D&D 5E Casters should go back to being interruptable like they used to be.

[W'rkncacnter]

Well, I guess at this point you'd have to decide how much time "an action" takes up in your individual turn in a 6-second round. Given that a high-level Fighters can use this same time to attack 4 times (leaving enough time to quickly move 30' and make a bonus action attack)...or hell that a Wizard could cast Burning Hands, Misty Step, and throw out a reaction spell in the same round, it does seem that spellcasting is fairly brief.

well, no, a wizard physically can't cast burning hands and misty step in the same round, because they'd have to do each on their turn (otherwise they can't get the reaction spell out), which they can't do because of the rule preventing you from casting a levelled spell on your action on the same turn you cast one with your bonus action.

but even if we ignore that, burning hands still (normally) takes up the same amount of time (an action) that a single attack from a low-level martial does, so the argument that "i can fan my fingers 3 times in the time it takes to swing a sword once" is still irrelevant.

 

[James Gasik]

well, no, a wizard physically can't cast burning hands and misty step in the same round, because they'd have to do each on their turn (otherwise they can't get the reaction spell out), which they can't do because of the rule preventing you from casting a levelled spell on your action on the same turn you cast one with your bonus action.

but even if we ignore that, burning hands still (normally) takes up the same amount of time (an action) that a single attack from a low-level martial does, so the argument that "i can fan my fingers 3 times in the time it takes to swing a sword once" is still irrelevant.

Sorry, the bonus action spell rule is so horrible my DM actually excised it from our game so I temporarily forgot about it.

Nothing stops you from using a reaction spell when it's not your turn during the round however, as the rule only limits casting on your turn. So you can cast Firebolt and Misty Step on your turn, and a Shield or Counterspell at some other point in the round. That's a lot of magic in 6 seconds!

Plus, if you have 2014 Action Surge, you can totally cast 2 leveled spells in one turn (I know this is being changed, but as of this moment it's legal).

 

[W'rkncacnter]

Sorry, the bonus action spell rule is so horrible my DM actually excised it from our game so I temporarily forgot about it.

lmao, fair enough.

Nothing stops you from using a reaction spell when it's not your turn during the round however, as the rule only limits casting on your turn.

i know - what i was saying is that if you cast burning hands off your turn (by holding your action), that takes your reaction, meaning you can't use it on a reaction spell.

So you can cast Firebolt and Misty Step on your turn, and a Shield or Counterspell at some other point in the round. That's a lot of magic in 6 seconds!

ok, but you can just as easily swing a maul instead of cast firebolt and be able to do the rest exactly the same way. so "Look at all these other spells I can cast on the same turn!" isn't relevant, because we're comparing actions to actions.

Plus, if you have 2014 Action Surge, you can totally cast 2 leveled spells in one turn (I know this is being changed, but as of this moment it's legal).

well yeah, but that's because action surge is a resource ability. it's not normal. that's the entire point of it.

 

[Maxperson]

Sorry, the bonus action spell rule is so horrible my DM actually excised it from our game so I temporarily forgot about it.

It is pretty bad.

 

[James Gasik]

It is pretty bad.

As near as I can tell, it only has two functions. To limit the Sorcerer and to mess with the Cleric, lol. Which is why my DM finally said we were ignoring it, because our Cleric kept getting tripped up by it.

My Wizard could care less- I have a 3pp Kobold Press subclass that eats my bonus action, so I rarely even cast Misty Step, I mostly have it memorized in case something grapples me.

Because while I do think grappling should limit spellcasting, Momma Gasik didn't raise a total idiot. If I'm allowed to cast the spell to escape some sumo monster, I'll happily do it.

 

[ECMO3]

LOL seriously? That is some really lax playing-style.

Yeah, I don't ignore any of that stuff... Not losing a concentration spell because you are incapatated? Ignoring spell components? Ignoring hand switching (which is a free object interaction typically)? Casting is easy enough RAW, there is no need to make it even easier!

I don't ignore any of that when I DM, but many tables do and purposely do and for that reason I disagree with the idea that there is this large number of players who want Somatic components to cause AOOs.

I have seen tables that have nerfed casters in various ways (reducing spell slots, slower spell progression, getting rid of spell foci so you have to track actual components).

I have not seen this in 5E at all, and I play a lot of D&D. I have also not seen it on any videos of games on you tube that I have watched.

TBH I have only even seen gritty realism the rules in the PHB one time. This effectively accomplishes some of the things you mentioned and they were universally disliked by all the players who chose never to do that again.

And yet how many people here are arguing against you??? Hmm...

I don't think this message board is a random sample of D&D players. Many players on this board also argue that 3E was better than 5E and we can say confidently players world wide don't believe that.

Which is, again, for ease of play and so players of casters can have more "fun".

No it isn't for ease of play because the rules only allow for it in certain situations. The rules regarding someatic components while both hands are full are actually quite complex - you can do it if you have a feat, or if one of the hands is holding a focus, and the rules on foci are themselves complex with different things counting for different classes, including weapons for some subclasses.

If it was for ease of play the rule would either be you can always do somatic components with both hands full or that you can never do it with both hands full. Either of those rules would be less complex than the current rule (as would doing away with components completely)

Yes, quicker. Much quicker. You like making an argument for heavy weapons, so what about finesse ones? I've fenced in college and that tip moves lightning fast. There is no way you could do a burning hands gesture before I could lunge and strike you.

I did not make an argement for heavy weapons, but I did note above that attacking with a light weapon should logically take about as much time as somatic components.

I can do a burning hands gesture as described in the spll A LOT faster than the videos posted earlier. Not just a little faster, a lot faster.

 

[ECMO3]

wouldn't that imply that whatever the somatic component is, it's actually much slower then just making a fan with your hands? since you can only cast burning hands once a turn (under normal circumstances).

There is no general rule limiting you to casting it once a turn, it takes an action to cast, but a turn is longer than an action and you can do more than one action on your turn, there are multiple ways it is possible to cast burning hands more than once in a 6 second round.

well, no, because that's a nonsensical question. what you should be asking is "can you give a single example of a fantasy caster being interrupted in the midst of casting what could be called a 1 action spell by a melee attack". to which my immediate (and admittedly cheeky) answer would be any 3.5 or pf1/2e caster (though to be fair, in pf2e's case you can only interrupt spells that have the manipulate trait, which would basically be any spell that has a somatic or material component).

But you can interrupt spells in the 5E rules too, just not as often or easily and I have had PCs spells interrupted in game.

Also I will add after thingking about it, there are tons of video game characters (including the fantasy Genre) that use magic in melee and don't cause AOOs.

 

[ECMO3]

As near as I can tell, it only has two functions. To limit the Sorcerer and to mess with the Cleric, lol. Which is why my DM finally said we were ignoring it, because our Cleric kept getting tripped up by it.

My Wizard could care less- I have a 3pp Kobold Press subclass that eats my bonus action, so I rarely even cast Misty Step, I mostly have it memorized in case something grapples me.

Because while I do think grappling should limit spellcasting, Momma Gasik didn't raise a total idiot. If I'm allowed to cast the spell to escape some sumo monster, I'll happily do it.

The coolest use of misty step to escape is using it to get out of an enemy that swallowed you. Use your action to look through your familiars eyes, then use your bonus to step out to a spot you can "see". If you have quicken spell you can also use this trick if you want to cast a spell at someone while blined and otherwise can't see an enemy your familiar can see.

If your familiar is in his pocket plane this takes two turns - one to summon the familiar and the next one to look through his eyes and step out

 

[W'rkncacnter]

There is no general rule limiting you to casting it once a turn, it takes an action to cast, but a turn is longer than an action and you can do more than one action on your turn, there are multiple ways it is possible to cast burning hands more than once in a 6 second round.

those aren't "normal circumstances". i specified "under normal circumstances" specifically because every way you could cast burning hands more then once in a round that i can think of (i.e. by getting more actions) would also let you get more attacks - or in other words, it's a wash, so there's no point in discussing it here.

But you can interrupt spells in the 5E rules too, just not as often or easily and I have had PCs spells interrupted in game.

what was even the point of your question, then, if this is your response to someone trying to answer it?

 

[ECMO3]

those aren't "normal circumstances". i specified "under normal circumstances" specifically because every way you could cast burning hands more then once in a round that i can think of (i.e. by getting more actions) would also let you get more attacks - or in other words, it's a wash, so there's no point in discussing it here.

But when you get more actions that turn does not take more time, you are still doing it inside the same 6 seconds, and your movements are not sped up when you get more actions (or more attacks in one action)

It takes one action to cast the spell, that action typically happens once on your turn during a round which lasts 6 seconds. That is fundamentally different than saying it takes 6 seconds to cast the spell.

As an example, I can also use my action to close a door and I can only typically do this once a round with my action. I can use an action to draw a dagger from a sheath and again can only do this once a round with my action. That doesn't mean it takes 6 seconds to close a door or draw a weapon from a sheath and there are many times in game you can do more than one of those in a round (or a turn).

Finally, saying an action takes an entire 6 seconds would also mean that it takes that 1st level fighter a full 6 seconds to swing a sword, or to throw a dagger or even to throw a punch, and to accept this as true would mean every PC except 20th level fighter is out there swinging their weapons around in slow motion (and even a 20th level fighter is not "blindingly" fast). High-level Paladins or Rangers and Barbarians, if your action takes an entire 6 seconds then each of their swings lasts 3 seconds long from start to finish, and Monks Flurry of Blows isn't really a flurry.