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

[ECMO3]

It changes the DC.

Most magic items that cast spells change the DC and they don't use this verbiage - Wand of Fear, Wand of Fireballs, Instrument of the Bards .....

 

[ECMO3]

from the PHB “Most spells require the Magic action to cast, but some spells require a Bonus Action, a Reaction, or 1 minute or more. A spell’s Casting Time entry specifies which of those is required.”

Yes exactly, MOST and you don't take the Magic Action when you use any of the things I mentioned above to cast a spell with a casting time of one action.

You take a different kind of action for all those examples - a Bonus Action or an Attack Action, or in the cast of a contingent spell you take no action at all. I think Ready a spell is just like these examples.

 

[mamba]

Most

Yes exactly, MOST

yeah, all the ones with casting time ‘action’, see the exceptions, namely ‘but some spells require a Bonus Action, a Reaction, or 1 minute or more’

The exception is not Ready, it is based on the casting time. Otherwise it would say something about the spells with casting time action using the Magic action most of the time, not that most spells require it

 

[BenjaminPey]

Most magic items that cast spells change the DC and they don't use this verbiage - Wand of Fear, Wand of Fireballs, Instrument of the Bards .....

You seem quite sure you got the right reading and if it works for you and your table, go ahead!

It just seems super rules-lawyery to me, requiring a very careful parsing of each magic objects' verbiage each time you use them in order to juice out a quite specific interaction based on missing words, and not explicit rules. It adds nothing to the fiction nor the feel of the game, it says nothing about what actually happens, just a use of keywords to clip behind the wall or something like that. So I'll keep ruling that in order to use a magic item, you have to make a magic action, unless it is explicitly ruled out, and that the action surge is built to prohibit doubling up on magic, because I feel doing otherwise would be a good way for us to spend our gaming time reading rules, rather than playing.

 

[Maxperson]

It is not though. There are numerous exceptions to that - Quicken Spell, War Magic, Mantle of Majesty, Battle Magic, War Caster, Contingency ....

IMO Ready a Spell is another one of those exceptions.

Exceptions do not indicate a lack of requirement. The exceptions you list specifically spell out how the exceptions work. Unlike Ready Action which says to cast it as normal, which means the Magic Action. There is no specific carve out that says Ready Action is an exception, no matter how badly you might want it to be there.

It says it for the Demonocon of Iggwilv too and that does not change the spell at all.'

It says Magic Action to cast the spells that are unchanged, yes. The abilities of the Demonomicon that are not identical to spells are not cast.

1) the entrapment ability is not a spell, but requires a Magic Action.
2) the ensnarement ability is not a spell or activated ability, but passively modifies a specific spell the owner is casting via the Magic Action.
3) the spells in the book are all cast using the Magic Action.

Where is the inconsistency with what @BenjaminPey said?

 

[Maxperson]

Most

Right. The others are Reaction spells and Bonus Action spells. Those are fewer than the Magic Action spells, so most use the Magic Action. Ready Action never plays into it.

 

[Maxperson]

yeah, all the ones with casting time ‘action’, see the exceptions, namely ‘but some spells require a Bonus Action, a Reaction, or 1 minute or more’

People are bending over backwards to twist things so that the "work around" works. Just make a ruling people. If you want it to work, just make it work. You don't need to invent "work arounds."

 

[Charlaquin]

People are bending over backwards to twist things so that the "work around" works. Just make a ruling people. If you want it to work, just make it work. You don't need to invent "work arounds."

Don’t even need a ruling. It absolutely just works as written, and I believe as intended.

Yall are just cagey about any interpretation in which phrasing is important, but this is WotC we’re talking about. Even when they try to write in “natural language” they can’t help but make it function technically.

 

[Maxperson]

Don’t even need a ruling. It absolutely just works as written, and I believe as intended.

There's no way that was intended. The incredibly obvious intent is for Action Surge to be unable to allow a spell to be cast.

Yall are just cagey about any interpretation in which phrasing is important, but this is WotC we’re talking about. Even when they try to write in “natural language” they can’t help but make it function technically.

It doesn't function technically unless you ignore what "cast normally" means and try to apply to Ready Action which would be an abnormal usage. And then if you DO ignore that, it become technically correct(which is the best kind of correct), but violates RAI.

 

[James Gasik]

Until WotC either:

A, specifies that this is or isn't intended.

B, explains whether Ready is or isn't it's own unique action type.

Or C, explains what the heck "cast normally" actually means in the context of 2024 as opposed to the 2014 rules.

This debate isn't going to be settled. What it's run into seems to be mostly "people who feel the rules don't clearly prevent this tactic" vs. "people who feel this is janky and exploitative". One group isn't really going to influence the other without a clear smoking gun.

Personally, I feel that the rules do leave this open as an option. I can't parse "cast normally" as turning one action into another. However, even though this is the same kind of nonsense as what Rogues are allowed to do with Sneak Attack, I don't think it's intended to do this. They changed the wording on Action Surge.* They didn't have to, but they did. It seems they felt that taking a 2 level dip into Fighter as a spellcaster was too prone to spell combo shenanigans (or the community did, take your pick) and wanted to nix it. I can't for the life of me see why they'd change that wording and still leave a jankier workaround in the rules on purpose- they apparently just didn't think to examine the ramifications of their own rules.

Because this whole Action Surge to ready a spell interaction totally existed in 2014, it's just that there was no reason to do it, so nobody ever looked too closely at the rules. What sane person creates a reason to funnel you into this specific rules interaction on purpose?

*They also defined a Magic Action, but without clear language about Ready, which has been sitting around in the rules for over 10 years now, it doesn't really help in this discussion. Personally, I've come around on this a little, I mean, if a player says to me "I'm going to Ready a Dodge Action", nothing about that sentence is going to make me think they aren't taking the Dodge Action. Now, I can't think of a reason why you'd want to Ready a Dodge Action, but that is somewhat besides the point. If WotC created a reason for someone to want to do this, we'd be right back into whether Ready is a distinct Action or not.