D&D 5E (2024) Using Action Surge to cast spells in 2024

[pemerton]

The freedom of an RPG can never be perfectly be descibed by a set of rules.

At some point you have to accept that people will find loopholes or edge cases.

I think this very much depends on the RPG in question.

D&D, increasingly over the past 25 years but going all the way back to its origins if one thinks about spell/magic item interactions, approaches action resolution by reference to all sorts of intricate individual components that must be integrated in order to create the totality of the system's action resolution rules.

But not all RPGs rules are set out in this fashion. Those RPGs don't create edge cases in the way that D&D does.

Honestly, that line "as part of the same action" just strikes me as damn odd wording.

Why not: "As a Magic Action, you may cast any Cleric spell of 5th-level or lower with a casting time other than a Reaction, without requiring any V, S, or M components"?

Interesting question!

Flavour text: You can call on your deity or pantheon to intervene on your behalf.

Actual rules text: As a Magic action, choose any Cleric spell of level 5 or lower that doesn’t require a Reaction to cast. As part of the same action, you cast that spell without expending a spell slot or needing Material components.

Alternative rules text: As a Magic action, you cast any Cleric spell of level 5 or lower that has a casting time other than a Reaction, without expending a spell slot or needing material components.​

The difference I see is that the actual text, as written, makes the primary action the choosing of the spell, which is to say - in the fiction - the calling on the deity/pantheon. For some tables, this then opens the door to the GM adjudicating that action before going on to consider the details of the spell that is cast. It establishes a difference between this "petitioning" style of spell casting, and a cleric's ordinary spell casting that allows them "to cast spells through prayer and meditation".

Presumably at some tables this is also the "solution" to the Hallow "problem".

I once sat down to join a friend's 2e game. I chose to play a Bard. We're in a fight and I decide to cast magic missile, only for the table to groan. It turned out that the DM "interpreted" the area of the spell (one or more missiles in a 10' cube) as meaning each missile affected all creatures in a 10' cube, causing me to blast my own party with damage for daring to strike an enemy they were in melee with. That's something I would have liked explained to me beforehand, lol.

This sort of thing always strikes me as just utterly bizarre. But on the other hand provides a reminder that some of the ridiculous things I've seen aren't total outliers.

 

[pemerton]

Given that nothing about the text indicates that Ready allows you to take a second action on your turn

Doesn't it?

Ready says:

You take the Ready action to wait for a particular circumstance before you act. To do so, you take this action on your turn, which lets you act by taking a Reaction before the start of your next turn.

First, you decide what perceivable circumstance will trigger your Reaction. Then, you choose the action you will take in response to that trigger, or you choose to move up to your Speed in response to it. Examples include “If the cultist steps on the trapdoor, I’ll pull the lever that opens it,” and “If the zombie steps next to me, I move away.”

When the trigger occurs, you can either take your Reaction right after the trigger finishes or ignore the trigger.

When you Ready a spell, you cast it as normal (expending any resources used to cast it) but hold its energy, which you release with your Reaction when the trigger occurs. To be readied, a spell must have a casting time of an action, and holding on to the spell’s magic requires Concentration, which you can maintain up to the start of your next turn. If your Concentration is broken, the spell dissipates without taking effect.​

Reading the first three paragraphs, here is what I see:

*This action - the Ready action - lets you (i) wait and thereby (ii) take a Reaction. [1st para]

*The Reaction is triggered by circumstances that you decide on. [2nd para, 1st sentence]

*What you will do when the trigger occurs is chosen by you when you wait, not when you respond. [2nd para, 2nd sentence]

*When the trigger occurs, you get a choice whether or not to take your Reaction. [3rd para]

*If you choose to take your reaction, then you take an action, or your move, in response to that trigger. [2nd para, 2nd sentence] - So the thing that you do in response to your trigger might be both a Reaction and an action.​

So far, two relevant things have been established: that the thing you do when the trigger occurs might be an action; and thus that a reaction can, sometimes, also be an action.

The final paragraph on readying a spell introduces additional rules and complications around that particular choice;

*You can only ready a spell with a casting time of 1 action. [2nd sentence]

*You cast the spell as normal. [1st sentence]

*You hold the spell's energy, which requires concentration. [1st and 2nd sentences]

*When the trigger occurs, you release the spell's energy - that is, the spell takes effect. [1st sentence]​

Now, casting a spell is clearly not movement. It is an action. So, when does the readied action occur? The normal rule is that the readied action occurs in response to the trigger - thus why there is an action that is also a reaction.

But the special rules for readying a spell tell us that the spell is cast as normal - so it seems that the readied action occurs when the ready action is performed. And what is the action used to cast a spell with a casting time of 1 Action? It is the Magic action (as per the rules for Casting Times).

I don't think the argument I've just presented is knock-down: interpretive arguments rarely are. But I think my argument follows the standard canons of interpretation: I have given every word and phrase in the rules some work to do; I have interpreted the rules for Readying in their overall context, which includes the rule for Casting Times; and I have preserved rather than contradicted the implication generated by the general rules for Readying, that as well as the Ready action itself, and the Reaction, there is another action that occurs - the readied action.

Whereas the alternative interpretation (i) is not fully consistent with the rules for Casting Times, as it requires treating the failure of those rules to mention the Ready action as a gap rather than a deliberate and meaningful omissions, and (ii) generates a departure from the general rules for readying an action, as it does not identify an action that is performed in addition to the Ready action itself, and the Reaction.

This is why I tend to agree with @mamba.

 

[Charlaquin]

Doesn't it?

Ready says:

You take the Ready action to wait for a particular circumstance before you act. To do so, you take this action on your turn, which lets you act by taking a Reaction before the start of your next turn.​

​

First, you decide what perceivable circumstance will trigger your Reaction. Then, you choose the action you will take in response to that trigger, or you choose to move up to your Speed in response to it. Examples include “If the cultist steps on the trapdoor, I’ll pull the lever that opens it,” and “If the zombie steps next to me, I move away.”​

​

When the trigger occurs, you can either take your Reaction right after the trigger finishes or ignore the trigger.​

​

When you Ready a spell, you cast it as normal (expending any resources used to cast it) but hold its energy, which you release with your Reaction when the trigger occurs. To be readied, a spell must have a casting time of an action, and holding on to the spell’s magic requires Concentration, which you can maintain up to the start of your next turn. If your Concentration is broken, the spell dissipates without taking effect.​

Reading the first three paragraphs, here is what I see:

*This action - the Ready action - lets you (i) wait and thereby (ii) take a Reaction. [1st para]​

​

*The Reaction is triggered by circumstances that you decide on. [2nd para, 1st sentence]​

​

*What you will do when the trigger occurs is chosen by you when you wait, not when you respond. [2nd para, 2nd sentence]​

​

*When the trigger occurs, you get a choice whether or not to take your Reaction. [3rd para]​

​

*If you choose to take your reaction, then you take an action, or your move, in response to that trigger. [2nd para, 2nd sentence] - So the thing that you do in response to your trigger might be both a Reaction and an action.​

So far, two relevant things have been established: that the thing you do when the trigger occurs might be an action; and thus that a reaction can, sometimes, also be an action.

The final paragraph on readying a spell introduces additional rules and complications around that particular choice;

*You can only ready a spell with a casting time of 1 action. [2nd sentence]​

​

*You cast the spell as normal. [1st sentence]​

​

*You hold the spell's energy, which requires concentration. [1st and 2nd sentences]​

​

*When the trigger occurs, you release the spell's energy - that is, the spell takes effect. [1st sentence]​

With you so far.

Now, casting a spell is clearly not movement. It is an action. So, when does the readied action occur? The normal rule is that the readied action occurs in response to the trigger - thus why there is an action that is also a reaction.

Well, in this case, what you’re Readying is releasing a spell. Again, the text of the Ready Action clearly lays out how this works, in specific exception to how you Ready things other than casting a spell.

But the special rules for readying a spell tell us that the spell is cast as normal - so it seems that the readied action occurs when the ready action is performed.

Yes, I understand that your interpretation relies on “cast the spell as normal” meaning “cast the spell using the Magic Action.” But this interpretation also involves you using two Actions on your turn, and you don’t have two Actions to spend. Short of Action Surge of course, but I doubt the intent is for Readying a spell to require use of Action Surge. Even if it did, that would be impossible in 2024, since Action Surge now prevents use of the Magic Action. Whereas my interpretation still makes sense of “cast as normal,” as it would still be necessary to specify that you must spend the resources the Magic Action would normally require you to spend to cast the spell.

And what is the action used to cast a spell with a casting time of 1 Action? It is the Magic action (as per the rules for Casting Times).

Except in the specific case that you’ve used your one action a turn to perform the Ready Action, which then instructed you to cast a spell with a casting time of 1 Action as part of its effect. Clearly in that case the 1 Action can only have been the Ready Action.

I don't think the argument I've just presented is knock-down: interpretive arguments rarely are. But I think my argument follows the standard canons of interpretation: I have given every word and phrase in the rules some work to do; I have interpreted the rules for Readying in their overall context, which includes the rule for Casting Times; and I have preserved rather than contradicted the implication generated by the general rules for Readying, that as well as the Ready action itself, and the Reaction, there is another action that occurs - the readied action.

Whereas the alternative interpretation (i) is not fully consistent with the rules for Casting Times, as it requires treating the failure of those rules to mention the Ready action as a gap rather than a deliberate and meaningful omissions, and (ii) generates a departure from the general rules for readying an action, as it does not identify an action that is performed in addition to the Ready action itself, and the Reaction.

This is why I tend to agree with @mamba.

Why does being fully consistent with the tilts for casting times matter? Specific beats general.

 

[Seramus]

Sure, but what it prevents from happening is the Magic Action. And the Ready Action is not the Magic Action. Granted, it can produce similar effects (e.g. casting spells), but not on your turn, at an additional resource cost (a Reaction and Concentration), and usually not if you’ve already cast a spell that turn, due to the one spell slot per turn rule. So, the fact that it doesn’t prevent the highly specific use case of casting a spell with a magic item, as a Reaction, later in the round… just doesn’t even strike me as some sort of exploit. It’s a completely different thing at that point than what the new wording prevents, and a much less action economy efficient thing at that.

Oh, to be clear I absolutely believe your position is a valid interpretation of RAW. It just feels like a bad faith interpretation of RAI. But I'm the furthest thing from the fun police. I would have also rewarded my player for the clever interpretation at the table and let them do it, then discussed it after the game. It's really not even powerful - holding a non-cantrip spell almost never goes well unless the DM hand waves the one round limit and allows the caster to stretch it out for a full minute or two.

But it definitely doesn't seem like RAI to me, which got me thinking about people who believe something is not RAI but choose to follow RAW instead. Like the old Crawford Invisibility thing.

 

[Charlaquin]

Oh, to be clear I absolutely believe your position is a valid interpretation of RAW. It just feels like a bad faith interpretation of RAI. But I'm the furthest thing from the fun police. I would have also rewarded my player for the clever interpretation at the table and let them do it, then discussed it after the game. It's really not even powerful - holding a non-cantrip spell almost never goes well unless the DM hand waves the one round limit and allows the caster to stretch it out for a full minute or two.

I’m not sure bad faith means what you think it means. Bad faith is when you’re arguing for a position you don’t genuinely hold, for some ulterior motive. Usually a rhetorical one, but in this case it would be to gain some in-game advantage. As I am not a player in @ECMO3 ‘s game, I don’t stand to gain anything from this interpretation. Even if I was, I’m on record saying I don’t even think it would be a very good move. This is just genuinely how I think the designers meant for it to work, based on the fact that it seems like both the most straightforward reading, and would also be easy to word differently if it wasn’t intended. If “cast as normal” is supposed to mean “cast with the Magic Action,” it could easily just say that instead. If Ready isn’t supposed to be an action, it could easily just be listed after the actions under a header like “Readying an Action,” start with something like “rather than take an Action on your turn, you can Ready an Action to take later using your Reaction by…” and then leaving the text of the current Ready Action otherwise the same. This is a very easily fixable “problem” if it is indeed a problem at all, which leads me to believe it probably isn’t. It’s probably either intended, or at worst not enough of an issue for them to care to fix.

But it definitely doesn't seem like RAI to me, which got me thinking about people who believe something is not RAI but choose to follow RAW instead. Like the old Crawford Invisibility thing.

What about it makes it seem so obviously not RAI to you? You seem to agree with me that it’s not game-breaking and in most situations probably just bad. Is it just an intuitive dislike of interpretations that rely on specific wording?

 

[Maxperson]

No it is not. According to youi I am Readying the Magic action so therefore:

1. I Ready the Magic action on my turn specifying the trigger

2. That Magic action occurs when the trigger happens, it has not occured yet when I Ready and may not occur at all

3. I cast a spell on my turn at the same time I Ready

If those 3 things are true then as a point of fact I cast the spell without using the Magic action and if I use my Reaction for something else or the trigger never happens then I cast it without ever using a Magic action.

If you think that's what I said, you need to go back and re-read. You're missing quite a bit.

 

[Seramus]

I’m not sure bad faith means what you think it means. Bad faith is when you’re arguing for a position you don’t genuinely hold, for some ulterior motive. Usually a rhetorical one, but in this case it would be to gain some in-game advantage. As I am not a player in @ECMO3 ‘s game, I don’t stand to gain anything from this interpretation.

I was speaking generally, in the sense that it seems against the intended purpose of the new limitation imposed on Action Surge. Not you specifically, since you said you believe it IS the intention of the designers (and you've always been an honest and cool person to my knowledge).

What about it makes it seem so obviously not RAI to you? You seem to agree with me that it’s not game-breaking and in most situations probably just bad. Is it just an intuitive dislike of interpretations that rely on specific wording?

I've done freelancing work and been in the group chats of devs and editors as they look over my work and the work of my peers, and seen them make errors like this all the time. Changes intended to add clarity, but introducing an unintended ripple. This looks exactly like the kind of thing done with the intention of adding clarity. I would bet actual money they didn't think about Readied Actions when they added the limitation to Action Surge. A playtester might have even mentioned it, but it got lost in the weeds.

Buuuut, there's no way to be sure. I could be completely wrong. It seems like a perfectly valid interpretation of RAW, and isn't at all overpowered, so it's not hurting anyone even if my belief about it being simply overlooked is correct.

 

[Maxperson]

No I am asking you for the specific language that lets me use two actions on my turn if one is the Ready action and you have not provided it yet.

Look at post #433. That's what the language looks like when the spell is part of the other action. Ready Action fails to have that language.