Home » Forums » Out Of Character Talk » RPG Discussion » 3.0 to 3.5 casting time

3.0 to 3.5 casting time

7 posts / 0 new
Last post
Mon, 2008-10-06 19:31
#1
snoeseven
snoeseven's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2008-07-08
3.0 to 3.5 casting time

Hey all.

I have a 3.0 -> 3.5 conversion question. I'm sure someone here will know the answer since PS has been through so many editions of D&D.

In a few of my 3.0 books the casting time for some spells is listed as: 'X actions'. In the same book it also has listed: 'Y rounds'.

At first, I thought if the spell had >1 'actions' then it must just mean 'rounds'. But with other spells in the same book listed for multiple rounds, that can't be it. It only seems to be listed like this in the 3.0 books I have. Does anyone know how to convert from these 'actions' to the 3.5 actions? And if so, does a source exist detailing the conversion?

Thanks,

snoeseven

Tags:
Thu, 2008-10-09 05:47
#2
Aghris
Aghris's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2008-10-09
Hi,   As I recall

Hi,

 

As I recall correctly, an action is something you can do in 1 round, while also have a move action. That is why casting times are set to actions and durations in rounds. I really don't see the point in having X actions as a casting time, as any time longer than 1 action would automatically result in rounds.  --

 

Scratch that. Upon replying I notice that I'm in the same mind set as you are. I.e. i don't know the answer either. Do you have examples of such spells? 

Fri, 2008-10-10 18:33
(Reply to #2) #3
snoeseven
snoeseven's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2008-07-08
I do indeed have examples

I do indeed have examples available to me, but I'm not sure what the posting rules are for material from DnD sources. The Rokugan Campaign setting (a 3.0 source) is where these odd spell casting times are listed. I take it I can't post spells in their entirety here from that source. So the names and location should be ok, but I'm guessing you may not have that source.

'Tomb of Earth' and 'Truth is a Scourge' are two spells which exist right next to each other on page 114. One has a casting time of '2 rounds' and the other has a casting time of '2 actions'.

I really don't understand how I'm supposed to make that work.

If one wanted to cast the '2 actions' spell, would it take 2 rounds to do but the player would still get move and swift actions for each round? Or should 'actions' simply be converted to 'rounds'? Or something else?

Is this source just broken or is there something I'm missing?

Fri, 2008-10-10 20:14
#4
Idran
Idran's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2007-06-10
I'm gathering this from what

I'm gathering this from what online sources for 3.0 I can find, since I never grasped that system as well as 3.5.  So this description might not be entirely correct.  However:

In 3.0, move actions didn't exist.  Instead, you had "standard actions", which took an entire round but you could still take a move-equivalent action in , "full-round actions" which took a full round and with which you couldn't move, and "partial actions", which took the duration of a standard action less a move-equivalent action.

 However, certain spells and effects allowed you to take multiple standard actions in a round.  Haste, for example, let you take an additional standard action every round in 3.0.  A spell with a casting time of 2 actions could thus be cast in a single round while hasted, while a spell with a casting time of one round could not.  I believe these effects might also have stacked at an early point, but I'm pretty sure that got errata'd out if it ever was the case.

This is the only reason I can see for the distinction, honestly, although maybe someone more versed in 3.0 can figure out some rule subtlety I'm forgetting.  And it does seem like a weird split to make, yes.  If you're converting it to 3.5, then yeah, the best thing to do would have to be a case-by-case basis.  Only a few spells in 3.5 have a casting time over 1 round and under 1 hour now, so you'll have to judge which spells are worth it to do a straight action->round conversion and which you should just cut to 1 round.

Sun, 2008-10-12 11:11
#5
snoeseven
snoeseven's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2008-07-08
That haste example does

That haste example does seem to make things more clear with the multiple actions. I'm guessing there's not going to be any actual source material that clears this up. So I'll probably have to do it on a case-by-case basis like you're saying. But if anyone knows better, please feel free to let me know.

Oh but wait, some of the casting times in that book go all the way up to '4 actions'. Is that even possible with the Haste and other effects? Or, I'm guessing, it would just take 2 rounds with 3.0 Haste instead of 4 rounds. Yeah, I guess that makes sense.

Thanks for the help, all.

Sun, 2008-10-12 17:42
(Reply to #5) #6
Bob the Efreet
Bob the Efreet's picture
Offline
factotums
Joined: 2004-05-11
I get the impression that

I get the impression that the people who wrote those spells didn't have a good grasp of the system (a common problem with 3.0 third-party material). I'd say to convert with your best judgement, keeping in mind how rare a higher than one round casting time is.

__________________

Pants of the North!

Mon, 2008-10-13 04:20
#7
Aghris
Aghris's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2008-10-09
Just thought of this: in

Just thought of this: in 3.0, a round consisted of an action, and a move. I vaguely remember from somewhere that it is possible to walk during castings. 

Could it be that spells with casting time of multiple actions would allow you to walk your movement rate during the casting of the spell, whereas spells with casting times of rounds need x rounds of uninterrupted concentration, with only a 5-foot step?

Planescape, Dungeons & Dragons, their logos, Wizards of the Coast, and the Wizards of the Coast logo are ©2008, Wizards of the Coast, a subsidiary of Hasbro Inc. and used with permission.