[5E] Interrupting a Spellcaster via Ready Action

[TaranTheWanderer]

Wait. Are we getting all finicky on precisel wording? Why is that important if the player is telling you what they want. And if you want to get in to semantics, if the player says I shoot after he starts casting but before he finishes casting. As soon as the casting start, it immediately stops starting even before the spell is cast. Seems a bit ludicrous to be that specific.

It means you can’t do things like this in combat: “on my turn I hold a knife to unconscious persons throat and ready an action that if anyone starts casting a spell, I kill the person. Then I say, “nobody move or he dies!”

In every situation I’ve played through like this, if someone casts a spell, you get to cut the throat before the spell hits anyone. The other way means the spellcaster can cast with impunity. He casts sleep or banishment on his ally or whatever and stand off averted. Easy peasy. Casters are powerful enough as it is but now you can’t even force a stand off anymore.

It kind of sucks the drama out of it, I feel. I wouldn’t play it like that at my table. Kind of boring in my mind. If that is indeed RAW, I guess this is one of these situations where I would ignore RAW and play in a way that makes my game more fun.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

All of those are acceptable wordings. And in all cases, you'd attack after the spell was cast, because the trigger is the spell being cast.

Disagree, but we've already tread that ground.

Because that's what the rules say. It's even the specific case used in the Sage Advice quote cited earlier in the thread. You are readying an attack in the event of the Grimlock attacking the wizard, and therefore your reaction occurs after that event finishes. Otherwise why would they have bothered including that line in the rules?

No, the PC is Readying a spear attack in the case of the Grimlock raising its club against the wizard. That's the trigger. The PC is looking for signs of aggression - and raising a club is a sign of aggression. Once the club is raised, the trigger event has finished, and the Readied action commences. Who's to say that the Grimlock is even attacking? Maybe it is just trying to intimidate? The player doesn't know which it is and the mechanic of the PC's Ready need not change just because the Grimlock intends to attack vs. intends to intimidate. What happens next is the PC gets to throw the spear, per the rules. If you point out that my original post said: "If the Grimlock raises its club to attack the wizard" and that the attack must finish, well we're back to Greg Brady exact words or "Mother-May-I" again: "If only the player left off that part about the attack, I would have allowed it..."

There is no way to use a Readied attack to disrupt the casting of a spell, so no amount of special phrasing will accomplish it.

It's not likely to happen often, but I can see a Readied action being used to remove a spell focus from an enemy's hand. Is that something that is truly impossible in the fantasy world? Methinks not. "If the evil warlock raises his staff, I (try to) snatch it from his hands." If the PC's Readied action succeeds, the PC has effectively disrupted the casting of a spell... if that's what the evil warlock was actually up to, that is. The rules do not prohibit this.

 

[Krachek]

Another view at this situation is seeing a caster like someone aiming a gun at you.
Maybe you can cut the throat before he put you a bullet in your head, maybe not.

We’re in a fantasy setting. How fast is a casting? How easily can another react at a casting.
Rules are vague about this. So we should not assume that we have time to interrupt a casting even he were in an advantageous position.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

Another view at this situation is seeing a caster like someone aiming a gun at you.
Maybe you can cut the throat before he put you a bullet in your head, maybe not.

We’re in a fantasy setting. How fast is a casting? How easily can another react at a casting.
Rules are vague about this. So we should not assume that we have time to interrupt a casting even he were in an advantageous position.

No. The caster always wins if you rule it one way. Always. Because the spell will always go off first.

Edit: how fast is casting? Verbal only is going to be quite fast. Especially things like Power Words. If it requires somatic, material components, then it probably isn't very fast. You have to fish materials out of your component pouch and you can't possibly have them all in your hand. Some require you to crush gems. If the guy reaches in to his pouch, then that's a good indication that he's about to cast a spell. So, should the player instead say, "If he reaches in to his pouch or touches his focus, I attack"? Or is it simpler to say, if he tries to cast a spell.

When I play soccer, I can immediately attack a player who has the ball or I can jockey. When I jockey, I'm 'readying' for an opportunity to attack. "when he tries to pass, I will attack." Kicking a ball is a very fast action. I imagine it's as fast as pulling a trigger and it might even be faster than reaching into a pocket to pull out a wallet or handful of sand. Maybe. Many times, I'm able to check the ball before they kick it, anticipating the opening. That's how fast a person can decide whether or not someone is about to do something in the heat of the moment. I think allowing the ready to go off first simulates that quite well and I like that.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Another view at this situation is seeing a caster like someone aiming a gun at you.
Maybe you can cut the throat before he put you a bullet in your head, maybe not.

We’re in a fantasy setting. How fast is a casting? How easily can another react at a casting.
Rules are vague about this. So we should not assume that we have time to interrupt a casting even he were in an advantageous position.

Since the rules are vague about this, why can't we assume that we have time to interrupt a casting? There is no official ruling on this and it can be ruled either way by the DM. 1 action is ambiguous intentionally, so it is up to each table to rule on whether it can be interrupted or not. Point of issue: how else would Counterspell work? It is a reaction, but has the ability to interrupt a creature casting a spell before the spell is finished.

No. The caster always wins if you rule it one way. Always. Because the spell will always go off first.

Edit: how fast is casting? Verbal only is going to be quite fast. Especially things like Power Words. If it requires somatic, material components, then it probably isn't very fast. You have to fish materials out of your component pouch and you can't possibly have them all in your hand. Some require you to crush gems. If the guy reaches in to his pouch, then that's a good indication that he's about to cast a spell. So, should the player instead say, "If he reaches in to his pouch or touches his focus, I attack"? Or is it simpler to say, if he tries to cast a spell.

When I play soccer, I can immediately attack a player who has the ball or I can jockey. When I jockey, I'm 'readying' for an opportunity to attack. "when he tries to pass, I will attack." Kicking a ball is a very fast action. I imagine it's as fast as pulling a trigger and it might even be faster than reaching into a pocket to pull out a wallet or handful of sand. Maybe. Many times, I'm able to check the ball before they kick it, anticipating the opening. That's how fast a person can decide whether or not someone is about to do something in the heat of the moment. I think allowing the ready to go off first simulates that quite well and I like that.

Right. Why should the caster always win? He shouldn't IMO.

However, one way or the other, we can make assumptions about how long something takes and we won't be right, regardless. How long is a Verbal component, even for a Power Word spell? The word could be Iwannallatheesfosatodi!, or it could be bork! We simply do not know since nothing is specified in 5E. A 1 action event might be quick, another 1 action event might be long. It can't matter in 5E because such things aren't (yet) defined.

Does it take longer to complete the spell once the caster starts casting it or does it take longer to throw the spear? Who knows. It seems pretty clear most people (or at least us vocal ones ) feel pretty strongly one way or another about it, but there is no official stance on it yet. The best we can do in interpret the other rules we have and make our own decisions on those.

Once I read in the SA about how a readied action and take place between a multiattack action, I am pretty convinced myself that allowing a readied action to stop a casting before it is complete is feasible. Since others don't feel that way I am not about to try to change their minds--that isn't my job.

For the people who do agree the spear can be thrown before the spell is finished, just decide what effect you want that to have. Will the damage from a hit alone be enough to interrupt the spell? Do you want to have a Concentration check or some other save or something to see if the caster can complete it despite the hit? Whatever works for your table is cool, but no matter what you do it isn't official for anyone else.

Personally, we have been using rolled Initiative each round, like older systems. So, for us, if a caster takes damage or fails a save prior to them casting their spell, they need to make a Concentration check to finish. If the caster goes first, nothing can stop them from completing the spell. Thus, we avoid the entire issue of a readied action. It adds more tension to the game as well. In our last session one of the players acted before the archmage and damaged him, the DM rolled and he failed the Concentration check (lucky for us!), so the spell was stopped. We all groaned when we heard "The archmage is going" before any of us... we knew we could be in trouble.

Finally, if there is anyone who feels their understanding is the "official" one, tell me what your job is at WotC, and maybe I'll believe you.

 

[Blue]

During casting, there is ONLY a concentration check for multi round casting. There is absolutely no other "damage interrupts CASTING" mechanic in 5e. Only spells longer than an action require concentration to cast.

So this whole thing is pretty moot.

EDIT: There's the "Ready a spell", but even there you cast and hold it - it's not a concentration check for the casting, it's for holding an already cast spell.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

During casting, there is ONLY a concentration check for multi round casting. There is absolutely no other "damage interrupts CASTING" mechanic in 5e. Only spells longer than an action require concentration to cast.

So this whole thing is pretty moot.

EDIT: There's the "Ready a spell", but even there you cast and hold it - it's not a concentration check for the casting, it's for holding an already cast spell.

There is. The status is called dead. Or a battlemaster may disarm the caster with an attack. There is an optional disarm rule in the dmg. So yes, you might stop someone from casting a spell. But not by forcing a concentration check. Although as a DM you might call for one as a ruling but I would not go so far as it would encourage players to use that tactic all the time.
It is just readying an action to loose your shot before the casting has finished because you set your trigger in a way that you habe enough time to react. A caster should not do anything with his voice or dingers or even draw a component.
I think some check however seems reasonable. Depends on what the caster wants to do. Bluff. Distract. Just be faster with a simple spell with maybe only a few words. You as a DM can call for a contest who is faster. The caster or the readier of the action. You might give advantage or disadvantage by circumstance.
You can actually stop acting in initiative order until someone starts the fight again which then would call for a new initiative dexterity check. It is so easy and that is all better than the fighter just using the attack to just shoot the wizard. Because if he can ready the action to use when the casting begins just means he already had his turn and could have as well just beaten on the wizard... most probably not with the single attack he readied but with a full round of attacks with maybe even action surge. If you want to encourage such a dynamic on your table... just do it but you should know that is not using the rules as written but something you imagine.
You might mix it up with the 3.5 that says you can act before the triggering action but once again here in 5e the word action is probably omitted on purpose and the word after is probably chosen to not have the backloop of 3.5 where you act before the trigger.
But then... it maybe does not matter how you word it because even with a quoted passage some people still claim the opposite... but that seems like the mood nowadays...

 

[5ekyu]

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”.

But, disarm is in the rules and has an action plus roll resist.

There is **no** roll to keep spellcasting outside of a concentration spell etc.

So, for the ready vs fighter swing you are indeed giving him the same thing he has as the base action rule, just delayed - execute disarm vs the weapon. But, if it were a monk strike, what then? Did you add in rules to stop the monk strike? The bard inspire? What if it's just a verbal spell - a thtoat shot to make thrm stop tslking

I guess it comes down to this - in a broader sense of this discussion not just limited to your point.

If the argument hinges on a special rule for casting to mske casting interruptable, cuz casting should be slower in a GMs view then it's a house rule to weaken magic casting and the wording of triggers in ready is minutiae by comparison - just linguistic hoops.

If however one is making a ready kobold bolt shot able yi interrupt snd dro every type of action, then its about the ready action and likely still a bit of house ruling cuz by the book not every action can be interrupted and stopped by a bolt shot - non-lethal.

But house rules are dandy, got a few myself and another being voted 9n by the group now.

 

[5ekyu]

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.

"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."

I saw reference like this before and frankly it baffles me.

Easily half the ready actions I have seen have been by lower in the order guys vs higher order guys. Because with std 5e initiative the init 10 guy can ready yo do ABC to init 20 guy based on event and that likely triggers next time init 30 comes up.

5e base initiative is cyclical, so really the highest guy on the init order is the one acting now in his turn and the lowest is the guy who just finished their turn. After one guy has gone higher changes.

 

[5ekyu]

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.

Ok so much misinformation here.

First maybe your games are different, but it's often the case that getting hit foes not equal dead nor does it equal not being able to cast later whrn your turn comes up, so in that case a ready shot has done house rule making it able to stop casting, there are I am sure lots of cases where "my ready shot stops a spell" is a lot better than "my ready shot does 7 more hp yo you."

Second, I have seen as many readied actions from the init losers as the winners. I have no idea where the notion of ready requiring winning init comes from.

Init 20 wizard spells moves, init 10 guy readies something against them for their next action with a defined trigger, so on init 20 next turn if the trigger goes it's the init 10 guy ready trigger vs the init 20. Init is cyclical in 5e, generally speaking.

As for fun, dead, etc... you fo you.