D&D 5E Vampiric Touch Opportunity Attack Ruling?

[Dausuul]

As a matter of RAW, I agree with Nevvur's interpretation: The spell specifies an action, on your turn.

However, since vampiric touch is an underwhelming spell to say the least, I would be fine with allowing OAs using it.

 

[Sage Genesis]

If you follow the logic that an already-cast-and-concentrated-VT can't be used to make opportunity attacks, then you run into a weird scenario if the Wizard does happen to have the Warcaster feat.

Because then you get the following:
* He still can't make an OA with his VT, because nothing changed in the rules.
* However, he can now stop concentrating on the old VT, cast an entirely new one, and use that to make the OA.

To me, that is insane. The idea that a feat allows you to perform the second while still not being able to pull off the first is counter-intuitive to the point of sounding like a Murphy's Rules parody. Like a bug in the programming it causes silly behavior.

Look, guys, this is 5e. The writing is fast and loose and "natural" so there's little point in analyzing the precise wording of spells with added emphasis in bold and italics. This is not 3e or 4e, that kind of approach just doesn't work all that often. The RAW is so vague on this issue as to be essentially be silent. But if I think in practical terms, that the Wizard is basically only reaching out and touching the orc with his creepy hand, then I see no reason whatsoever not to allow the OA.

 

[MindxKiller]

If you follow the logic that an already-cast-and-concentrated-VT can't be used to make opportunity attacks, then you run into a weird scenario if the Wizard does happen to have the Warcaster feat.

Because then you get the following:
* He still can't make an OA with his VT, because nothing changed in the rules.
* However, he can now stop concentrating on the old VT, cast an entirely new one, and use that to make the OA.

To me, that is insane. The idea that a feat allows you to perform the second while still not being able to pull off the first is counter-intuitive to the point of sounding like a Murphy's Rules parody. Like a bug in the programming it causes silly behavior.

Look, guys, this is 5e. The writing is fast and loose and "natural" so there's little point in analyzing the precise wording of spells with added emphasis in bold and italics. This is not 3e or 4e, that kind of approach just doesn't work all that often. The RAW is so vague on this issue as to be essentially be silent. But if I think in practical terms, that the Wizard is basically only reaching out and touching the orc with his creepy hand, then I see no reason whatsoever not to allow the OA.

Nobody is saying you can't house rule it, they're just saying that the book says you can't make an Opportunity Attack with the ongoing effect of Vampiric Touch. It isn't vague at all, the spell description clearly outlines the rules for using the spell, that's how EVERY spell is. The rules for using the spell specify "Until the spell ends, you can make the attack again on each of your turns as an action." An Opportunity Attack is neither on your turn, nor an action, it's on the offending creatures turn, and a reaction. Each spell is a specific case, and in this case it doesn't allow an Opportunity Attack by RAW.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

It is unclear whether a specific spell, or the specific situation of being able to make an opportunity attack, is the more specific rule, so it can not be said definitely by anyone but Jeremy Crawford as to what the intended case is. RAW is not so clear as [MENTION=6802801]MindxKiller[/MENTION] suggests, especially since the rules effectively word using a weapon to make an attack as "Until you put the weapon down, you can make an attack with it on each of your turns as an action."

 

[MG.0]

But if I think in practical terms, that the Wizard is basically only reaching out and touching the orc with his creepy hand, then I see no reason whatsoever not to allow the OA.

This is the only thing that matters to me. Can I picture a wizard with vampiric touch already active reaching out and touching a retreating orc? Sure.

Thus, you can do it.

Arguments over what is an action, or a melee attack or a spell attack, or what the specific wording on some random page in the PHB says, is pointless .

 

[Nevvur]

I vaguely recall reading a similar discussion involving Flame Blade, with a (slim) majority including Mike Mearls saying OA wasn't possible RAW. Not that argument ad populum (or argument ad Mearlum) amounts to much.

 

[SnakeEyes097]

In this specific case, as the concentration spell had already been cast in advance and is still active, I would allow it. I would not allow a person to cast VT as a reaction then try to attack with it though.

 

[Uchawi]

Using RAW, I would state you can not make an AO, but if you allow it as a DM, then you will have to be consistent will similar abilities in the future. That would include the consideration of being more flexible with what martial classes can do with AOs. It is my opinion that martial characters should have the most flexible use of AOs.

 

[jodyjohnson]

I can picture a wizard/monk striking someone with Vampiric Touch strike 5 times on their turn and adding their unarmed damage plus ability mod. Ya know, cuz that'd be cool.

Or an eldritch knight doing it 9 times with the right feats. Cuz why not?

 

[Jester David]

Arguably, the rule in the vampiric touch spell description is the general while the Opportunity Attack is the specific, trumping and adding onto the rules. So its uncertain if it's banned by RAW or not.
5e is not a RAW game. You're not supposed to be able to consult the text to resolve each and every debate.

I'd allow it in my game. You cast he spell and its ready. The effect is the same as if you hit in your previous turn, so it's not broken or overpowered (and they might still miss). And it seems cool, giving the spellcaster a heroic moment.