D&D 5E Mage Slayer feat, order of actions and concentration.

[Ruin Explorer]

Nice to see I am not alone in realizing this.

One of the PCs in a group I run for has it - even against the caster-heavy stuff I run, it's shockingly not great - even with me running it that the reaction occurs first! That makes it just about okay.

 

[Nikosandros]

Yeah though it's worth noting that interpretation is imho dumb as hell because it makes Mage Slayer almost completely worthless, and it's already and weak and very situational.

Yeah, that is the official stance, but IMO makes the feat nearly worthless.

So, I go with what makes sense logically.

I actually agree

 

[Gammadoodler]

The irony of it is that it is a way better feat for casters to take.

Target spellcaster with a damaging AoE.

If they don't save, they get to eat spike damage that is typically more than a single attack can inflict and save at disadvantage

If they do save, they still take half damage and still get to make a concentration check with disadvantage.

Did I mention spellcasters can hold concentration on spells that can potentially do damage every round, sometimes multiple times a turn (hello Spike Growth).

The melee martial use case and reaction is the sexy sounding part of it, but it's mostly inconsequential (as usual).

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

I will also add that for a feat called "Mage Slayer", something like:

If you interrupt the caster's spell, the caster takes psychic damage equal to the spell's level.

would be cool.

I like....

"If you interrupt the caster's spell, the caster must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or be stunned until the end of your next turn."

Probably overpowered, but fun.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I like....

"If you interrupt the caster's spell, the caster must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or be stunned until the end of your next turn."

Probably overpowered, but fun.

Yeah, stunned would be a bit too powerful IMO but it still shows the spirit of what the feat should be...

 

[DeviousQuail]

#3 make it advantage on saves AND disadvantage on the caster's attack roll. Now, it helps your defense in all cases.

I think the caster would still have disadvantage on a ranged spell attack roll due to being within 5ft. Making it disadvantage on all spell attack rolls within 5ft would still be nice against vampiric touch, shocking grasp, inflict wounds, etc. How that rule would interact with a spell like Bigby's Hand gets a little weird though.

 

[J-H]

I have houseruled it to allow the attack during casting, and forcing a Concentration check to avoid losing the spell when hit.

 

[the Jester]

Reactions interrupt other actions, so I would say the reaction happens before spells are even completed.

That's incorrect. Unless a reaction specifically states that it interrupts the trigger, such as shield, it resolves after the trigger.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That's incorrect. Unless a reaction specifically states that it interrupts the trigger, such as shield, it resolves after the trigger.

I know, I meant it was just how we rule the feat works. Actually how we rule MOST reactions work.... as IMO reactions, due to their very nature and how they work in 5E, should INTERRUPT the action.

For example, shield bumps your AC.

But it is in response to being "HIT", so you've already been hit by a successful attack and yet the bump to AC can turn it into a miss after the fact? That really doesn't make sense.

Many other reactions in 5E don't make sense if the reaction "action" occurs AFTER the trigger, they really are interrupting it, like shield, by changing the narrative.

It is a failure of the devs in 5E to say reactions don't interrupt the other action.

 

[the Jester]

I know, I meant it was just how we rule the feat works. Actually how we rule MOST reactions work.... as IMO reactions, due to their very nature and how they work in 5E, should INTERRUPT the action.

I feel like shield is one of the few examples where it should be labeled an interrupt. For the most part, it hasn't seemed to hurt anything that the trigger resolves first. It does mean that you can't just decide to interrupt anything with a readied action, but I like that.