[5E] Interrupting a Spellcaster via Ready Action

MarkB · Mar 2, 2019

DM Dave1 said:
How is "it moves towards us" a different event than "it finishes its move"?

There's no such thing as a move action in 5e, so what is this "finishes its move" thing you speak of? If you choose to ready an action based upon a creature moving a certain distance, your action will occur after it has moved that distance.

DND_Reborn · Mar 2, 2019

MarkB said:
How is "attempt to cast a spell" a different event than "cast a spell"?

You'd have to ask the OP.

For me, as I have stated repeatedly, when you ready an action how it operates depends entirely on how the trigger is worded.

Torquar said:
And you think that's more realistic than having the attack land after the spell is completed?

A

Again, you think it's more realistic for you to be able attack the Wizard mid-spell, have him interrupt your spell with a Reaction spell that has VS components, then resume his original spell than it is for your attack to simply land after the cast? How long do you think an action is? Is casting a spell difficult, or is it easy enough that you can interrupt it with another spell then go back to it with no consequence. If a caster can interrupt and resume a spell with no consequence, what do you expect the attack to do other than damage? Why can't the caster simply resume the spell once your attack is over?

Sure, why not? As you say how long does it take to cast a spell. 1 action has no description on timing. As for Shield interfering with the spell being cast, it is simply an issue of specific beating general and the description of Shield allows it. It is magic, after all.

As far as if the caster takes damage, rule it however you want. Make a concentration check, just roll damage, etc. For the final time, there is no official rule about this, just how your table and my table plays. Each to their own.

5ekyu · Mar 2, 2019

UngeheuerLich said:
I would always go with the interpretation that is more fun. I would not want it to be an action that drags combat. But in a situation where a readied crossbow is pointed at the wizard and it is: "hold still or I shoot", then it would be appropriate to have the bolt attack resolved first.

On the other hand maybe it would be better to just start combat and rolling initiative, maybe with advantage on the initiative check for the crossbow shooter. Maybe I´d allow the wizard a bluff check to negate the advantage or allow for a surprise round. On a failed bluff check I might even give the wizard disadvantage on the dex check. Remember that initiative is only a dex check on which the DM can give advantage or disadvantage depending on the circumstances.

Uhhh... more fun for whom?

In my games, the number of spellcasters in the party as a percentage of spellcasting actions vs non-spellcasting actions is much greater than their adversaries taken as a whole.

So, this ready to screw casters house rule is gonna be affecting the PCs a lot lot lot more than it's being used by them. Just a couple extra lower minions with bows or crossbows in a enemy force makes this a serious blow to the one or two casters in a party.

Now, certainly, in a world where this is how things work, tactics will evolve to both thwart it and enhance it and certain features become major - like subtle metamagic, a variety of illusions, mirror image becomes worth its weight in gold and of course corner-casting.

So, a lot of the basic expectations would change under these house rules. Definitely one I would emphasize in rule zero.

5ekyu · Mar 2, 2019

dnd4vr said:
Except the triggering action isn't that the target casts a spell, it was "he second I see the Mind Flayer Arcanist attempting to cast a spell (using Verbal or Somatic Components), I throw my spear at the Mind Flayer's chest."

Notice, not "cast" a spell, but "attempting to cast a spell" The player intends to be ready to throw instantly. Now, refer to my other post on how any of the possible interpretations is feasible, none are official as their as been no ruling on this either way.

There is no "attempt to cast a spell" that is separate from "casting a spell". Every action is an attempt, but it foesnt gr separated into the attempt to do it and doing it.

You dont attempt to attack, you attack.

Put another way, none of my dpellcasters attempt to cast spells, they either cast or they dont. So, if you said that as your trigger in my gsme, I would explain it would never go off.

As for the cases of "raises a hand, makes a gesture, says a word etc, I think its important to understand that characters are not assumed to be standing stock still and silent when in a combat and not on your turn. So how does one differentiate between those movements and noises snd casting spells on the fly in that instant before someone is actually casting a spell.

Anyway, folks can house rule what they want. Would avoid playing a caster in that game myself if it was made clear at session zero. Not that it cant be countered but it's just less fun to always be running the same few required tricks to beat ready-fu.

Swarmkeeper · Mar 2, 2019

MarkB said:
There's no such thing as a move action in 5e, so what is this "finishes its move" thing you speak of? If you choose to ready an action based upon a creature moving a certain distance, your action will occur after it has moved that distance.

Ah, I see: you feel a movement trigger is different than an action trigger. That's fine, I suppose. But the trigger can be anything the player specifies.

Attempting to cast a spell is moving a hand, or grabbing a spell component, or starting to speak magic words. A completely acceptable trigger is: "if the Flayer attempts to cast a spell, I throw my spear." Perhaps you prefer more nuanced wording and want the fighter to specify: "if the Flayer starts to cast a spell, I throw my spear." A similar trigger might be: "If the Grimlock raises its club to attack the wizard, I throw my spear at it." The Grimlock is attempting to attack, yes? It is starting to attack, right? Why should the fighter have to wait for the club to fall before throwing the spear that is already at the Ready? Or perhaps you're looking for super-specificity: "if the Flayer moves its hand or makes a noise, I throw my spear at it." Acceptable?

As a DM, I'm looking for the spirit of what the player is trying to have their PC do. Any of those Ready wordings are fine to me. We're not playing "Mother-May-I" at our table. If that's the style of play at your table and everyone is on board and having fun with it, carry on.

Satyrn · Mar 2, 2019

Nickolaidas said:
Initiative Order:

1. PC Fighter
2. Grimlock
3. PC Wizard
4. Mind Flayer Arcanist
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"DM: PC Fighter, what do you do?

PC Fighter: I grab my spear and ready the following action: The second I see the Mind Flayer Arcanist attempting to cast a spell (using Verbal or Somatic Components), I throw my spear at the Mind Flayer's chest.

Grimlock: The monster dashes towards the PC Wizard and ends its movement right in front of him.

PC Wizard: I cast shield on myself.

DM: Magical energies surround you and you can feel more protected against enemy attacks. The Mind Flayer Arcanist moves its hands and makes hissing sounds as it is about to cast a spell …."

. . .

Thoughts?

I don't get why the PC wizard is casting shield on his turn.

But seriously. I'd rule that the fighter gets to interrupt, and if he hits, instead of dealing damage, I'd have the mind flayer roll a Constitution save with a DC equal to 8 + the fighter's Strength. Failure would result in losing the action.

Edit: This assumes that I've clarified with the fighter's player that he's actually trying to disrupt the spellcasting. If he's just aiming for a well timed shot (because perhaps he bet the PC wizard he could hit a foe mid-casting) then the attack works normally and the spellcasting, not disrupted, works normally, too: since there's nothing yet to concentrate on, there's nothing to disrupt.

TaranTheWanderer · Mar 2, 2019

5ekyu said:
And if the intention was to knock the sword out of the attackers hand if he starts an attack, just as successful?

Yes, why not. If he fails his roll to resist. Anything you can do as an action, you can ready.

A readied attack forces a concentration check and if he fails he loses the spell and the player narrates the failed concentration as the caster fumbling his components.

If there was a situation and the player said, “I don’t want anyone to get hurt. If the guy raises his sword to attack, I will disarm him. I’m readying an action.”

I’d say “sure makes sense” and I’d have him roll an appropriate roll to disarm the guy before the attack resolves. Maybe an opposed attack rollor am opposed athletics check.

If the enemy succeeds his role (like the caster succeeding a concentration check) the disarm would fail and the attack would proceed. If the enemy failed his check the player could narrate as raising his sword to block the oncoming blow and knocking the weapon out of the enemy’s hand.

It’s more interesting than, “you can try that but only after he attacks the person you are defending”.

Nickolaidas · Mar 2, 2019

5ekyu said:
So, this ready to screw casters house rule is gonna be affecting the PCs a lot lot lot more than it's being used by them. Just a couple extra lower minions with bows or crossbows in a enemy force makes this a serious blow to the one or two casters in a party.

Which is why I am against of the spellcaster rolling concentration checks everytime he gets hit, UNLESS he was about to cast a spell which requires concentration.

A character/NPC/monster which rolled a higher initiative should be (imo) rewarded with being able to screw with less fast/lucky characters/npcs/monsters.

For example, if an NPC spellcaster rolled higher than the PC wizard, why not ready a Sleep spell in case the PC will cast anything, and (if rolls high hp enough) make the PC caster fall asleep before having a chance to cast the spell? Or ready a grease spell and have him fall on his/her ass before managing to cast it?

And don't forget that readying a spell is risky, too. In case the PC/monster doesn't activate the 'trigger', the enemy caster loses the slot, unlike counterspell.

Nickolaidas · Mar 2, 2019

Satyrn said:
I don't get why the PC wizard is casting shield on his turn.

Sorry, I had Shield of Faith in mind.

Which doesn't make it better since it's a Divine Spell and the PC is supposed to be a wizard in this example.

UngeheuerLich · Mar 2, 2019

5ekyu said:
Uhhh... more fun for whom?

In my games, the number of spellcasters in the party as a percentage of spellcasting actions vs non-spellcasting actions is much greater than their adversaries taken as a whole.

So, this ready to screw casters house rule is gonna be affecting the PCs a lot lot lot more than it's being used by them. Just a couple extra lower minions with bows or crossbows in a enemy force makes this a serious blow to the one or two casters in a party.

Now, certainly, in a world where this is how things work, tactics will evolve to both thwart it and enhance it and certain features become major - like subtle metamagic, a variety of illusions, mirror image becomes worth its weight in gold and of course corner-casting.

So, a lot of the basic expectations would change under these house rules. Definitely one I would emphasize in rule zero.

Tell me in which situations it is not better to just shoot instead of ready to shoot if someone casts a spell? Never did I say that a concentration check is asked for. So the only situation I can think of is that the enemies don't want to kill the spellcaster immediately. So it is actually more fun for the wizard if the DM says: "ok, the enemies are faster than you, all point with their crossbows into your direction and say: don't even move a finger or we shoot" instead of the DM saying: "everyone shoots at you and you are dead, because there is no way in the rules that they could stop you from casting when you start moving your fingers."
I mean, I don't want to tell you what is more fun, but I have a clear preference. Remember that to actually ready a crossbow you initially had to win initiative.

Edit: and no that is no house rule. That is the rule as in the PHB. The trigger can be anything you can perceive, not an action. Move fingers is something you perceive before the spellcasting is finished. Actually I would allow the spellcaster a sleight of habd check to conceal such a movement to still try and cast the spell. But when you fail, the trigger is fulfilled, but that would be a ruling, not a rule.

[5E] Interrupting a Spellcaster via Ready Action

MarkB

Legend

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin

5ekyu

Hero

5ekyu

Hero

Swarmkeeper

Hero

Satyrn

First Post

TaranTheWanderer

Legend

Nickolaidas

Explorer

Nickolaidas

Explorer

UngeheuerLich

Legend

Similar Threads