D&D 5E (2014) Casting multiple spells with bonus spells and the order they are cast.

[Yardiff]

So why do you lose your reaction when you use a bonus action spell but not when you do other bonus actions such as bardic inspiration?

 

[Ilbranteloth]

So why do you lose your reaction when you use a bonus action spell but not when you do other bonus actions such as bardic inspiration?

You don’t technically lose your reaction. You can only cast a cantrip, but that cantrip must have a casting time of reaction.

At least I guess that’s the answer. As I said, it doesn’t make sense to me that you can cast a full action spell, in some cases twice, and still cast a spell as a reaction, but those are the rules.

I think at this point only Jeremy or Mike could answer those questions.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

The sneak attack rules clarified that a reaction on someone else's turn is not your turn. Not "to". "on".

And of course if someone pushes you off a cliff on their turn, then you are casting feather fall on their turn. But that's not the question Crawford was responding to in his tweet.

And this is exactly where I’m confused.

If I cast a spell as a bonus action, then somebody pushes me off a cliff, can I cast feather fall on their turn?

Apparently not.

I’m good with that from the standpoint that the rules for a reaction should be consistent. But because a reaction can happen on your turn or on somebody else’s turn, an answer that specifies only your turn, or this turn, would seem to exclude reactions.

Furthermore, I think the rules should have an internal logic. Right now I’ve been told the logic is “because them’s the rules!” That’s not logic.

I think part of my (and others) problem is that we unconsciously assign a block of time to an action and a bonus action. That is, if we can spend a whole action (one that can eventually contain x number of attacks by a fighter) and still cast a spell as a reaction, why can’t we cast a spell as a bonus action, which can only contain one attack as a fighter, and do the same?

Why, with two fighter levels, can we cast TWO spells that consume an action and still cast feather fall, but not that lowly bonus action spell and still cast feather fall?

If all we can do is cast a cantrip, what cantrip could we possibly cast since none have a casting time of reaction?

The published Sage Advice seemed to be clear to me. And when there is a published Sage Advice about a specific question, and the tweets don’t make sense (to me) or contradict with the published Sage Advice (to me) then I go with the published Sage Advice.

I will reiterate that the rule, as clarified by tweet by Jeremy Crawford is that you cannot cast a spell as a reaction if you have already cast a spell as a bonus action. I wouldn’t want to be accused of disseminating misinformation...

 

[Caliban]

So why do you lose your reaction when you use a bonus action spell but not when you do other bonus actions such as bardic inspiration?

You don't lose your reaction in either case. Casting a bonus action spell just limits what spells you can cast with the rest of your turn, but you can still do a non-spell reaction during your turn. And once your turn ends, you can cast a reaction spell again.

It rule itself is clear, but the application feels counter-intuitive. It's one of the few rules that are unique to 5e, as far as I'm aware and it feels rather arbitrary. I suspect they didn't consider reaction spells when they made the rule, but the situations where it actually stops you from casting them are rare enough that it's not worth issuing errata for. Or maybe this is exactly what they intended when they made the rule. *shrug*

Like I said earlier, I've house ruled it to allow reaction spells to be cast on your turn even if you've cast a bonus action spell. No problems so far, and less confusion during play.

 

[Caliban]

And this is exactly where I’m confused.

If I cast a spell as a bonus action, then somebody pushes me off a cliff, can I cast feather fall on their turn?

Apparently not.

Sure you can. As long as they pushed you off on their turn and not your turn (for example, if you cast misty step and they had a readied action to shove you when you appeared next to them). Why would you think you couldn't?

I will reiterate that the rule, as clarified by tweet by Jeremy Crawford is that you cannot cast a spell as a reaction if you have already cast a spell as a bonus action. I wouldn’t want to be accused of disseminating misinformation...

On your turn. You can still cast a spell as a reaction on someone else's turn, after your turn ends (assuming you cast a bonus action spell on your turn).

The rule itself is simple. The consequences of the rule can feel counter-intuitive though.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

Sure you can. As long as they pushed you off on their turn and not your turn (for example, if you cast misty step and they had a readied action to shove you when you appeared next to them). Why would you think you couldn't?

On your turn. You can still cast a spell as a reaction on someone else's turn, after your turn ends (assuming you cast a bonus action spell on your turn).

The rule itself is simple. The consequences of the rule can feel counter-intuitive though.

Oh, no. Come back from the Dark Side. That's not the case.

Jeremy responded to my tweet. For some reason I can't pull up his response on the Twitter site, so I'll have to type it:

My question: Can you cast a spell as a bonus action, a cantrip as an action, and a spell as a reaction in the same round?

Jeremy: Casting a bonus action spell means no other spells that turn but a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.

Again, the use of "that turn" which is exactly the problem in my mind. It's really "that round" as best as I can understand. He continues to say "no other spells but cantrip." Further more, if the rule is "cantrip with a casting time of 1 action" then you can't ever use your reaction to cast a spell in this circumstance, even if it is a cantrip with a casting time of 1 reaction.

So I asked: Why fireball then feather fall, but not misty step then feather fall? There are no cantrips with a CT of reaction.

We'll see if he answers.

But no, the official rule is that once you cast a spell with a casting time of 1 bonus action, you've forgone the possibility of casting a spell with a reaction in that entire round.

 

[Caliban]

Oh, no. Come back from the Dark Side. That's not the case.

Jeremy responded to my tweet. For some reason I can't pull up his response on the Twitter site, so I'll have to type it:

My question: Can you cast a spell as a bonus action, a cantrip as an action, and a spell as a reaction in the same round?

Jeremy: Casting a bonus action spell means no other spells that turn but a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.

Again, the use of "that turn" which is exactly the problem in my mind. It's really "that round" as best as I can understand. He continues to say "no other spells but cantrip." Further more, if the rule is "cantrip with a casting time of 1 action" then you can't ever use your reaction to cast a spell in this circumstance, even if it is a cantrip with a casting time of 1 reaction.

So I asked: Why fireball then feather fall, but not misty step then feather fall? There are no cantrips with a CT of reaction.

We'll see if he answers.

But no, the official rule is that once you cast a spell with a casting time of 1 bonus action, you've forgone the possibility of casting a spell with a reaction in that entire round.

Nope. He said "that turn" (meaning the turn on which you cast the bonus action) and that's what he meant. You phrased your question poorly and he answered with the actual rule without bothering to clarify. He does that a lot.

And if you cast fireball or feather fall (i.e. any non-cantrip spell), you can't cast a bonus action spell that turn.

 

[SkidAce]

So the cleric cant cast Guiding Bolt and then drop a Healing Word on a buddy? Ooops.

 

[Caliban]

So the cleric cant cast Guiding Bolt and then drop a Healing Word on a buddy? Ooops.

Not by the normal rules, no. I know Matt Mercer on Critical Role has house ruled it to allow PC's to use a 1st or 2nd level spell slot as well as a cantrip for this very reason - he wants them to be able to do more stuff in a round, especially healing. (He also allows them to drink potions as a bonus action.)

 

[Ilbranteloth]

Yes.

Again, which is most likely?

That the rules thought it completely obvious that reactions are exceptions to things happening on turns to a degree it never mentions or explains the rule even once, and that each device tweet just happens to always have an alternative explanation...

...or that three guys on the Net initially misread a rule that truthfully IS wonky, but then couldn't admit their error and instead refuses to listen to reason, desperately misinterpreting Sage Advice and ignoring pretty obvious hints.

Not to mention they show the telltale signs: a focus on denying evidence rather than support for their own position.

This I leave up to each reader to decide.

But tell me this. If you have "cleave" (the part of GWM where you gain a bonus attack if you drop a foe) and you kill a goblin as a reaction on your turn, do you get your bonus attack?

By the conspiracy reading, the answer would be no, which is ridiculous.

That is:

Bob the Barbarian says "I'll chop anything I see, then walk around the corner". He readies an attack, then moves.

When he rounds the corner there's a goblin - his readied action triggers! He attacks! He hits! He kills the goblin!

Now, Bob doesn't get to "cleave" because he didn't drop the foe on his turn, since reactions aren't part of a turn.

Huh?

Just another nail in the coffin: when a desperate read of the rules to avoid an undesirable rules effect leads to absurd effects elsewhere.

The conclusion is clear - a reaction is always part of a turn (somebody's turn). If that turn happens to be your own turn, the rule against casting non-cantrip spells when you have cast a bonus action spell prevents you from casting a reaction spell (unless that reaction spell is a cantrip, which I believe there are none in the game).

Zapp

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

So I suppose I'm "one of the three guys" but I think you're wrong about the cleave thing...sort of. I'll clarify below.

I do object to your characterization of people being desperate conspirators and refusing to listen to reason. I spelled out my reasoning specifically so you and others could clarify where I'm wrong for me.

And my "agenda" is to understand the rules better. If you are correct, then I'd like to understand why. My reasoning being flawed is very different from deliberately attempting to cause dissent. I'm probably just not as smart as you. Regardless, I just didn't get it. It wasn't connecting for me.

Based on a more recent post from @Caliban (thanks!), I have a better understanding of where my confusion was.

It clarified where my reasoning was flawed: Because I thought that you and others were saying that "if you cast a spell as a bonus action, then you couldn't cast a spell as a reaction at all. Whether the reaction occurred on your turn or another person's turn."

I now understand that's not the case.

So yes, RAW would indicate that if you cast a spell as a bonus action, you can't cast a spell as a reaction if the reaction happens on your turn. But if the reaction happens on somebody else's turn, then you can cast a spell as a reaction.

Is that correct?

While in theory you could cast a cantrip as a reaction, the wording of the rule prevents that:
You can only cast a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
You can't cast a spell as a reaction (cantrip or otherwise) unless it has a casting time of 1 reaction.

Furthermore, no cantrips have a casting time of 1 reaction.

Not trying to be difficult, I really want to understand.

The conclusion is clear - a reaction is always part of a turn (somebody's turn). If that turn happens to be your own turn, the rule against casting non-cantrip spells when you have cast a bonus action spell prevents you from casting a reaction spell (unless that reaction spell is a cantrip, which I believe there are none in the game).

Zapp

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

It took me a moment, and had to look a few things up, but I don't think there's any rule (or text) in the game that states "part of" a turn. I had stated that a reaction isn't part of your turn, and why, but now that I look at it, that the game doesn't think that way.

The game uses the term "on your turn." This is actually important and clarifies things quite a bit (for me anyway, because when you interrupt somebody else's turn, your reaction isn't "part of their turn" but it's also not "part of your turn" since it didn't occur during your turn).

What it says is "on your turn."

This is what I gathered from the Sage Advice answer on Sneak Attack (which is also why I think your cleave example is wrong):

Can a rogue use Sneak Attack more than once per round? "Yes, but no more than once per turn. In combat, a round comprises the turns of the combatants (see the Player’s Handbook, p. 189). Many features in the game, such as Extra Attack, specify that they work only on your turn. The Sneak Attack description specifes that you can use the feature once per turn, but it’s not limited to your turn. The feature also doesn’t limit the number of times you can use it in a round.
This rule is relevant because you sometimes get a chance to use Sneak Attack on someone else’s turn. The most common way for this to happen is when a foe provokes an opportunity attack from you. If the requirements for Sneak Attack are met, your opportunity attack can benefit from that feature. Similarly, a fighter could use Commander’s Strike to grant you an attack on the ghter’s turn, and if the attack qualites, it can use Sneak Attack. Both of those options rely on your reaction, so you could do only one of them in a round.
Because of getting only one reaction per round, you’re unlikely to use Sneak Attack more than twice in a round: once with your action and once with your reaction."

So for the cleave example, if nobody else's turn started before you turned the corner, then the cleave works. But that's a vague and very situational example, quite similar to the vague, sometimes almost non-answers given by Jeremy.

So here's a different example:

The barbarian stands in a doorway and Readies their action to attack the first creature that comes in reach. Then on the goblin's turn, the goblins close to attack. The barbarian's reaction is triggered and can attack, but cannot use the cleave ability of their feat because the description of that ability starts with "On your turn...."

That is, they are specifically excluding the cleave ability from a reaction - probably to eliminate it's use in an opportunity attack, but it has the same effect here.

So oddly, the cleave feature of GWF is the exact opposite of "you can't cast a spell as a reaction on your turn if you've already cast a spell as a bonus action."

You can only use the cleave ability of GWF on your reaction if your reaction occurs on your turn.
You can only cast a spell on your reaction after casting a spell with a bonus action if the reaction occurs on somebody else's turn.

Did I finally get it?

If so, how about this one?

Would a 20th level fighter be able to use the Extra Attack feature for three attacks during their reaction if their reaction occurs on their turn?

In other words, could a fighter take 3 attacks for their action, then 3 more attacks with a second action using action surge, and 3 more attacks with their reaction, as long as the reaction occurred on their turn?

I'm not sure you can actually take the Attack action on a reaction, so I'm guessing no. But it ties into the example they used for Sneak Attack.