[5E] Interrupting a Spellcaster via Ready Action

Ristamar

Adventurer
You're not the dealer in a casino, or the host of a television game show. Your function is not to just tell players "that's not in the rules, you can't do it." Your job is to run the game, because you're the Dungeon Master. That means if it isn't in the rules, you make it up.

I appreciate the sentiment behind this line of thought, but there is always an inherent danger in having to simply "make it up," particularly as it relates to a universal capacity to disrupt casters. If the made up rule is effective and consistent in any capacity, it becomes a de facto strategy to shut down mid-to-high level casters.

Given your scenario above, a savvy party would gladly keep a rogue around (perhaps with Expertise in Arcana) to constantly keep attacks readied when facing a potent spellcaster. It's not difficult to find a way for the rogue to obtain advantage, so there's often going to be sneak attack damage added to any readied attack. If this same strategy was applied against the PCs, I doubt it'd be enthusiastically embraced by the players.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

You can certainly assume other groups are not as good or aren't actually roleplaying - one's assumptions say a lot and tend to serve as foundations.

Me, I dont need to make such assumptions or assertions. Nor do I find any value in doing so.

But, you do you.

I think it is frustrating to have conversations where the main point ks ignored. So I indeed can assume that I would have no fun playing with you.
 


I won't quote your long post but only say that I got ninja'd. I think what you described is what I've been trying to get across.

I appreciate the sentiment behind this line of thought, but there is always an inherent danger in having to simply "make it up," particularly as it relates to a universal capacity to disrupt casters. If the made up rule is effective and consistent in any capacity, it becomes a de facto strategy to shut down mid-to-high level casters.

Given your scenario above, a savvy party would gladly keep a rogue around (perhaps with Expertise in Arcana) to constantly keep attacks readied when facing a potent spellcaster. It's not difficult to find a way for the rogue to obtain advantage, so there's often going to be sneak attack damage added to any readied attack. If this same strategy was applied against the PCs, I doubt it'd be enthusiastically embraced by the players.

It's not as bad as all that. If they set a rogue up to use this strategy, the rogue will lose an action as the wizard uses a disengage action, then casts misty step to somewhere safe and then the other minions in the fight will close on the rogue. So, the rogue completely wasted his turn, and, possibly, his cunning action readying to attack.

Or, the triggered action occurs, the rogue attacks, the wizard casts shield, the Rogue misses and then the Wizard banishes the Rogue. Goodbye Rogue.

I think people are overestimating how powerful this is.
 
Last edited:

epithet

Explorer
I appreciate the sentiment behind this line of thought, but there is always an inherent danger in having to simply "make it up," particularly as it relates to a universal capacity to disrupt casters. If the made up rule is effective and consistent in any capacity, it becomes a de facto strategy to shut down mid-to-high level casters.

Given your scenario above, a savvy party would gladly keep a rogue around (perhaps with Expertise in Arcana) to constantly keep attacks readied when facing a potent spellcaster. It's not difficult to find a way for the rogue to obtain advantage, so there's often going to be sneak attack damage added to any readied attack. If this same strategy was applied against the PCs, I doubt it'd be enthusiastically embraced by the players.

It's not as bad as all that. If they set a rogue up to use this strategy, the rogue will lose an action as the wizard uses a disengage action, then casts misty step to somewhere safe and then the other minions in the fight will close on the rogue. So, the rogue completely wasted his turn, and, possibly, his cunning action readying to attack. I think people are overestimating how powerful this is.

I agree with Taran here. Even if you have a character built to maximise this strategy, there are still risks, counters, and uncertainty. Plus, quite frankly, it is no different than having a character built to maximise any particular strategy in an RPG--if you build a character for one particular scenario, that character really should own that scenario. You're giving up other stuff to focus on one thing and be a specialist, there is nothing wrong with being good at that one thing.

Besides, caster monsters should either have minions to guard them, or legendary actions if it is a solo boss. You can use your reaction to attack, but then you have no cunning action to disengage or hide. I hope you brought your Shield Guardian.
 



Ristamar

Adventurer
It's not as bad as all that. If they set a rogue up to use this strategy, the rogue will lose an action as the wizard uses a disengage action, then casts misty step to somewhere safe and then the other minions in the fight will close on the rogue. So, the rogue completely wasted his turn, and, possibly, his cunning action readying to attack.

Or, the triggered action occurs, the rogue attacks, the wizard casts shield, the Rogue misses and then the Wizard banishes the Rogue. Goodbye Rogue.

I think people are overestimating how powerful this is.

A 30' Misty Step typically isn't going to make the caster safe from ranged weapons, and minions are largely inconsequential* (that's why they're minions). Also, you've now made Shield a must prepare spell for Wizards (granted, it's already a popular choice, I believe). Shield won't help Clerics or Druids, though.

*EDIT: I'm not dismissing the usefulness of minions in an encounter, but I am assuming the front line combatants will be able to protect a back line mobile Rogue, or at least or delay their impact for a short period of time.
 
Last edited:

A 30' Misty Step typically isn't going to make the caster safe from ranged weapons, and minions are largely inconsequential (that's why they're minions). Also, you've now made Shield a must prepare spell for Wizards (granted, it's already a popular choice, I believe). Shield won't help Clerics or Druids, though.

You still would have used shield if they didn’t ready and just chose to attack. M And if misty step won’t protect you from readied attacks, it won’t protect you from normal attacks. And if your minions are worthless, then you are screwed. The readied action didn’t make this less challenging, it was already not very challenging to start with. Are you expecting to go through an encounter without using a single defensive spell?
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
A 30' Misty Step typically isn't going to make the caster safe from ranged weapons, and minions are largely inconsequential* (that's why they're minions). Also, you've now made Shield a must prepare spell for Wizards (granted, it's already a popular choice, I believe). Shield won't help Clerics or Druids, though.

*EDIT: I'm not dismissing the usefulness of minions in an encounter, but I am assuming the front line combatants will be able to protect a back line mobile Rogue, or at least or delay their impact for a short period of time.

Yeah, and clerics, druids, and archetype casters can't Counterspell either. Basically, if you don't have a Sorcerer, Warlock, or Wizard in your party, you can't really hope to stop an enemy spellcaster from casting his spell.
 

Ristamar

Adventurer
Yeah, and clerics, druids, and archetype casters can't Counterspell either. Basically, if you don't have a Sorcerer, Warlock, or Wizard in your party, you can't really hope to stop an enemy spellcaster from casting his spell.

Don't forget the occasional Bard with Counterspell.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top