D&D 5E Bonus Actions vs Reactions

[Xeviat]

(Note, I accidentally typed "immediate action" instead of "reaction". Change that in the poll in your mind.)

Hi everyone. I've building more and more homebrewed stuff recently, and I've encountered a question on which I'd like to hear your opinion. What do you think is more valuable: A bonus action or a reaction? Which carries more weight. For instance, if two spells were largely identical, but one was a bonus action and one was an reaction, which would you consider to be higher level? As an example, imagine if there was a spell alongside Shield which, as a bonus action, increased your AC until the start of your next turn. Would that be too weak for a 1st level spell?

Considering this requires both looking at the action itself and what you give up by using the action. When you use a bonus action, you can't use another bonus action; likewise, when you use an reaction, you can't use another reaction. For spells, things are further altered because bonus action spells do not let you cast spells with spell slots in the same round, but I don't want to worry about that rule for this discussion.

So what do you think? Which action is more heavily valued in the rules?

 

[neogod22]

What's an immediate action?

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

 

[neogod22]

Which edition are you playing?

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

 

[Xeviat]

What's an immediate action?

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

Ugh, I meant Reaction. This is for 5th. I've been reading too many 3rd Edition books recently.

 

[neogod22]

Ugh, I meant Reaction. This is for 5th. I've been reading too many 3rd Edition books recently.

Well reactions are situational. You are more limited in what you can do as a reaction. The main difference is, you can always have a reaction, bit bonus actions are only granted for certain conditions. Bonus actions are more generally used in offensive conditions and reactions are more generally used in defensive. You can only use a bonus action on your turn, whereas a reaction can be taken anytime.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

 

[Xeviat]

Well reactions are situational. You are more limited in what you can do as a reaction. The main difference is, you can always have a reaction, bit bonus actions are only granted for certain conditions. Bonus actions are more generally used in offensive conditions and reactions are more generally used in defensive. You can only use a bonus action on your turn, whereas a reaction can be taken anytime.

Yes ... I'm aware of the limitations of the various actions. So would a shield spell that used a bonus action be weaker than the shield spell or equal to the shield spell?

 

[Illithidbix]

Depends a bit upon the class and how many abilities they have that use bonus actions already, and how persistently.

From the top of my head; Rogues and Monks have alot of abilities tied to bonus actions and I expect them to use their bonus action pretty much every round.
Other classes have less use of their bonus action, I am willing to be proved wrong, but I seem to recall that when playing a Fighter (even a battlemaster) I rarely used my bonus action.

Relatively few abilities and spells use Reactions

I also apparently have a probably semi complete list to hand, although this lists *attacks* not defensive or mobility uses of Reactions.

Figured I'd document the ways that you can make an attack with your Reaction, who has them, how they're triggered, melee or ranged, etc. If you notice any others, feel free to chime in and I'll add it to the list.

All characters:
Opportunity Attack: Melee; When an enemy chooses to move away from your reach (5 ft.).
Commander's Strike: Melee or Ranged; when a Battle Master Fighter chooses you to attack via this maneuver.

Feats:
Mage Slayer: Melee; Enemy within 5 ft. of you casts a spell.
Martial Adept, Riposte: Melee; Enemy misses you with melee attack, costs 1 superiority die, does benefit from a reach weapon.
Polearm Master: Melee; Can make opportunity attack when an enemy enters your reach (5 ft.) if you're wielding glaive, halberd, pike or quarterstaff.
Sentinel: Melee; Can make opportunity attack even vs. Disengage; Also can attack when enemy within 5 ft. attacks someone other than you.

Classes:
Barbarian (Berserker), Lv. 14, Retaliation: Melee; When you take damage from enemy within 5 ft.
Cleric (Tempest), Lv. 1, Wrath of the Storm: Not an attack, but 2d8 auto-damage (lightning or thunder), DEX save for half; When enemy within 5 ft. hits you with an attack, WIS mod times per day.
Fighter (Battle Master), Lv. 3+, Riposte: Melee; Enemy misses you with melee attack, costs 1 superiority die, does benefit from a reach weapon.
Monk (Shadow), Lv. 17, Opportunist: Melee; Enemy within 5 ft. is hit by an attack from someone other than you.
Paladin (Vengeance), Lv. 15, Soul of Vengeance: Melee; Enemy under your Vow of Enmity makes an attack (regardless of whom it targets), does benefit from a reach weapon.
Ranger (Hunter): Lv. 3, Giant Killer: Melee (Ranged works technically, but ...); Large or larger enemy within 5 ft. hits or misses you with an attack.


---------------------------------------------------
Spells that take 1 reaction to cast:
---------------------------------------------------

Level 1 Spells:
Feather Fall [Transmutation] (V,M) (Bard, Sorcerer, Wizard)
Hellish Rebuke [Evocation] (V,S) (Warlock)
Shield [Abjuration] (V,S) (Sorcerer, Wizard)

Level 3 Spells:
Counterspell [Abjuration] (S) (Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard)

---------------------------------------------------
Spells that take 1 bonus action to cast:
---------------------------------------------------
Cantrips:
Shillelagh [Transmutation] (V,S,M) (Druid)

Level 1 Spells:
Compelled Duel [Enchantment] (V; Concentration) (Paladin)
Divine Favor [Evocation] (V,S; Concentration) (Paladin)
Ensnaring Strike [Conjuration] (V; Concentration) (Ranger)
Expeditious Retreat [Transmutation] (V,S; Concentration) (Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard)
Hail of Thorns [Conjuration] (V) (Ranger)
Healing Word [Evocation] (V) (Bard, Cleric, Druid)
Hex [Enchantment] (V,S,M; Concentration) (Warlock)
Hunter's Mark [Divination] (V; Concentration) (Ranger)
Sanctuary [Abjuration] (V,S,M) (Cleric)
Searing Smite [Evocation] (V; Concentration) (Paladin)
Shield of Faith [Abjuration] (V,S,M; Concentration) (Cleric, Paladin)
Thunderous Smite [Evocation] (V; Concentration) (Paladin)
Wrathful Smite [Evocation] (V; Concentration) (Paladin)

Level 2 Spells:
Branding Smite [Evocation] (V; Concentration) (Paladin)
Flame Blade [Evocation] (V,S,M; Concentration) (Druid)
Magic Weapon [Transmutation] (V,S; Concentration) (Paladin, Wizard)
Misty Step [Conjuration] (V) (Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard)
Spiritual Weapon [Evocation] (V,S) (Cleric)

Level 3 Spells:
Blinding Smite [Evocation] (V; Concentration) (Paladin)
Lightning Arrow [Transmutation] (V,S; Concentration) (Ranger)
Mass Healing Word [Evocation] (V) (Cleric)

Level 4 Spells:
Grasping Vine [Conjuration] (V,S; Concentration) (Druid, Ranger)
Staggering Smite [Evocation] (V; Concentration) (Paladin)

Level 5 Spells:
Banishing Smite [Abjuration] (V; Concentration) (Paladin)
Swift Quiver [Transmutation] (V,S,M; Concentration) (Ranger)

Level 7 Spells:
Divine Word [Evocation] (V) (Cleric)

 

[neogod22]

Yes ... I'm aware of the limitations of the various actions. So would a shield spell that used a bonus action be weaker than the shield spell or equal to the shield spell?

No, a wizard can't cast shield as a bonus action. Only as a reaction. He can cast it on his turn however, it will still use up his reaction.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

 

[Illithidbix]

No, a wizard can't cast shield as a bonus action. Only as a reaction. He can cast it on his turn however, it will still use up his reaction.

I believe you are misunderstanding the quesiton.

Xeviat is quite aware that the shield spell uses a reaction (I think...), instead what I understand they are asking "if there existed a spell that provided the same benefit as shield, would it be more potent or less potent than the existing version that uses a reaction".

 

[neogod22]

I believe you are misunderstanding the quesiton.

Xeviat is quite aware that the shield spell uses a reaction (I think...), instead what I understand they are asking "if there existed a spell that provided the same benefit as shield, would it be more potent or less potent than the existing version that uses a reaction".

If there were a hypothetical spell, then it will be as the spell description says. There is no answer to what's more powerful between a bonus or reaction, because it's an apples to oranges comparison.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk