Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ryan92084" data-source="post: 6787859" data-attributes="member: 6802559">Which is why it is the least important of my reasons.&nbsp; I am aware of what mage slayer is doing mechanically.&nbsp; They react to a spell being cast and hit after the trigger the same as the general reaction rules.I should have phrased it as mid cast a spell action I suppose but for me it doesn't matter.&nbsp; If you feel the need to break spell casting down into parts (which this edition doesn't really support) then it could be argued that reacting to a ray is later than reacting to &quot;casts a spell&quot; as a mage slayer does so getting the attack in first would be odd.&nbsp; Also I just wouldn't think it fair to the mage slayer pc.I find the cost/reward for both to be similar.&nbsp; Permanent cost for permanent possible reaction which you may have competing uses for versus a temporary cost for a temporary reaction that you likely wouldn't have had another use for.As always this is just how I personally have decided to run it given the current RaW and my justifications for it.&nbsp; I am not trying to convince anyone one way or the other and I find both rulings completely reasonable.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ryan92084, post: 6787859, member: 6802559"] Which is why it is the least important of my reasons. I am aware of what mage slayer is doing mechanically. They react to a spell being cast and hit after the trigger the same as the general reaction rules. I should have phrased it as mid cast a spell action I suppose but for me it doesn't matter. If you feel the need to break spell casting down into parts (which this edition doesn't really support) then it could be argued that reacting to a ray is later than reacting to "casts a spell" as a mage slayer does so getting the attack in first would be odd. Also I just wouldn't think it fair to the mage slayer pc. I find the cost/reward for both to be similar. Permanent cost for permanent possible reaction which you may have competing uses for versus a temporary cost for a temporary reaction that you likely wouldn't have had another use for. As always this is just how I personally have decided to run it given the current RaW and my justifications for it. I am not trying to convince anyone one way or the other and I find both rulings completely reasonable. [/QUOTE]

Verification