5E An Argument for Why Paladins are the Strongest Class in 5E D&D

Ashrym

Hero
I was thinking party wizard evoker readies fireball in respose to incoming fireball as the situational option because of the range difference between that and counterspell.

Said evoker hitting his own party and sculpting it with a higher level slot should protect his own party from the incoming fireball that way.
 
I was thinking party wizard evoker readies fireball in respose to incoming fireball as the situational option because of the range difference between that and counterspell.

Said evoker hitting his own party and sculpting it with a higher level slot should protect his own party from the incoming fireball that way.
I seen what you were going for - I don't think it would though.
 

Ashrym

Hero
I seen what you were going for - I don't think it would though.
An overlapply duration of instaneous is arguable as an overlapping duration. I don't recall a RAW rule that prevents it, but I can certainly see DM's not allowing it.

Thematically I could see the slot cost the evoker is spending along with the subclass focus being able to manipulate evocations like that.
 
An overlapply duration of instaneous is arguable as an overlapping duration. I don't recall a RAW rule that prevents it, but I can certainly see DM's not allowing it.

Thematically I could see the slot cost the evoker is spending along with the subclass focus being able to manipulate evocations like that.
Instantaneous literally means without duration.
 

Ashrym

Hero
Instantaneous literally means without duration.
That's why I could see a DM not allowing that oddball tactic. It turns into a debate on instaneous duration.

Fireball "instaneous" lasts long enough to see the pea-size missile and ball of fire. It's not like instananteous = infinitely fast. It clearly lasts long enough to react to it, hence options like absorb elements. "Counter-fireball" as a tactic would be using the same reaction because it's already readied.

It's also reasonable to state the speed is effectively too fast to time simultaneous instaneous durations. DM gets to make a ruling with an out-of-the-box approach like that.
 
That's why I could see a DM not allowing that oddball tactic. It turns into a debate on instaneous duration.

Fireball "instaneous" lasts long enough to see the pea-size missile and ball of fire. It's not like instananteous = infinitely fast. It clearly lasts long enough to react to it, hence options like absorb elements. "Counter-fireball" as a tactic would be using the same reaction because it's already readied.

It's also reasonable to state the speed is effectively too fast to time simultaneous instaneous durations. DM gets to make a ruling with an out-of-the-box approach like that.
I mean rulewise, not fiction wise. In the rules if it is instantaneous then it has no duration - ruleswise.
 

Ashrym

Hero
I mean rulewise, not fiction wise. In the rules if it is instantaneous then it has no duration - ruleswise.
Rulewise "instantaneous" is a duration. The duration is "an instant" and the rules state this means it cannot be dispelled because the magic is done in an instant so there's no magic to dispel after that. Using the absorb elements to compare is using a reaction for another instantaneous spell that takes place in the same area at the same time as a fireball would. That's a clear precedent to reinforce the timing of using a reaction to cast fireball in the same area at the same time because of a readied action.

The only rule for instantaneous duration is that it cannot be dispelled. It's up to the DM to determine whether that also applies to overlapping magical effects at that point. What I'm saying is I can see a legitimate argument from both perspectives.
 
Rulewise "instantaneous" is a duration. The duration is "an instant" and the rules state this means it cannot be dispelled because the magic is done in an instant so there's no magic to dispel after that. Using the absorb elements to compare is using a reaction for another instantaneous spell that takes place in the same area at the same time as a fireball would. That's a clear precedent to reinforce the timing of using a reaction to cast fireball in the same area at the same time because of a readied action.

The only rule for instantaneous duration is that it cannot be dispelled. It's up to the DM to determine whether that also applies to overlapping magical effects at that point. What I'm saying is I can see a legitimate argument from both perspectives.
I'm saying I don't see it as legitimate from a rules perspective. From a fictional perspective I could but not from the rules perspective.

Interruping and dispelling magic has nothing to do with it. Rulewise - fireball is not an effect with a duration. Instant is not a duration.
 

Ashrym

Hero
I'm saying I don't see it as legitimate from a rules perspective. From a fictional perspective I could but not from the rules perspective.

Interruping and dispelling magic has nothing to do with it. Rulewise - fireball is not an effect with a duration. Instant is not a duration.
What evidence do you have to back that up?

Many spells are instantaneous. The spell harms, heals, creates, or alters a creature or an object in a way that can’t be dispelled, because its magic exists only for an instant.
An instant is an amount of time long enough to which a character can react. It's long enough so see the bead, long enough to see the fireball, long enough to cast absorb elements.

It's even listed "Duration: Instaneous" in the stat block.

Although I just reread absorb elements and that's not actually instantaneous so I might hurt my argument. :D
 

Seramus

Adventurer
There is no such thing as a simultaneous turn in 5e.
Monsters of the same type go at the same time, not sequentially. The DM might choose to handle their turns sequentially to keep things straight in his head, but the rules say they go at the same time.

It's a commonly overlooked thing.
 

fearsomepirate

Explorer
Monsters of the same type go at the same time, not sequentially.
You still resolve actions sequentially, not as though they all happen at precisely the same instant (which would make an absolute mess out of adjudicating reactions). If you want to belabor the point with your DM, he can just say that Pit Fiend 1 launches his fireball 0.00001s before Pit Fiend 2 does. Since the duration is instantaneous, there's no overlap.
 

dnd4vr

Tactical Studies Rules - The Original Game Wizards
FWIW, the monsters take their turns sequentially and all go before the next PC. The DM can even roll for each monster if he really wanted to track it.

After all, if four orcs are attacking and surround a PC, and the PC goes down after the second attack, the other two orcs can move and attack other PCs. If they actually went simultaneously then all four would strike together, not only resulting in the PC going down but being killed since the last two attacks would be auto crits and result in 4 failed death saves.

The DM determines the timing. Two of the orcs might act simultaneously or they might not, despite going on the same turn.
 

fearsomepirate

Explorer
If you really wanted to run the game as though every monster moves and attacks in perfect unison, as though D&D were a video game where multiple instances of the same monster share animation frames or something, you should let the rogue decide which incoming attack he uses Uncanny Dodge on. Or, at least, if he has two hill giants on him, you should do both of their first attacks and let him choose before doing both their second attacks.

Obviously, this is not how the game is run.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
Aura, Aura, Aura!

Me hates itsss!

Seriously. I can put up with nova smites all day long. But the massive boost aura gives to saves seriously reduces the challenge of many encounters to a cake walk.
I've found that the bunching up to be within 10' of the paladin often seriously limits characters tactical flexibility, and puts everyone in a nice AoE. If I'm going from hitting half the party with 1/4 making saves and 1/4 not, to hitting all the party with 3/4 making saves and 1/4 not - that's a solid upgrade of pain to the party. Not that every encounter has area of effect, but many that require saves do.
 

Seramus

Adventurer
You still resolve actions sequentially, not as though they all happen at precisely the same instant (which would make an absolute mess out of adjudicating reactions). If you want to belabor the point with your DM, he can just say that Pit Fiend 1 launches his fireball 0.00001s before Pit Fiend 2 does. Since the duration is instantaneous, there's no overlap.
It's fairly easy to resolve things simultaneously, much like two Samurai launching at each other and both of them falling down dead. In any case, you are free to do it however you like at your own table. But the book really does say they go at the same time.
 

Advertisement

Top