How would this house rule affect the game?

[Matrota]

I've recently discovered that immediate actions are effectively swift actions taken from your next round, and thus using an immediate action makes it so that you do not have a swift action on your following turn. I wasn't aware of this, and have been playing and DMing as if the two were unrelated. If I were to officially house rule that they are separate, and thus someone could use a swift action in the round following an immediate action, how would such a thing affect the game? Could it be abused?

[Celestia]

I don't think casters have too many immediate actions, so this rule can only make things better. I could be wrong, however.

Overall, I don't think most classes will notice, though.

[Necroticplague]

Martial initiators will become much more powerful. They’re usually pretty hard up for swift actions, between swift Boosts, stance changes, and immediate Counters (and recovery for Warblades). Making it so that they can use Counters freely without having to sacrifice their Boosts/recovery significantly improves both their usefulness in general, and their durability in particular. Prepare to have to focus them down, because one attack per turn heading their way will simply be deflected by their impenetrable ‘nonmagic’ BS.

[Mike Miller]

I agree that martial initiators could make more use of this than most classes. However, if they did, they would run out of maneuvers fairly quickly. Some classes would be more impacted than others, considering how refreshing maneuvers works. I would think a swordsage could run himself out of maneuvers fairly quickly with all the boosts and counters at his disposal without a meaningful way of refreshing them.

[Troacctid]

You've been playing that way already, right? How has it affected your games?

[ComaVision]

It certainly makes tracking a lot easier. As DM, the initiators in my game have probably used an Immediate and then a Swift on their turn without me noticing more than a handful of times.

[ngilop]

Before swift and immediates were an official thing I made swift and interrupt actions.

a character gets a move, swift, interrupt, and standard action a round.

Mundanes had the biggest amount of interrupts available to them, mostly revolving around the way to stop spells and such from happening.

When WoTC immediates and swifts I was like poop, that sound better than interrupt.



I hae not had it impact the game in any significant way at all, but then you have to ralize that I and the vast majority of people I play with are null optimizers, so my experiences have been ad will be vastly different from the majority of GiTPers are and will be.

[PrismCat21]

If I were to officially house rule that they are separate, and thus someone could use a swift action in the round following an immediate action, how would such a thing affect the game? Could it be abused?

If you've been playing like this all along, then nothing will change for you.
CAN it be abused? Yes. Most every rule and houserule can. If any abuse was happening at your table, you've already experienced it.
How will it affect the game? It won't affect your game at all. This is the way you've been playing, and nothing will have changed.