D&D 5E Warlock and Repelling Blast

[Ovinomancer]

[MENTION=6801315]Noctem[/MENTION],

Can you please responded re: my question on readied actions in between attacks using eldritch blast.

I continue to ask because you, earlier, insisted that this couldn't happen, but lately you've adopted a point of resistance that seems to concede that, indeed, readied actions can occur in between attacks. If that's the case, let's go ahead and clear that up so that we can move past that point.

And I also continue to ask because I find it useful to run down all of the ramifications of a ruling before adopting it. Surely you see the benefits in doing that as well?

 

[Bolares]

Does anyone know if there is a prize or trophy for being right in this tread? 'cause peole are trying really hard to prove they are right. If there is a prize I want to chip in hahaha

 

[Noctem]

[MENTION=6801315]Noctem[/MENTION],

Can you please responded re: my question on readied actions in between attacks using eldritch blast.

I continue to ask because you, earlier, insisted that this couldn't happen, but lately you've adopted a point of resistance that seems to concede that, indeed, readied actions can occur in between attacks. If that's the case, let's go ahead and clear that up so that we can move past that point.

And I also continue to ask because I find it useful to run down all of the ramifications of a ruling before adopting it. Surely you see the benefits in doing that as well?

I think that until Arial Black asks some questions on twitter, based on your responses so far in the thread, I'm essentially wasting my time responding to questions from either of you. You've decided that Arial's claim makes sense to you. I would suggest you ask questions on twitter too, it's the best way to get this resolved. I'm not the designer of the edition, go ask him instead.

 

[Noctem]

Does anyone know if there is a prize or trophy for being right in this tread? 'cause peole are trying really hard to prove they are right. If there is a prize I want to chip in hahaha

None whatsoever, but if I can I'd like to say that I only want Arial Black to put his money where his mouth is. That he go on twitter, ask questions and post the replies here for everyone to see. It's clear, and I think you agree, that there's nothing more to gain from further back and forth when it comes to what Arial Black is saying. The only thing that might get through is having him discuss it with Jeremy Crawford imo. And if he comes back with responses from JC that prove me wrong I'll apologize and agree I was wrong.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I think that until Arial Black asks some questions on twitter, based on your responses so far in the thread, I'm essentially wasting my time responding to questions from either of you. You've decided that Arial's claim makes sense to you. I would suggest you ask questions on twitter too, it's the best way to get this resolved. I'm not the designer of the edition, go ask him instead.

Huh, for someone that got very upset with my for 'putting words in their mouth' I'm a bit nonplussed that you would think to do the same to me. I believe I would thank you to not do so anymore.

I'm not pursuing Arial's line of argument. I thought it was interesting enough to see your response, but I'm very much not interested in setting you up with my question to immediately follow through with the dispel argument. Not my intent at all. I am curious as to whether or not you've decided to change your opinion on readied actions occurring between blasts, because that's an interesting outcome of subsequent attacks instead of simultaneous attacks and likely to come up in game.

I'm not very interested in pursuing the dispel options, as I feel that to be a very niche response highly unlikely to come up in my game, and, honestly, whatever the rule if I have a player that decides to use such a resource to stop an eldricth blast after the first bolt but before the remaining bolts, I'm highly inclined to allow it just because it is such a sub-optimal use of resources that it doesn't need further punishment.

 

[Coredump]

Noctem, 2 items:
1) I don't think Ariel needs to contact JC, because JC has already explicitly commented on this, and Ariel just asserts he is 'wrong'. He will just assert the same thing for any future tweets.
2) I am surprised you will not answer Ovinmancer's direct question... he has asked it several times and you are dodging it.



So heck, I will answer it. (I am away from books, but I *think* I can remember everything well enough)
Yes. I do believe you can ready an action that triggers 'between' EB bolts. I see no reason why not. The attacks are obviously not simultaneous, so the first one could trigger a reaction.

No. This does not mean Dispel Magic will work. Dispel Magic dispels the 'effects' of a spell, not the *casting* of the spell. If you could dispel EB between blasts, then you could dispel it before the first blast... and you can't. Counterspell is used to stop the casting of a spell. Dispel Magic would only work on the actual bolt....but that only lasts 'an instant' and thus can't be Dispelled.

 

[Jaelommiss]

So heck, I will answer it. (I am away from books, but I *think* I can remember everything well enough)
Yes. I do believe you can ready an action that triggers 'between' EB bolts. I see no reason why not. The attacks are obviously not simultaneous, so the first one could trigger a reaction.

No. This does not mean Dispel Magic will work. Dispel Magic dispels the 'effects' of a spell, not the *casting* of the spell. If you could dispel EB between blasts, then you could dispel it before the first blast... and you can't. Counterspell is used to stop the casting of a spell. Dispel Magic would only work on the actual bolt....but that only lasts 'an instant' and thus can't be Dispelled.

I agree with this on all counts, though I am wondering what situations it would actually come up in.

If the target is in LoS on your turn, then I'd attack enemy instead of readying action. If target is not in LoS, I would ready action to attack them when they leave cover. If I know it's a spellcaster, I might ready action for when they cast a spell or start casting a spell just in case it is a concentration spell. Setting the trigger as "when he/she/it/someone attacks" seems like it would only possibly come up during tense negotiations between armed parties.


On a tangent about Dispel Magic and instantaneous spells, is it possible to dispel an instantaneous spell with an ongoing effect? As examples, Ray of Frost has a lingering slow effect, Vicious Mockery imposes disadvantage on the target's next attack, and Vitriolic Sphere deals acid damage at the end of each of the targets' next turns. RAW, I think not, however as a DM I would probably rule in favour of dispelling ongoing effects despite the instantaneous duration.

 

[Uchawi]

I am just disappointed that an at-will cantrip can out perform a martial specialist like the battle master who must spend resources to do the same thing.

 

[Falling Icicle]

On a tangent about Dispel Magic and instantaneous spells, is it possible to dispel an instantaneous spell with an ongoing effect? As examples, Ray of Frost has a lingering slow effect, Vicious Mockery imposes disadvantage on the target's next attack, and Vitriolic Sphere deals acid damage at the end of each of the targets' next turns. RAW, I think not, however as a DM I would probably rule in favour of dispelling ongoing effects despite the instantaneous duration.

RAW, no, you can't dispel a spell if its duration is instantaneous, even if it has lingering effects. The rules state: "Many spells are instantaneous. The spell harms, heals, creates, or alters a creature or an object in a way that can’t be dispelled, because its magic exists only for an instant." PHB p. 203.

 

[Coredump]

I am just disappointed that an at-will cantrip can out perform a martial specialist like the battle master who must spend resources to do the same thing.

An at will cantrip *with* taking a specific invocation lets the Warlock outperform the BM in one specific manuever. Seems okay with me...