D&D 5E Common rules mistakes

[Nebulous]

I wonder if the biggest reason behind the wording in the DMG is to give a bit of a boon to spellcasters when they cast a spell? By making your Readied action occur after the triggering Action, you can no longer shoot a caster as he casts a spell, potentially ruining it. This is important to know, as there could be times a DM (one playing particularly savvy foes), might have five archers Ready actions to shoot the spellcaster if he casts a spell, which would force five separate Concentration checks. Now, the caster would complete the spell, then five arrows would come his way. Equally scary, but perhaps less frustrating?

That's my guess, to make it harder to disrupt spellcasters. I'm really glad I read this thread, it's been helpful.

 

[miniaturehoarder]

Now, the caster would complete the spell, then five arrows would come his way. Equally scary, but perhaps less frustrating?

It's one of the main reasons justifying the Save at the end of each turn effects. Used to be if magic shut you down you STAYED shut down until more magic was used to get you active. That created a imperative to "kill the wizard". Now while a caster can still devastate lots of foes, but at least the caster isn't guaranteed of making you do nothing for the rest of the fight on a single failed save.

 

[Pvt. Winslow]

It's one of the main reasons justifying the Save at the end of each turn effects. Used to be if magic shut you down you STAYED shut down until more magic was used to get you active. That created a imperative to "kill the wizard". Now while a caster can still devastate lots of foes, but at least the caster isn't guaranteed of making you do nothing for the rest of the fight on a single failed save.

Ah, you mean in exchange for it being harder to disrupt a caster initially, 5E has made it easier to recover from harmful effects without outside aid? If that's the case, I definitely agree. I have heard some people complain about the ease with which characters and monsters are able to recover from these effects, however. It's a new paradigm that we're all still getting used to. As you said, it used to be that when a spell took hold, you could be reasonably sure you'd just affected a target for a good length of time. Now, many spells are quite a bit more powerful than before, but they only last a fraction of the time (usually only a single round or two). This means we need to re-calibrate our expectations of how magic impacts a fight. Instead of being crippled all fight long, but still capable of action, nowadays many spells make it so you're out of commission for a round or two, unable to do anything, but you recover from it before a fight ends.

It remains to see how the community as a whole will come to feel about the change as we get further into 5E.

 

[DaveDash]

Also this is why I think you can only use one attack (not Extra attacks) on a readied action:

The game would boil down to a Mexican stand-off otherwise, because if you ever had an encounter where foes started outside of your movement range, it just makes more sense to ready an action and wait for them. They do the same. You then end up in a silly situation where no one wants to move. This is what happened a lot in 3rd edition.

They want to encourage you to engage in combat, and not hide around corners or everyone wait with readied actions. They also don't want to reward you if you're out of position by allowing you to be as effective.

 

[Sage Genesis]

Also this is why I think you can only use one attack (not Extra attacks) on a readied action:

The game would boil down to a Mexican stand-off otherwise, because if you ever had an encounter where foes started outside of your movement range, it just makes more sense to ready an action and wait for them. They do the same. You then end up in a silly situation where no one wants to move. This is what happened a lot in 3rd edition.

They want to encourage you to engage in combat, and not hide around corners or everyone wait with readied actions. They also don't want to reward you if you're out of position by allowing you to be as effective.

Not too sure about that. Note that the Multiattack action (which loads and loads of monsters have, including NPCs) doesn't have this on-your-turn limitation and can be fully used on a Readied Action.

 

[Paraxis]

Not too sure about that. Note that the Multiattack action (which loads and loads of monsters have, including NPCs) doesn't have this on-your-turn limitation and can be fully used on a Readied Action.

MM pg 12.

MULTIATTACK
A creature that can make multiple attacks on its turn has the Multiattack ability.A creature can't use Multiattack when making an opportunity attack, which must be a single melee attack.

The general description of Multiattack has the "on it's turn" wording so all the instances throughout the book don't need it.

 

[DaveDash]

Not too sure about that. Note that the Multiattack action (which loads and loads of monsters have, including NPCs) doesn't have this on-your-turn limitation and can be fully used on a Readied Action.

Nope. See Paraxis's quote.

ALL readied actions have this same constraint in relation to multi-attacks and extra attacks. It's quite deliberate.

Did you play 3E? It was a delay/readied action bonanza for martial characters/melee monsters.

 

[KarinsDad]

I wonder if the biggest reason behind the wording in the DMG is to give a bit of a boon to spellcasters when they cast a spell? By making your Readied action occur after the triggering Action, you can no longer shoot a caster as he casts a spell, potentially ruining it. This is important to know, as there could be times a DM (one playing particularly savvy foes), might have five archers Ready actions to shoot the spellcaster if he casts a spell, which would force five separate Concentration checks. Now, the caster would complete the spell, then five arrows would come his way. Equally scary, but perhaps less frustrating?

From what I can tell, this would rarely be an advantage for the wizard. I don't have my PHB in front of me, but I am unaware of any non-concentration spells getting disrupted. So, if a concentration spell goes off, very few of them actually adversely still affect the PC if the concentration is broken. For example, Hold Person just stops paralyzing the foe. Web doesn't even do anything until the start of the foes turn, so no difference there. Mordenkainen’s Sword and Witch Bolt are probably exceptions (since they would do damage right away), but the number of spells affected by losing concentration before casting as opposed to after casting is probably a very low number. Probably concentration spells that do damage right away are the main ones.

 

[Superking]

Drinking from a tankard is considered part of interacting with an object during your movement, but drinking a potion requires an action to do.

 

[Thyrwyn]

So THAT'S why Dwarves keep their potions in tankards!... I always wondered - they were meta-gaming