D&D (2024) Two Spells, One Turn Confusion Never Dies

[Distracted DM]

Once I personally understood the 2014 action+bonus action spell rule, I could remind my players of it.
Do I have to remind them of it? Yes, pretty frequently.
Do I think that saying "one magic action per turn" will help players remember it better? I don't think so- because I would tell the players "one leveled spell per turn" and they still wouldn't remember, even if that was technically incorrect.

 

[DEFCON 1]

So what's the solution? The DM could basically never use a normal spellcaster as an antagonist, they never got a spell off. It directly impacted the stories she could tell.

Cheat.

Or to be less facitious... if it was me and I was DMing that table of yours where the players would line up and just counterspell and counterspell counterspell everything under the sun... I'd just make a bunch of monsters who used magic that weren't spells. I'm the DM... I can make monsters have whatever abilities I want-- including "special" spellcaster NPCs that have spells that can't be counterspelled on occasion (if having a spellcaster NPC be a legitimate story threat was something I thought was actually necessary.)

But of course... that's just me and my playstyle. Other tables will have to make their own decisions and house rules as they see fit. WotC can only always be able to account for a small select of us with how they write their rules, so everyone else will need to make their own judgements and choices and changes.

 

[ezo]

I think it is a problem because it's such a large gain to caster, specifically Sorcerer power over all other classes. You can basically end some encounters round one.

So, that is what you are good at then? Most encounters won't be so nicely set up for this to work IME.

That's not so though, because you burn through a relatively small amount of resources to prevent the party using up a ton of resources. Sure, that individual character might be weaker later on, but the overall party resource savings from completely devastating alpha strikes shouldn't be overlooked.

Meh. I see it as more of a wash than anything. You use more of your power to the better of others, or they use a bit more of theirs to your betterment.

And of course what is good for the PCs is good for the bad guys. Since opponents aren't playing an attrition game like PCs, it weighs more in their favor IMO.

Two fireballs is 2x 3rd level slots and 2 (not 3, unless it increased in 2024) Sorcery points, which sure, is significant. But if the other characters are saved a bunch of spell slots and other daily or even significant short rest resources, it's a massive win overall. Particularly in attrition-heavy scenarios, oddly enough - it's actually much more significant there than in the "5 minute work day", where you'll regain all the resources for the party anyway.

Yeah, I was thinking of Twinned Spell, not Quicken--which is only 2 SP.

As for 5MWD, I don't do those and encourage other DMs not to do them, either. Rests come when they come, so sometimes it might happen, but when attrition is going to play a role, rests typically aren't possible.

I hope that makes sense, I can try and explain better - but powerful alpha strikes very often are big resource savers and help most in attrition-heavy campaigns (this is also true in videogames, note, and BG3 helps to illustrate it).

You've explained your position very well, I just don't agree that it illustrates any sort of real problem to the game. I've never played any BG games, but I know such games rarely play by the rules of the RPGs they mirror.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Once I personally understood the 2014 action+bonus action spell rule, I could remind my players of it.
Do I have to remind them of it? Yes, pretty frequently.
Do I think that saying "one magic action per turn" will help players remember it better? I don't think so- because I would tell the players "one leveled spell per turn" and they still wouldn't remember, even if that was technically incorrect.

Yeah, that's the thing... many players will always come up with ideas in the moment of playing where doing something "off-rule" would not only make a lot of sense, but also be "really cool" to see happen. They aren't trying to purposefully "break the rules" (as oftentimes they might not even be thinking about what the rules are to pull off this crazy idea of theirs)... but merely that it'd be an awesome potential solution to their party's current situation or predicament. And I don't fault them for coming up with stuff like that, nor that they've forgotten what would technically be "allowed" by the rules.

It's a simply fact that sometimes a player's Rule of Cool ideas jump up to trump their Rule As Written thoughts. And we DMs have to then make our judgement calls on it.

 

[Oofta]

Cheat.

Or to be less facitious... if it was me and I was DMing that table of yours where the players would line up and just counterspell and counterspell counterspell everything under the sun... I'd just make a bunch of monsters who used magic that weren't spells. I'm the DM... I can make monsters have whatever abilities I want-- including "special" spellcaster NPCs that have spells that can't be counterspelled on occasion (if having a spellcaster NPC be a legitimate story threat was something I thought was actually necessary.)

But of course... that's just me and my playstyle. Other tables will have to make their own decisions and house rules as they see fit. WotC can only always be able to account for a small select of us with how they write their rules, so everyone else will need to make their own judgements and choices and changes.

I guess I don't think escalation is generally the best option. I'd rather just talk it over with the players and come to an agreement.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I guess I don't think escalation is generally the best option. I'd rather just talk it over with the players and come to an agreement.

Oh, of course. Talking is always #1.

But usually though I assume that when someone posts "My players have been doing X and it's become a problem!" that the talking phase has already taken place, and now they've moved onto phase 2... which is asking a bunch of us weirdos on EN World (who wouldn't all be able agree on how a rule should be adjudicated if our lives depended on it, LOL) to come up with a workable solution! Good luck with that! Heh heh!

 

[beaumontsebos]

Yes they took something that was confusing and made it even more confusing.

I think the new rule itself is less confusing for me. You get to use only one spell slot per turn. The only question you need to ask is "Does this use a spell slot?"

The confusion only came because of a situation in my group. We are still using the 2014 PHB. One of my players used Misty Step and then used a Wand of Lightning Bolts. I allowed it in the heat of the moment, but later found out that this would not have been allowed per the 2014 rules. Out of curiosity I checked the 2024 PHB to see if they tried to clarify the rule and found they did. But the clarification changed how the original 2014 rule worked.

Which also makes me wonder... is the new rule how they intended it to work all this time? Were the previous official explanations of the 2014 rule simply to gloss over a poorly written rule?

In any event, I like the new rule better. It'll be nice to switch over to the 2024 rule set eventually.

 

[mamba]

It's pretty clear. One spell slot per turn. But, it's not, because you don't expend spell slots - you expend spells. A spell "fits" into a slot

yes, so if you cast a level 2 spell, leveled up to 3, you have expended a level 3 spell slot and that is it for your turn, no more spell slots to use. The wording is pretty clear on that

Yeah, that's useless now, because every spell has a level.

what level is a cantrip?

 

[beaumontsebos]

A caster can no longer 'Counterspell', with a spell slot, the 'Counterspell' that targets their leveled spell cast with a spell slot, since they would then be using two spell slots per turn.

A character who casts a spell with a slot and then falls into a pit trap on their movement can no longer cast 'Feather Fall' to stop the falling damage, as that would be two spell slots per turn. An almost identical character with the Magic Initiate Feat can cast 'Feather Fall' if that is what they picked as their daily slotless Level one spell.

Never even thought of this. I like the 2024 rule better and better.

 

[DEFCON 1]

what level is a cantrip?

Cue the 'Level 0'! responders... despite the fact that they are only called that colloquially and not actually as part of the game rules.