Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 9756532" data-attributes="member: 6779196">It doesn’t really require litigation. There are two potential interpretations here, both of which can pretty reasonably be arrived at from the text, and because this is the internet, people who have arrived at each of those different interpretations are trying to prove each other wrong, and that’s what requires litigation. In an actual gameplay context, the DM would either say “yes” or “no,” and in either case a player trying to dispute the ruling with the sorts of arguments we’re making here would be equally disruptive behavior.As to whether a “yes” is potentially unbalancing, it definitely isn’t. Given the choice between using your Action Surge to use the Attack Action (likely allowing multiple attacks, since you’re a Fighter), while being able to maintain your concentration on any active buff or damage over time spells, and keep your Reaction available for an Opportunity Attack, or to give all of that up for a chance to cast one spell, if the trigger occurs before the start of your next turn and you haven’t lost concentration by then… I don’t know about you, but it’s a pretty rare case where I would pick the latter option. And let’s not forget, this is only possible when the spell you want to cast comes from a magic item or race/class/feat feature that lets you cast a spell without a spell slot.</blockquote>