Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Retros_x" data-source="post: 9757214" data-attributes="member: 7033171">I think its wild that people still discuss this RAI. Its clearly stated in action surge that it is not intented to use magic. This whole reaction thing clearly is not in good faith and tries to circumvent that - but as multiple people pointed out: Even the ready-action phrasing is not clearly supporting  a spell cast without restrictions.All together its clear to me RAI and debatable RAW this is not a valid turn.I get flashbacks from the stealth discussion. Finding exploits is one thing, but then trying to claim that this exploit is the actual RAI... why? Its ok, you can do at your table whatever you want, why do you want to persuade other people on the internet that this ruling is not against the intented rules interpretation?If this would be possible, if this disadvantage of potentially wasting your action of a ready action balances everything out, they would written this in the description! They would've written something like: If you ready a spell, you cast it without using a magic action! Instead all the wordings in ready action, in spell casting, in action surge are at best ambigious and at worst quite clear.The reason why they wrote "cast it as normal" because writing "cast it only when you not have cast another spell with casting time action" would be redundant, because these are already the normal spellcasting rules for spells with casting time of an action!(also just in general, the disadvantage of potentially wasting your action and spell slot is already balanced out, there is no need to make it stronger. The advantage is: you can do an action outside of turn order! That is the whole reason player want to ready an action. Its a typical risk / reward situation, you risk waste of resources but gain a timing advantage)</blockquote>

Verification