D&D 5E (2024) Using Action Surge to cast spells in 2024

[Maxperson]

You’re arguing a position you don’t actually believe for the purpose of making it look absurd. That’s the definition of bad faith.

No. I was making a point. Making a point is not bad faith.

 

[ECMO3]

So it doesn’t require an action to use it working with merely a thought? Or do you think that it defaults to the Magic Action as per the Magic item introduction?

I think the wording is purposeful. Every item that I know of that casts a spell states you can cast the spell while holding or similar. Items that do something other than cast a spell says you use a "Magic action" to do XXX.

That wording differentiation is consistent and I think it is purposeful. I think it is in there specifically because magic items that let you cast a spell use the spell casting mechanics, which can be different from the Magic action mechanics.

 

[Maxperson]

I do agree you cast the spell as normal on your turn, I do not agree that means you use the Magic action.

It does not say you use the magic action to do it and using the Magic action to cast it on your turn would require you to take 2 actions on your turn.

IMO it is a stretch to think that "normal"="Magic action" particularly given the specific way the terms "casting time" and "Magic action" are used throughout the PHB and DMG and how "ready a spell" is used in the glossary entry on the ready action.

It's also a stretch to think "normal" = Ready Action, because if it did the phrase would never have been used.

 

[ECMO3]

That's because it's stated in the "Activating a Magic Item" section.

You conveniently ignored the verbiage "usually".

Activating a Magic item usually does require a Magic action and it says so in the description of most magic items with a feature you would activate or use. It does not say so in the description of most (any?) magic items that allow you to cast a spell.

This is like saying attacking usually requires an attack action, but there are a ton of ways in the rules to make an attack without using an attack action.

 

[ECMO3]

Right. It's a very clear case of specific beats general.

This to me is the biggest reason it does not require a Magic action. The rules to "ready a spell" are specific rules that overide the general rules for using the ready action when you use the ready action to cast a spell.

If the designers wanted the ready action to use the Magic action to cast a spell they would have said that in the description of the ready action, they would not have a separate call out for "ready a spell".

 

[UngeheuerLich]

If the designers wanted the ready action to use the Magic action to cast a spell they would have said that in the description of the ready action, they would not have a separate call out for "ready a spell".

Usually I would agree with you, but after reading the 5.24 rules in detail, I rather believe, that they just miss the interaction or didn't care about restricting people who have fun finding loopholes.

I was really looking forward to a cleaned up version, but for everything cleaned up, they introduced something less clear. And they did not fix bad interaction.

I still prefer 5.24 over 5.14 because martial characters in general seem to be much more fun, even without shenanigans. But I am still really worried how they could ignore people like treantmonk who directly pointed out problematic parts.

 

[ECMO3]

But that makes absolutely no sense. There's zero reason to put something like that in when it's frankly, irrelevant.

It is very relevant, it just does not refer to the action IMO.

You can't for example ready Command to trigger when the enemy runs around the corner. The reason is the "normal" way you cast that spell requires you to see the target and you can't see it before the enemy runs around the corner.

You can't say when the Orc gets within 30 feet of me I cast Tasha's Hiedous Laughter because THL requires the target to be within 30 feet of you when you cast it.

Then you have all the mechanics associated with spell components.

That is the kind of thing I think they mean by normal. I don't think they mean the action they are using and I don't think this for multiple reasons:

1. I believe if they wanted you to use a Magic action (in addition to a Ready action) they would have stated this explicitly as they do elsewhere when a Magic action is specifically required for things. They would not have assumed people would come to that conclusion from the use of the word "normal"

2. In 2024 using 2 actions on a single turn is very abnormal and using two actions at the same time is flat prohibited and nothing in the verbiage suggests this restriction is waived. In this respect it is far more abnormal to use two actions on your turn then it is to cast a spell with a casting time of 1 action without using the Magic action.

3. The verbiage "ready a spell" makes it clear they want different mechanics for using the ready action with a spell than with the Magic action generally.

You only put the "normal" phrasing into the Ready Action if it's being cast as normal for the Magic Action that you have chosen when you picked Ready Action.

Nothing in the verbiage indicates to me that this is why they put the word "normal" in there and this intepretation is inconsistent with the rest of the PHB and DMG where they repeatedly and often in a redundant fashion state that a Magic action must be used to do a certain thing.

Given the wording throughout the rest of the PHB and DMG, if the intent was for "ready a spell" to use the Magic action they would have said this explicitly and not relied on an implicit meaning interpreted from the word "normal".

 

[ECMO3]

Usually I would agree with you, but after reading the 5.24 rules in detail, I rather believe, that they just miss the interaction or didn't care about restricting people who have fun finding loopholes.

With repect to "Magic action" this would be the only place they missed it then. They use that term over and over and over again even when it is obvious, it would be very peculiar to leave it out here considering the way the rest of the books are written.

 

[Scribe]

With repect to "Magic action" this would be the only place they missed it then. They use that term over and over and over again even when it is obvious, it would be very peculiar to leave it out here considering the way the rest of the books are written.

Peculiar? The books had day 0 errata if I remember right.

 

[pukunui]

Peculiar? The books had day 0 errata if I remember right.

There's also still a bunch of things they failed to address in the official errata. We can chuck this loophole on the pile!