Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7039578" data-attributes="member: 12731">This is making my head hurt. Talk about going to extremes just to find corner cases!First off, Shenron only said "it goes a little like this". He did not claim to present the full, exhaustive fool-proof rules text.Then, his focus was on how you are supposed to only be able to cast one spell per round, just like you can only use the Attack action once per round. Where he (or rather, the designers) went astray is in the "cantrip = attack" comparison. A cantrip scales with level, so it compares more with the attack action than any individual attack. A cantrip can be just as powerful as a full attack action that includes the Fighter's Extra Attack feature.Finally, when he says "The consequential RAI is IMHO that there should never be 2 non-cantrip spells cast in the same round with normal combat rules" he clearly meant there should never be 2 regular action non-cantrip spells. To which I'm adding that what really should have been intended and implemented is that the only combination of two spells on your own turn should have been one levelled spell and one cantrip (whether the levelled spell is using your regular Cast Spell action and the cantrip is using the bonus action, or vice versa, is of lesser concern, especially since the pertinent solution would be to ALSO restrict you from using both Extra Attack and a Cantrip in the same turn)So. Yes, if you cast any bonus action spell at all, you're limited to casting a cantrip as your main action. That's what he said. Or meant. (As I've shown, cantrip + cantrip is too good anyway.)The fact the language doesn't take Action Surge into account is hardly a major failing, and does definitely not deserve your characterization that RAW fails to match RAI. Action Surge isn't a standard spellcaster feature - whatever it gives us, should definitely be considered a bonus, rather than making the failure of Bonus Action Spells to take Action Surges into account a failure.Nobody has been talking about reaction spells as if there should be a difference between slotted spells and cantrips, so I simply don't understand why you think the RAI means to prevent you from casting a slotted spell the same round as you cast a reaction spell like Counterspell.Casting a bonus action spell does not prevent you from casting a reaction spell, since the RAW says "during the same turn" and not "during the same round". (You never cast reaction spells on the same turn as casting regular or bonus action spells, since you always cast regular and bonus action spells on YOUR turn, and always cast reaction spells on somebody else's turn).So.Shillelagh and FireballHis RAI: Not Allowed, since he clearly didn't mean to allow you to cast two levelled spells on the same turnRAW: Not AllowedFireball and CounterspellHis RAI: AllowedRAW: AllowedThis has simply nothing to do with anything, since reactions never happen on the turn that bonus action spells restrict.Shillelagh and ShieldHis RAI: Not Allowed RAW: Not AllowedAction Surge: All these examples are clearly out of scope of any "RAI" discussion</blockquote>

Verification