used outside your turn.

If it was setup like "you can only trade your move action when you would be able to use your move action", it might work the way you'd expect. But then again, an immediate action normally lets you consume a swift action at a time you couldn't use your swift; if the swift and move are considered equivalent here, then maybe the move can also be consumed at a time it couldn't normally be used.

Although, if people are getting multiple swifts per turn, then there are bigger things to worry about than details like this :smalltongue:


Have you played in a game where this was abused to the point of breakage?
Yes. I was in a game where the DM did action trades like this (standard -> swift; there were various other conversions too, but this was the one that solely destroyed any semblance of intended game design or balance). This was a Pathfinder game, so the exact same options aren't available, but the same concepts apply.

I'm sure I can eventually fish out the build I had somewhere, but it's not really necessary, because all immediate/swift actions are balanced around the knowledge that players can never use more than one per round.

Even in unofficial third-party publishings, even with the most severe restrictions and requirements and penalties, the one thing that basically no game developer will ever do is provide you with a way to get 2 swift actions on the same turn. It's the ultimate taboo, and an indicator of bad design; in the rare instance a developer wants to be a special snowflake so bad that they let you have 2 swift actions on the same turn (and that's very rare; between 3.5e and Pathfinder, you can count all the examples on your fingers), it still comes with significant restrictions and penalties.

As an example of how serious it is, there's an artifact (activated with a swift action, of course) which people use because it gives you 2 swift actions every turn for 10 turns in a row. The cost of activation? -2 INT drain, -2 CON drain, and -5 years from your maximum lifespan.

If the item is activated more than once a day, the -2 INT/CON drain is accompanied by -2d4 INT/CON damage, and you get -10 years on your maximum lifespan. On a side note, reductions to your lifespan caused by this item can never be reversed by any means.

I think the most "reasonable" instance of receiving 2 swift actions is a prestige class in ToB; you just need to meet all of the incredibly specific prerequisites for it, and be at least level 15, with 7 levels in the prestige class. Then bam, you just got the much-sought-after ability! What does it do? It lets you trade a turn/rebuke undead for a swift action; which you can do 3 + CHA mod times per day if you forfeit all your turn/rebuke undead.

It might sound restrictive, but it's stupidly powerful. The reason there's basically no instances of swift-granting abilities/items/effects is because it's bad design. If at any point there is anyone with 2 swift actions at the same time: someone has designed something very poorly.

Basically, every creator of an ability/item/effect balanced their super awesome amazing thing by tossing "as a swift action" on the description. This is the only restriction preventing all the best items and most powerful effects in the game from stacking and otherwise interacting with each other.

It's like how every creator of an ability/item/effect also balances their bonuses by sticking a type on them. "I'm giving them +10 to this, so I'll just make it a competence bonus."

If you change the rules to make all bonuses in the game untyped, then suddenly that critical balancing mechanic which every designer relied on is gone. A change like this is bad design.

That's not to say it can't be fun, though. It could be fun to be able to stack all bonuses in unexpected ways, in the same way it was fun to be able to get an extra swift action. It isn't something you'd do in a serious campaign, but for something that's just meant to be light-hearted/silly/non-serious, trading actions for swift actions will certainly result in players coming up with things that are hilariously imba/nonsensical/clearly unintended.

As for the campaign I was in, the DM eventually removed the "standard -> swift" trade, and allowed us to reselect any items, build choices, or other decisions we'd made based on the fact that we could get more than 1 swift action (because otherwise our builds were totally useless).

Up until then, looking through all the items/abilities to find amazing combinations was actually pretty fun. Sometimes when I see something that'd be especially awesome without the swift action, I still think of that campaign. The only reason the DM removed it is because the campaign was supposed to be serious, and things started getting pretty stupid. But it was a fun kind of stupid. Broken, but fun :smalltongue:


What if i just limit it to magical items - you can use a move action to activate a magical item with a swift action activation cost.
Magic items are one of the best sources of imbalance, whether they're being combined with other magic items or simply other abilities. Anything that says "as a swift action" is telling you "this should not be functioning alongside anything else that requires a swift action; otherwise it'd have said 'once per turn, as a move action'".

That being said, there are some items that allow you to use an extra swift action specifically to activate them, or to otherwise perform a very specific and well-defined purpose. This is basically equivalent to saying the item's activation is a free action that can be used once per turn.

If you really want to give people extra swift actions, I'd advise that you decide on some very specific things that the swift action can be used for. As an example, "casting extra quickened spells" is the least broken thing you need to worry about, because almost no spells require a swift action under normal circumstances; this means that, unlike things which do require a swift action, spells have all been balanced against each other already.

That being the case, something like "at any time, when you would spend a swift action to cast a spell, you may spend a move action instead" might not be so bad (in comparison to allowing normally-swift actions to stack). If that fulfills your desire to grant extra swift actions, maybe try it out. Since it doesn't say "during your turn", people can get extra immediate actions outside their turn by spending their move actions from their next turn, and it still allows them all the immediate actions they want to use for spellcasting during their turn.

Spellcasters are already so much more powerful than martial characters though, and when "being able to cast three 9th level spells simultaneously" is one of the least powerful aspects of a potential system, it might be time for reconsideration :smalltongue:

Even if you went with "You receive an extra move action and standard action every turn, and a move action and standard action can be combined to perform a full-round action", and you only gave that ability to the PCs, it'd be more balanced than letting everyone get additional swift actions.

Another option is to just say "You can always spend a move action instead of a swift action, unless I rule that whatever you're spending your swift action on is not eligible. In these instances, the ruling will apply to everyone permanently, so no one can ever spend an extra swift action on whatever you were trying to spend yours on."

It may not feel as consistent to the players, but it'll safeguard your campaign against people coming up with broken combinations and exploits. Pathfinder Unchained offered an alternate action economy (to replace standard/move/swift/etc) which would allow you to take multiple swift actions, and they just explicitly stated that the DM should restrict any swift action to once-per-turn if it would otherwise be imbalanced.

All that being said, at the end of the day, it really comes down to your players. If your players aren't actively trying to find ways to optimize their expanded action economy, then no problem, it'll be business as usual. You can give people 100 swift actions per turn, and if they never use more than 1, then nothing actually changed :smalltongue: