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

[Lanefan]

Just in case anyone was unaware, Command can only do this if the DM allows it, as it's entirely up to them, as per the spell description:

"Some typical commands and their effects follow. You might issue a command other than one described here. If you do so, the DM determines how the target behaves. If the target can't follow your command, the spell ends.


Halt. The target doesn't move and takes no actions. A flying creature stays aloft, provided that it is able to do so. If it must move to stay aloft, it flies the minimum distance needed to remain in the air."

Freeze works well on fliers who have to flap their wings to stay aloft.

The wording here is poor (surprise, surprise). In theory any single-word command can be issued, but the wording makes it look like the DM has to approve anything not on the examples list.

 

[Lanefan]

Charm Person causes the charmed condition, which prevents the target from attacking those who have charmed them.

Command causes the target to spend their action on their turn following the command..which means they cannot attack.

In addition, at first level you have Cause Fear, which causes the frightened condition, which prevents the target from approaching and forces attacks to be made at disadvantage.

And you have Entangle, which Restrains and creates difficult terrain and costs an action to escape from.

So with Tasha's Hideous laughter, that's 5 separate shutdown spells..

At level 1

..and there might even be a couple more.

There's at least one more: you missed Sleep.

 

[James Gasik]

Freeze works well on fliers who have to flap their wings to stay aloft.

The wording here is poor (surprise, surprise). In theory any single-word command can be issued, but the wording makes it look like the DM has to approve anything not on the examples list.

I thought that's exactly what the wording is saying, that your inspired command might not work the way you expect.

 

[M_Natas]

So, I still don't like just adding the ability to interrupt spells with a reaction melee attack to the current rule system.

It would destroy the existing balance between casters and melee which actually exist in the most played level range (1 to 10).

It also implies a PvP mentality. The Wizard could do this to me, so I should be able to do this to him!
I only ever had one instance were a player cast (against the will of the other llayer) spells on him and that offending player was quickly gone.

So this would be foremost an ability that it used by monsters and NPCs against player characters and in the rare occasion that there is an enemy caster against them.

Because (right now) caster are played way more as PCs and a lot less monsters have Spellcasting (which is further removed with Monsters of the Multiverse and the 2024 Monster Manual) it will be primarily used against caster players.

So when this would be implemented, the whole encounter math would need to be redone, because now casters contribute way less to a battle than before or players would be forced to play classes they don't wanna play (martials) because they would hinder the party. Now martials would be way more efficient in battle than casters and are totally needed to survive.

So the whole system would need to be redone in order for the addition of easily interruptable spellcasting not to utterly destroy the game.

So we need a to create a new game/modify 5e way more strongly, so let's do it in a way that is actually fun for caster players and martials alike:

Ideas for rewrite of rules:

6 second/action points battle round

So first of all, let's change battle rounds from action, bonus action, reaction, free interaction to 6 seconds (or use action points to make it a little bit more abstract)
That allows for a wider range of options.
You can use all 6 seconds in your turn and up two two seconds for reactions, but altogether not more than 6.

To convert quickly: everything that was an action takes now 4 seconds. Bonus actions 2 seconds, Reaction 2 seconds.

Instead of extra attack, for martials we reduce the time a weapon attack takes. At level 5 for example by 1 second.
Also using light weapons reduces the time by 1 second.
So a Level 1 character could use all his Action Points/seconds to make 2 attacks with a light weapon or make one attack with a normal weapon and has 2 AP/Seconds left for other things.
From level 5 on, Martials can now use their reaction to make a weapon attack with a light weapon.

This is just a rough sketch, maybe we habe to increase the amount of action points to 7.

So, now to spells. Normal conversion:
Action spells 4 seconds.
Bonusaction/reaction spells 2 seconds.

But actually we would change the durations where it makes sense to different durations. Uttering a command word? 1 second spell. Casting a big bad spell like fireball? 6 seconds and so on.

Now, as a reaction a character in melee range can make a melee attack (when he has a melee attack he can take as a reaction, so a level 5+ martial with a light weapon or a level 11 fighter with a normal weapon) to interrupt any spell casting that has a longer casting time than his attack.
So he can interrupt every spell with a casting time of 3 seconds/action points or longer.

So a caster now has a choice - cast a bigger spell and risk a melee attack that could interrupt it or cast a quicker spell.

Maybe to balance that out more reactions could take up to 3 seconds/action points, so first level martials could do that, too. Especially when combined with 7 second/Action Point rounds.

Putting everything in seconds/action points instead of splitting it up into action, bonus action, free interaction is also easier to grasp.

So, now to the maximum fun part:

If a spell is interrupted, let's use DCC and have a possible table of things that could happen, based on the attack roll against AC.
If the interrupting attack is a Nat20 or he hits the AC by more then 10, the spell is interrupted and the caster looses the spell slot and everything that happens when you hit on a 5+ over ac happens, tol.
If he misses by 10 or with a Nat1, something bad happens to the Martial (becomes additional target, gets extra damage or something).
Hitting with 5+ over the AC creates a feedback loop and leads to a roll in an improved and way cooler wilde magic table and interrupts the spell.
Hitting the ac till 4 over ac forces a concentration check to see if the spell is interrupted.

Just as a rough idea of what I would imagine would be way bettet than just tugging on opportunity attacks against spellcasting which 5e RAW could bot handle very well.

 

[Gammadoodler]

There's at least one more: you missed Sleep.

Yeah. I think Disaonant Whispers would have a pretty good case too since you'd have to full move away as your reaction. So getting back to the caster on your turn would be a challenge.

I was trying to be a bit generous though in only counting the level 1 spells with 100% effectiveness no matter the level/CR of the target creature.

 

[Gammadoodler]

So, I still don't like just adding the ability to interrupt spells with a reaction melee attack to the current rule system.

It would destroy the existing balance between casters and melee which actually exist in the most played level range (1 to 10).

It also implies a PvP mentality. The Wizard could do this to me, so I should be able to do this to him!
I only ever had one instance were a player cast (against the will of the other llayer) spells on him and that offending player was quickly gone.

So this would be foremost an ability that it used by monsters and NPCs against player characters and in the rare occasion that there is an enemy caster against them.

Because (right now) caster are played way more as PCs and a lot less monsters have Spellcasting (which is further removed with Monsters of the Multiverse and the 2024 Monster Manual) it will be primarily used against caster players.

So when this would be implemented, the whole encounter math would need to be redone, because now casters contribute way less to a battle than before or players would be forced to play classes they don't wanna play (martials) because they would hinder the party. Now martials would be way more efficient in battle than casters and are totally needed to survive.

So the whole system would need to be redone in order for the addition of easily interruptable spellcasting not to utterly destroy the game.

So we need a to create a new game/modify 5e way more strongly, so let's do it in a way that is actually fun for caster players and martials alike:

I fail to see how you conclude that such drastic measures are required.

In setting, it is rare to find that most of your time is spent in combat where such reactions would be worrying. And often enough, the party is either in control of or aware of when combat will take place.

Like..it's not typically the monsters that are kicking the doors in on the PCs.

Even assuming that spell interruption rules apply globally to all PCs and monsters (which isn't a necessary implementation), they would only apply specifically in combat and then only specifically when the caster is within melee range of a monster (assuming existing reaction attack parameters).

So the usefulness of spells would be unchanged outside of combat (where they offer leagues of capability beyond what a martial can do), and unchanged in combat at range (where they also offer leagues of options beyond what a martial can do).

For my money, this is most of the time spent in D&D already. And the remaining circumstance, being within melee range of a monster, isn't a circumstance most casters were seeking out anyway.

And note again that this would be assuming that we give the same reaction to every character everywhere. We don't have to do that. We can make it a PC option only, we can give it to some monsters and not others. We can vary the trigger parameters of the reaction and the execution methodology. Like, nothing is set in stone here.

In summary, I think you are overreacting to a potential (and specific) change to mechanics that only apply in a niche circumstance, a circumstance that is already avoided, and that already has tools available to mitigate the risks when it cannot be avoided.

 

[Lanefan]

I thought that's exactly what the wording is saying, that your inspired command might not work the way you expect.

To me that wording reads that the examples list are the only command words the spell allows unless the DM says different; which to me is the reverse of the intent that any word is allowed unless the DM says no.

 

[Lanefan]

So, I still don't like just adding the ability to interrupt spells with a reaction melee attack to the current rule system.

It would destroy the existing balance between casters and melee which actually exist in the most played level range (1 to 10).

It also implies a PvP mentality. The Wizard could do this to me, so I should be able to do this to him!

If you balance for PvP then you've by default balanced for PC vs NPC; and PCs are easier to directly compare against each other.

Or, put another way, assume for these purposes that the PCs opponents are also adventurers just as competent as the PCs.

So this would be foremost an ability that it used by monsters and NPCs against player characters and in the rare occasion that there is an enemy caster against them.

Because (right now) caster are played way more as PCs and a lot less monsters have Spellcasting (which is further removed with Monsters of the Multiverse and the 2024 Monster Manual) it will be primarily used against caster players.

For monsters, sure. But it's frequently the case that the PCs' foes are other non-"monster" NPCs with classes, levels, etc.; and who can cast spells.

So when this would be implemented, the whole encounter math would need to be redone, because now casters contribute way less to a battle than before or players would be forced to play classes they don't wanna play (martials) because they would hinder the party. Now martials would be way more efficient in battle than casters and are totally needed to survive.

Good! Martials are supposed to be more efficient in battle - it's their job. And if you insist on going into battle without having any martials along, that's an up-front strategic fail.

Casters contribute before the battles, after the battles, and to avoidance of battles.

So the whole system would need to be redone in order for the addition of easily interruptable spellcasting not to utterly destroy the game.

So we need a to create a new game/modify 5e way more strongly, so let's do it in a way that is actually fun for caster players and martials alike:

Ideas for rewrite of rules:

[snip]

Your wild magic surge idea is IMO well worth considering.

 

[ECMO3]

Freeze works well on fliers who have to flap their wings to stay aloft.

The wording here is poor (surprise, surprise). In theory any single-word command can be issued, but the wording makes it look like the DM has to approve anything not on the examples list.

The only issue swith freeze is it can't be "directly harmful", so if the creature would take falling damage I probably would not let it fly as DM, although if they are immune to falling damage or not high enough to take any it would be good.

"Land" works very well for flying creatures.

Another creative use that works well is "daydream" to break concentration on a spell.

I've seen players use both of these in play.

 

[ECMO3]

Charm Person causes the charmed condition, which prevents the target from attacking those who have charmed them.

The "Charmed" condition is different than the "Incapacitated" condition and generally far weaker. The Charm Person spell in particular is very weak in combat for numerous reasons. First enemies get advantage on the save if you are already in combat, it only effects humanoids and many of them get advantage on the save even if you are not yet in combat. Finally, it only prevents the charmed enemy from attacking or targeting the charmer specifically, they can still target other party members at will. Finally the condition prevents "targeting" or "attacking" the charmer, but not harming the charmer so RAW an enemy can still use an AOE that affects the Charmer because the Charmer is not the target of the AOE.

Charm Person has its out of combat uses, but as a combat spell it is one of the worst 1st level spells, down at the bottom of the list with Witchbolt. A caster is usually better off with a Cantrip or Crossbow than with Charm Person.

Command causes the target to spend their action on their turn following the command..which means they cannot attack.

Yes, if they speak your language it can be powerful. But they still have bonus actions and reactions and possibly an action depending on the specific command. Incapacitated eliminates all actions.

I'm not saying Command is not powerful, but it is situational and does not cause incapacitated.

In addition, at first level you have Cause Fear, which causes the frightened condition, which prevents the target from approaching and forces attacks to be made at disadvantage.

Yes and unlike Charm Person, Cause Fear is very powerful in combat for a 1st level spell. The Frightened condition is not generally better than incapacitated, but it is still very powerful in its own right and can be situationally better as a condition.

Now you are expanding this though and ALL Fighters, regardless of subclass, have access to causing the frightened condition at 1st level.

And you have Entangle, which Restrains and creates difficult terrain and costs an action to escape from.

And as I noted on another post, a net causes restrained and can be used at will, can be used against flying creatures, always requires at least one off the enemies attacks to break free or at least an action if the enemy does not do slashing damage and it does not require concentration.

All characters can throw a net at level 1 and with the right build choices a 1st level fighter can also throw 2 nets in a single turn.

So with Tasha's Hideous laughter, that's 5 separate shutdown spells..

Charm Person is not a "shutdown spell", so it is 4 spells and only 4 spells if the enemies you face speaks your language and has an intelligence higher than 4, otherwise it is 2 spells, one which is only available to Druids at 1st level and the other that is only available to Wizards and Warlocks.

And since now we are now looking beyond the "incapacitated" condition to "shutdown conditions", many martials have access to these or comparable effects as well, as I pointed out above.