Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 7572538" data-attributes="member: 6987520">Sure, that works by the official rules, but then you are getting around the attack by just wording your trigger differently, even if your intent is the same: act before the bowman attacks, as soon as he begins to. I do agree if the bowman already had a an arrow ready, it is likely he might get off the shot before you pull the lever and maybe even before I fire the crossbow.I find it unfortunate that the official rule works this way and I would prefer a different mechanic. Of course, I suppose you can default to the rules for tied initiative, maybe allowing you and the bowman to both roll a d20 to see who acts first?Back to the OP, however, if such wording means you could act before the bowman attacks, why wouldn't you be able to pull the lever or fire the crossbow before a spellcaster casts? If he fell because the lever was pulled, he might not have a valid target he could see. I suppose you could also simply resolve the crossbow attack and allow the caster to complete the spell. As others have posted, there is no mechanic for disrupting a spell in 5E (other than Counterspell) by dealing damage unless the spell takes more than one round to cast.At any rate, I think this is definitely a flaw in the system IMO unless it was intentional simply to allow each table to rule as they see fit.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DND_Reborn, post: 7572538, member: 6987520"] Sure, that works by the official rules, but then you are getting around the attack by just wording your trigger differently, even if your intent is the same: act before the bowman attacks, as soon as he begins to. I do agree if the bowman already had a an arrow ready, it is likely he might get off the shot before you pull the lever and maybe even before I fire the crossbow. I find it unfortunate that the official rule works this way and I would prefer a different mechanic. Of course, I suppose you can default to the rules for tied initiative, maybe allowing you and the bowman to both roll a d20 to see who acts first? Back to the OP, however, if such wording means you could act before the bowman attacks, why wouldn't you be able to pull the lever or fire the crossbow before a spellcaster casts? If he fell because the lever was pulled, he might not have a valid target he could see. I suppose you could also simply resolve the crossbow attack and allow the caster to complete the spell. As others have posted, there is no mechanic for disrupting a spell in 5E (other than Counterspell) by dealing damage unless the spell takes more than one round to cast. At any rate, I think this is definitely a flaw in the system IMO unless it was intentional simply to allow each table to rule as they see fit. [/QUOTE]

Verification