D&D 5E Legal Ready action triggers and order of resolution

At my table I would not allow it. I'd allow them to pick the start of an action as a trigger, but since they have not yet begun to take their action, only get ready to take one, they don't suddenly become hasted and able to go before someone else who has already started.

Actually, at least in the case of spells, they have all but completed their action:
PHB pg. 193 said:
When you ready a spell, you cast it as normal but hold its energy, which you release with your reaction when the trigger occurs.

You're obviously still free to rule it either way, but at the very least your assumption that they have not yet begun to take their action is wrong by RAW.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

At my table I would not allow it. I'd allow them to pick the start of an action as a trigger, but since they have not yet begun to take their action, only get ready to take one, they don't suddenly become hasted and able to go before someone else who has already started.

I'm afraid you are factually incorrect here.

The 5E 'Ready' action is an Action In Combat. You do everything needed to execute the action except 'pull the trigger' as it were.

If that were not the case, then Readied spells would work differently than how the Ready action describes.

In the 5E Ready action, if you want to Ready a spell then: it takes your concentration (even if it doesn't usually require concentration), because you are concentrating on maintaining a spell you have already cast, and the spell slot is already used even if you don't actually release the spell. Why? Because you already cast it!

If the Ready action didn't work that way but instead works like you assert (you haven't actually taken the action until you use your reaction to release it), then a readied spell would not use up a spell slot if it was never released, and there would be no spell to concentrate on.

The way you see it resembles 'Delay', not 'Ready'. And there is no 'Delay' action in 5E.
 

If an archer readies to shot his bow at a rogue, should the rogue try to make a run for it, narratively would you say the archer has an arrow pulled back and aimed at the rogue? Or is he just standing there passively with his bow by his side and arrows in their quiver? Or something in between?
 

If an archer readies to shot his bow at a rogue, should the rogue try to make a run for it, narratively would you say the archer has an arrow pulled back and aimed at the rogue? Or is he just standing there passively with his bow by his side and arrows in their quiver? Or something in between?
I'd say he doesn't have an arrow pulled this can be achieved within the same action as attacking, and this way he isn't limited and could fire at another target or use his hand for some other action. (i.e Action Surge)
 

I'd say he doesn't have an arrow pulled this can be achieved within the same action as attacking, and this way he isn't limited and could fire at another target or use his hand for some other action. (i.e Action Surge)
As part of their readied action? I'm confused how the archer is using his hands for something else, or using Action Surge, or even just firing at a different target, when they already declared they are readied to shoot the rogue if the rogue moves.
 

As part of their readied action? I'm confused how the archer is using his hands for something else, or using Action Surge, or even just firing at a different target, when they already declared they are readied to shoot the rogue if the rogue moves.
Yes as part of your reaction since drawing the ammunition from a container is part of the attack.

Ready An Action doesn't otherwise prevent you from taking further actions. So if you can take other action or bonus action, you should still be able to take them even though you just Ready an Action.
 

Ready An Action doesn't otherwise prevent you from taking further actions. So if you can take other action or bonus action, you should still be able to take them even though you just Ready an Action.
But you did use your Action on your turn. To declare the Readied Action. You spent your Action. And now it is not your turn anymore and you are waiting for your Readied Action to trigger so you can use your Reaction. How are you taking other Actions or Bonus Actions?
 

But you did use your Action on your turn. To declare the Readied Action. You spent your Action. And now it is not your turn anymore and you are waiting for your Readied Action to trigger so you can use your Reaction. How are you taking other Actions or Bonus Actions?
No on your turn you take the Ready an Action to shoot the rogue when he moves, you take the Attack action to attack the wizard (Action Surge) and a bonus action to heal yourself (Second Wind). Then on the rogue's turn when he moves, you shoot him with your bow, drawing an arrow as part of the attack.
 

A very good response. Bringing up Counterspell really seals the deal as it would have to interrupt an enemy caster's turn mid-casting and it is a Reaction. So reactions can interrupt an opponent's actions if properly worded.

This really opens up a lot of tactical options to intuitive players and smart NPCs in fights.
Yes, and no. Reactions cannot interrupt their trigger unless they specifically say so. Both counterspell and shield are examples of reactions that can interrupt their trigger because they say so. No others come to mind at the moment outside of monster reactions, which are varied.

But trigger != action. A trigger must be a clearly defined and noticeable event. I wouldn't allow any "starts to..." triggers because that's clearly defined. But attacking someone is, so I'd allow that as a trigger. So, if you Ready to strike at the foe if they attack someone, you react immediately after they make an attack -- even if they get multiple attacks. In effect, you interrupt their multi attack or attack action.

So, then, the issue is what you allow as definable triggers. As I said above, I'd never allow a "starts to..." trigger. I'd allow a "majes somatic gestures" and you'd react before they finish casting, but wouldn't be able to id the spell beforehand because those gestures aren't complete. If you want to ID the spell, you have to wait until casting is complete, and then you can't stop it because it's done.

So, can't interrupt triggers unless specifically stated; and triggers must be definable and clear events that can be noticed. That's it, everything else is rulings and opinion.
 

Yes, and no. Reactions cannot interrupt their trigger unless they specifically say so. Both counterspell and shield are examples of reactions that can interrupt their trigger because they say so. No others come to mind at the moment outside of monster reactions, which are varied.

But trigger != action. A trigger must be a clearly defined and noticeable event. I wouldn't allow any "starts to..." triggers because that's clearly defined. But attacking someone is, so I'd allow that as a trigger. So, if you Ready to strike at the foe if they attack someone, you react immediately after they make an attack -- even if they get multiple attacks. In effect, you interrupt their multi attack or attack action.

So, then, the issue is what you allow as definable triggers. As I said above, I'd never allow a "starts to..." trigger. I'd allow a "majes somatic gestures" and you'd react before they finish casting, but wouldn't be able to id the spell beforehand because those gestures aren't complete. If you want to ID the spell, you have to wait until casting is complete, and then you can't stop it because it's done.

So, can't interrupt triggers unless specifically stated; and triggers must be definable and clear events that can be noticed. That's it, everything else is rulings and opinion.
Attacking when a creature swing back his sword or bind/cork (cross)bow (or pull ammunition) should be enought to interrupt before the target actually swing forth its sword or fire the ammunition. Like i said, it can be made clear if a Ready An Action ir meant to interrupt the action its trigger contain and easily achieveable.
 

Remove ads

Top