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

[Ruin Explorer]

It is all fun and games until the DM can do it back to you.

Makes my players think a bit on how the rules should be interpreted.

That's true in more symmetrical games, but D&D is profoundly asymmetrical.

It's bit like the old "We only have to be lucky once, you have to be lucky every time" deal.

The players have to win (almost) every battle if they expect to be alive, and have to shepherd their resources with care (assuming an attrition-heavy game).

Monsters and NPCs don't have a single care in the world and can blow absolutely every resource they have at the maximum possible rate for the one combat 99.9% of them are in. Any monster that can cast two fireballs/round is probably casting two fireballs per round every single round it's alive, if it can. They're always going flat out, because there's literally no reason not to. This is why a lot of monster abilities have things like dice-based refresh rolls rather than "X per day", and if you follow 5E's monster design you can see how that's only becoming more the case. To put it another day, to monsters and NPCs, every day is the legendary "5 minute work day".

It's a completely different game for each side. Furthermore, the monsters, particularly in 4E and 5E, are absolutely designed on this basis - i.e. that they're going to go absolutely flat out and blow everything they have, as fast as they can, in combat. If you play them any other way, they'll be less effective than designed - drastically so in some cases (which of course can be intentional on your part, but still).

There are very few rules which impact players and monsters equally, and this rule 100% is not one of them, because decreasingly few monsters (and it's going to drop sharply again after MM 2024, we know) even use "spells" - instead they largely use uniquely designed abilities which may be similar to spells, but aren't, and aren't limited in the same.

 

[GMMichael]

The players have to win (almost) every battle if they expect to be alive, and have to shepherd their resources with care (assuming an attrition-heavy game).

Whose assumption is this, and why is it required? The PCs could end a battle in a draw, flee, or avoid the battle in the first place. Careful use of resources is granted.

Monsters and NPCs don't have a single care in the world and can blow absolutely every resource they have at the maximum possible rate for the one combat 99.9% of them are in. Any monster that can cast two fireballs/round is probably casting two fireballs per round every single round it's alive, if it can. They're always going flat out, because there's literally no reason not to.

Why don't NPCs (or monsters, in 6e) have a care in the world? And what's so literal about it?

I think the "blow every resource" part is accurate, though: if your life is at stake, why hold back?

This is why a lot of monster abilities have things like dice-based refresh rolls rather than "X per day", and if you follow 5E's monster design you can see how that's only becoming more the case. To put it another day, to monsters and NPCs, every day is the legendary "5 minute work day".

Another reason to have dice refresh instead of X-per-day is that it's much easier for a GM to track dice refresh than X-per-day. I definitely don't have a list of all NPCs in an area, ticking off their X-per-day resources as the day wears on. Once an encounter begins, though, that's when I want to keep track.

. . . If you play them any other way, they'll be less effective than designed - drastically so in some cases (which of course can be intentional on your part, but still).

Some NPCs might have other commitments in store for which they need to save resources. Like the next party of "adventurers" that's rumored to be visiting, or the wrath of their angry BBEG. Some NPCs might not be short-sighted. Some might be guided (coerced) by a persnickety god, and therefore have a holy agenda to meet (that doesn't involve unloading on everyone). The animalistic NPCs though: they'll likely burn it all, and hide until they've recovered.

Not trying to pick on you, by the way - but I saw the "everything is life-or-death" argument in an earlier post or two, and had to start somewhere.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Whose assumption is this, and why is it required? The PCs could end a battle in a draw, flee, or avoid the battle in the first place. Careful use of resources is granted.


Why don't NPCs (or monsters, in 6e) have a care in the world? And what's so literal about it?

I think the "blow every resource" part is accurate, though: if your life is at stake, why hold back?


Another reason to have dice refresh instead of X-per-day is that it's much easier for a GM to track dice refresh than X-per-day. I definitely don't have a list of all NPCs in an area, ticking off their X-per-day resources as the day wears on. Once an encounter begins, though, that's when I want to keep track.


Some NPCs might have other commitments in store for which they need to save resources. Like the next party of "adventurers" that's rumored to be visiting, or the wrath of their angry BBEG. Some NPCs might not be short-sighted. Some might be guided (coerced) by a persnickety god, and therefore have a holy agenda to meet (that doesn't involve unloading on everyone). The animalistic NPCs though: they'll likely burn it all, and hide until they've recovered.

Not trying to pick on you, by the way - but I saw the "everything is life-or-death" argument in an earlier post or two, and had to start somewhere.

With respect, I think this is a lot of very idle and half-hearted semi-rhetorical question asking, and I don't think there's anything actually warranting a response. Maybe that's intended though!

 

[Swarmkeeper]

My takeaways:

• Much easier for players to comprehend
• If a spellcaster casts a spell on their turn that uses a spell slot, reaction spells can only be used on other creatures' turns.
• Fey-Touched (and any other feats or abilities that grant bonus action spells that do not expend a spell slot) gains a bit of a boost
• On turn Counterspell chains are justly kiboshed (are these truly even a thing? probably at some outlier tables, IG)

 

[Ashrym]

I wouldn't call it confusing, but the 2024 rules make a big difference. Look at the glamour bard, for example.

Under 2014 rules using mantle of majesty to cast command as a bonus action precludes casting anything but a cantrip using the action. Under 2024 rules this is no longer the case because command isn't using a slot.

One spell with a slot per turn seems simple enough to remember, and it's a bump up for every ability that casts a spell without a slot.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The whole point of these rules was always just to stop players from casting two Fireballs in a single turn-- using whatever power-gaming rules shenannagins they came up with in order to try.

In 2024, getting to cast two fireballs on the same turn isn't TOO hard. You just need to be a thief with a necklace of fireballs. Fast Hands lets you use the Magic action as a bonus action, so you use that bonus action to chuck a bead from the necklace...and then do it again with your action.

Pew pew, boom boom.

The necklace of fireballs works around most limitations since you don't actually cast a spell from it. It just produces an effect that is like a spell. So it doesn't need to respect spellcasting limitations.

FWIW, you could also be a sorcerer who uses Quicken Spell to cast Fireball and then also use a fireball from a necklace of fireballs - potentially more effective, since you can upscale your fireball, if you want. But a little less funny, because you don't expect your rogue to become your fireball artillery because of a serendipitous rules interaction.

Pretty niche, I guess, and consumes a lot of a rare magic item, but probably worth the 4k gp when you get the chance if you're a thief or a sorc...

 

[Paul Farquhar]

NPCs spamming multiple fireballs per turn is itself an unintended consequence of a rule change. In this case the removal of prepared spellcasting. A prepared caster probably only has one fireball, even if they know multiple third level spells.

 

[Nefermandias]

Yeah, I was already typing furiously to correct that madness. Cantrips are officially level 0 spells.

Thank you!

 

[GMMichael]

NPCs spamming multiple fireballs per turn is itself an unintended consequence of a rule change. In this case the removal of prepared spellcasting. A prepared caster probably only has one fireball, even if they know multiple third level spells.

You might want to take another look at this (or correct me). "Prepared" now means "known," so there's no longer such thing as having one fireball prepared. If you have a spell prepared and the right spell slot(s), you can cast it.

 

[Xetheral]

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.

That never was a problem for me--outdoors it was usually straightforward to get out of range of potential counterspellers, and indoors it was usually straightforward to break line of sight to the counterspellers by going around a corner. As long as you could get it down to only one PC counterspeller left in range/LOS, the party couldn't dogpile counterspells.

And if the party was specifically trying to limit an NPC spellcaster's ability to manuever in order to be able to counterspell them, great! At that point a fight already had multiple levels of tactics and coordination going on, and so if the party did succeed at shutting down an enemy caster, I considered it well-earned.

And to make sure the same anti-spellcasting tactics don't become stale, there are plenty of other ways to complicate the counterspellijg situation with mook spellcasters making good use of (e.g.) Fog Cloud, Invisibility, Blindness/Deafness, and Pyrotechnics to deny PC counterspellers sight of the primary caster while still leaving some targets visible. And non-spellcasting mooks can help by trying to eat up the PCs' reactions or to force them out of counterspelling position.