[3.5] Downgrading actions?
Moderator: Moderators
[3.5] Downgrading actions?
Are you able to downgrade your actions? For example, you have a pair of quickened fireballs, along with a normal fireball. Can you use your standard, move, & swift actions to cast all three?
Last edited by virgil on Tue Jul 21, 2009 3:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
- JonSetanta
- King
- Posts: 5525
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: interbutts
-
- Invincible Overlord
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am
Making Standard -> Move -> Minor action equivalency was one of the best ideas that 4E had. So was creating Opportunity, Immediate Reactions and Immediate Interrupts.
It doesn't work in 3rd Edition because Swift Actions were obviously built on the assumption that you wouldn't use more than one a round--hence the nature of Immediate Actions.
It doesn't work in 3rd Edition because Swift Actions were obviously built on the assumption that you wouldn't use more than one a round--hence the nature of Immediate Actions.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
- JonSetanta
- King
- Posts: 5525
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: interbutts
With downgrade actions, why not go all the way and do turn-based Action Points?
4e (5ap pool)
• Minor 0ap to 1ap, unsure
• Move 2ap
• Standard 3ap
3e (5ap pool)
• Immediate 0ap
• Swift 0ap (limit 1?)
• Move 2ap
• Standard 3ap
The math doesn't quite work out, or perhaps larger numbers are required.
For instance a Standard > Move in all instances; 2 Moves can make a turn, but one can't perform 2 Standards. 1 Move and 1 Standard is possible.
Therefore, in a pool of 10ap:
• Standard 6ap
• Move 4ap
• 2ap leftover (Minor/Swift)
IMO one could have a balanced system of increased AP with level gain and static ability purchase but NOT attached to stats, buff, or item.
Abilities of all kinds would become more frequent each turn, or alternatively one might discount specific categories of powers such as Melee, Ranged, Spells, or Move.
4e (5ap pool)
• Minor 0ap to 1ap, unsure
• Move 2ap
• Standard 3ap
3e (5ap pool)
• Immediate 0ap
• Swift 0ap (limit 1?)
• Move 2ap
• Standard 3ap
The math doesn't quite work out, or perhaps larger numbers are required.
For instance a Standard > Move in all instances; 2 Moves can make a turn, but one can't perform 2 Standards. 1 Move and 1 Standard is possible.
Therefore, in a pool of 10ap:
• Standard 6ap
• Move 4ap
• 2ap leftover (Minor/Swift)
IMO one could have a balanced system of increased AP with level gain and static ability purchase but NOT attached to stats, buff, or item.
Abilities of all kinds would become more frequent each turn, or alternatively one might discount specific categories of powers such as Melee, Ranged, Spells, or Move.
Re: [3.5] Downgrading actions?
virgileso wrote:Are you able to downgrade your actions? For example, you have a pair of quickened fireballs, along with a normal fireball. Can you use your standard, move, & swift actions to cast all three?
So no.Quicken Spell wrote:You may cast only one quickened spell per round.
And for natural abilities that happen to be swift actions to activate?
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
- RobbyPants
- King
- Posts: 5201
- Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm
- RobbyPants
- King
- Posts: 5201
- Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm
Correct. They explicitly state that you can swap a standard for a move. When they later came out with swift actions, they didn't say anything.TOZ wrote:I've always understood that you get a standard and a move, and can convert your standard to a move. Then they added swift actions but never specified that you could convert to those.
per the SRD:
I can see where the OP thinks it's implied, but I think Ice9 summed it up best:SRD wrote:You can take a move action in place of a standard action.
Clearly, the standard action is the best of the three, but swift actions and move actions are kind of like apples and oranges here. And while a swift might be "quicker" in terms of how much time it takes to execute, you're limited to one per round for balance reasons.Ice9 wrote:4E:
Standard > Move > Minor
3E:
Standard > Move
Standard > Swift
Last edited by RobbyPants on Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- JonSetanta
- King
- Posts: 5525
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: interbutts
We'll never know until tried.hogarth wrote: The 3.5 rules don't allow it. Would it be unbalanced? Probably not.
I agree, probably fine.
Player1: "I use my first round to chug an armload of buff potions."
DM: "I'll allow it. 50 points for Gryffindor."
Player2: "That's not fair, he should have to waste his turn on moving and attacking like I am!"
Player1: "You're just jealous that you don't have any potions. Like I do. Correction, did."
- CatharzGodfoot
- King
- Posts: 5668
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: North Carolina
Even a Witcher-like 'toxin bar' might be enough, but really three potions at the start of combat isn't unreasonable.tzor wrote:It is things like this that make me long for the days of the old 1E "potion miscibility table."
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
-
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 968
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- JonSetanta
- King
- Posts: 5525
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: interbutts
That was in AD&D as well. I don't miss it at all.tzor wrote:It is things like this that make me long for the days of the old 1E "potion miscibility table."
I wouldn't stop at three potions, though. It would be as many Swifts a PC can scrape out of their downgraded action points each turn.
"You drank the entire cartload in a minute?!?"
I'm of the opinion that potions should heal the max amount of the spell. None of this 1d8+1 or 2d8+3 bullshit. Know how many times I've rolled snake eyes on healing potions? Too damn many. If they're going to cost so much, they should do something worth the expense.
Official Discord: https://discord.gg/ZUc77F7
Twitter: @HrtBrkrPress
FB Page: htttp://facebook.com/HrtBrkrPress
My store page: https://heartbreaker-press.myshopify.co ... ctions/all
Book store: http://www.drivethrurpg.com/browse/pub/ ... aker-Press
Twitter: @HrtBrkrPress
FB Page: htttp://facebook.com/HrtBrkrPress
My store page: https://heartbreaker-press.myshopify.co ... ctions/all
Book store: http://www.drivethrurpg.com/browse/pub/ ... aker-Press
- RobbyPants
- King
- Posts: 5201
- Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:11 pm
That's what wands are for. Less than a third of the cost per use.Meikle641 wrote:I'm of the opinion that potions should heal the max amount of the spell. None of this 1d8+1 or 2d8+3 bullshit. Know how many times I've rolled snake eyes on healing potions? Too damn many. If they're going to cost so much, they should do something worth the expense.
- JonSetanta
- King
- Posts: 5525
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: interbutts
I think that's another matter entirely, but yes. Rolling for heal is shit.Meikle641 wrote:I'm of the opinion that potions should heal the max amount of the spell. None of this 1d8+1 or 2d8+3 bullshit. Know how many times I've rolled snake eyes on healing potions? Too damn many. If they're going to cost so much, they should do something worth the expense.
Damage should usually be random (even though most 'dice' of spells could stand for a solid value with a little random on top) while the healing should always be maximized, just like a PC's HP.