D&D 5E Bonus Actions vs Reactions

[Li Shenron]

Yes ... I'm aware of the limitations of the various actions. So would a shield spell that used a bonus action be weaker than the shield spell or equal to the shield spell?

It's hard to tell in general... The Shield spell specifically works against the triggering attack, so it's kind of "retroactive" which is a very good benefit. I would presume that the bonus action version of Shield would not require a trigger (otherwise it'd be very unlikely to get attacked during your turn, you might use this only against OA and a very few other cases). It would last a little longer (1 full turn, while the reaction Shield lasts between the attack and your next turn), but I would still choose the reaction Shield because it's never wasted, since you cast it only when you are actually hit by an attack.

There is also a small but interesting situation with reaction spells. Depending on the exact trigger, you might be able to voluntarily cast them during your turn. For example if you jump down a height, you can cast Feather Fall on your turn because the trigger is fulfilled immediately. You use up your reaction for this round of course, but you're not limited with other spells during your turn (like you are instead if you cast a bonus action spell -> your main action spell has to be a cantrip). So this is a way to technically cast 2 regular spells during the same turn.

 

[Xeviat]

For Shield, the reaction does seem more potent than a bonus action would be, unless you're a melee build and you intend to get attacked and you want to keep your immediate action open for an OA or something. That's definitely a rare thing.

Thanks for the input.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Satyrn]

With a blank slate and not knowing what the spell is, bonus actions, because you can always cast them. Reactions need a trigger, making them conditional by nature.

Although thinking about it, if my player ever wanted to casting a reaction spell without the trigger, I'd probably wind up ruling that doing so uses a bonus action.

Because, well, it's odd that you couldn't cast a spell just because you want to.

 

[GypsyCowboy]

There is no innate difference to them. They are just resources to be used. Bonus actions are more plentiful in being used, so in a way, Reactions are more "powerful" as they are more rare and situational.

Ideally, to maximize your character's output, each resource should be fully utilized every turn. Move, Action, Bonus Action are usually all easily activated. Reaction is the most difficult and specialized in usage, requiring a exact situation, and by that metric is the most powerful. It allows for an ability to interact directly with another agent's decision instantly.

 

[Satyrn]

Although thinking about it, if my player ever wanted to casting a reaction spell without the trigger, I'd probably wind up ruling that doing so uses a bonus action.

Because, well, it's odd that you couldn't cast a spell just because you want to.

Thinking about it even more, I'm now leaning towards saying that casting a reaction spell without the trigger just uses up your reaction; that, in effect the trigger is just advice on the optimal time to use it.

 

[neogod22]

Thinking about it even more, I'm now leaning towards saying that casting a reaction spell without the trigger just uses up your reaction; that, in effect the trigger is just advice on the optimal time to use it.

That's what I said earlier

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Yes ... I'm aware of the limitations of the various actions. So would a shield spell that used a bonus action be weaker than the shield spell or equal to the shield spell?

Weaker. Reaction spells that let you react conditionally (only when you'd be hit) are very efficient.

You also don't run into the bonus-action-spell/cantrip issue.

I tend to think of bonus action cast as worth +1 to +2 spell levels, and reaction cast as worth +2 to +4. Yes, that means Shield is unusually strong for a first level spell, but we all knew that. IMO it's about on par for a second-level spell, and if a PC were researching Shield from scratch that's where I'd put it, unless they optimized it to first (+4 to research DC).

Sent from my Moto G (4) using EN World mobile app

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Reactions also generally are set off by whatever it is you'd want/need to use them for anyway, so the argument that being able to use a bonus action whenever you want makes a lick of difference doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[hastur_nz]

It totally depends on who you are, so the question is of no real use...

for example everyone can use a Reaction to take an Opportunity Attack (given certain circumstances), and everyone can use a bonus action to take an off-hand attack (assuming they have the right weapons in hand)
but not all Classes can take a Bonus Action to do something really powerful, and only very few things can use a Reaction to do something really powerful.

It's like saying "which is better - fruit or meat?", you are trying to compare two very different types of food.

 

[BookBarbarian]

I put "it depends" Reactions tend to be game changers, turning a hit into a miss with Shield or defensive duelist for example, but you don't have as much control regarding when they happen typical.

Bonus actions on the other hand tend to be less powerful, but if you build for it can be very reliable.