War Caster/Opportunity Attacks

Quote from Plaguescarred >>

Quote from Brad_Paradox >>

So.... did I just cause the creature to flee and otherwise lose its turn both during its current turn AND during its "next turn"? 

 Yes it would because Command duration is Instantaneous it's not subject to Combining Spell Effects limitation for example.

 I'm not sure how that allows them to affect two different Turns.

Quote from Deyric >>

3 Sage Advice entries:

"Casting Time Is there a limit on the number of spells you can cast on your turn?

There’s no rule that states you can cast only X number of spells on your turn, but there are some practical limitations. The main limiting factor is your action. Many spells require an action to cast, and unless a feature says otherwise, you only have one action on your turn. You also must abide by the rule of only expending one spell slot to cast a spell on your turn.

So, for example, if you take your Bonus Action to cast Healing Word using a spell slot, you can also take the Magic action to cast Vicious Mockery—a cantrip which doesn’t require a spell slot."
______________________________________________

"Can you cast a Reaction spell on your turn?

Yes, but you must abide by the rule of expending only one spell slot to cast a spell on your turn. For example, if you take a Magic action to cast Fireball using a spell slot and an enemy casts Counterspell, you can’t also then expend a spell slot to cast Counterspell targeting that enemy."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Can you use a melee spell attack to make an Opportunity Attack?

No, you can’t cast a spell when a creature provokes an Opportunity Attack from you. This is because each spell has a casting time. For example, the Chill Touch spell has a casting time of an action. A game mechanic, such as Opportunity Attack, doesn’t let you alter that casting time unless a feature says otherwise (see the War Caster feat for an example of this)."

_____________________________________________________________________________________

The first two explicitly enforce the casting limit per turn rule.  But do say "On your Turn."

The last Sage entry I posted seems to imply Warcaster is an exception and grants the ability to supersede the casting limit. Specifically mentioning the feat as an exception to the previous posts.   And this is not 'on your turn' either. 

If opportunity attacks let you exceed your melee attack limit without any feat at all, why wouldn't Warcaster, when you have to delve into a feat to even do so. 

I can't find anything else official. 

 Warcaster doesn't affect how many spells you can cast on your Turn. What it does do is allow spells that require an Action to cast to be fast as a Reaction - contrary to the normal rules. That's what it's talking about. If you cast a Reaction spell on your Turn, then it counts towards the maximum of one levelled spell per Turn. However, War Caster is being invoked on a different person's Turn so it doesn't matter anyway. The spell limit refreshes on a new Turn, rather than Round, so it's fine.

The question asked though is whether Command cast by War Caster affects the creature both the current Turn and the following one, which is different.

Quote from Linklite >>

Quote from Plaguescarred >>

Quote from Brad_Paradox >>

So.... did I just cause the creature to flee and otherwise lose its turn both during its current turn AND during its "next turn"? 

 Yes it would because Command duration is Instantaneous it's not subject to Combining Spell Effects limitation for example.

 I'm not sure how that allows them to affect two different Turns.

Because they ''follow the command on its next turn'' effectively meaning; 

1. The effect of previous Command occuring on the target's turn.

AND

2. The effect of current Command occuring on the target's next turn.

- You can cast a leveled spell on your turn using your Reaction (e.g. because it's the spell's Casting Time, thanks to War Caster...), but then you cannot cast a second leveled spell on your turn using your Magic action or Bonus Action due to the One Spell with a Spell Slot per Turn rule.

- You can cast a leveled spell off-turn using your Reaction (e.g. because it's the spell's Casting Time, thanks to War Caster...). Then, on your turn, you can cast again another leveled spell using your Magic action, Bonus Action or even your Reaction, as long as you follow the One Spell with a Spell Slot per Turn rule.

A way to cast more than one leveled spell on your turn using your Magic Action, Bonus Action, and/or Reaction is if those spells come from traits/features/feats that let characters cast them without using a spell slot. Or using Magic Items.

Quote from Linklite >>

Quote from Plaguescarred >>

Quote from Brad_Paradox >>

So.... did I just cause the creature to flee and otherwise lose its turn both during its current turn AND during its "next turn"? 

 Yes it would because Command duration is Instantaneous it's not subject to Combining Spell Effects limitation for example.

 I'm not sure how that allows them to affect two different Turns.

It's two different castings of Command. Why wouldn't it affect two different turns?

Quote from Brad_Paradox >>

Here's another question that ISN'T about OA's on allies!

I'm a glamour bard.  I cast Command on a creature using the Flee option on my turn on which the creature fails its save.  This causes  "The target spends its turn moving away from you by the fastest available means.".   On its turn, it flees and in the process leaves my melee range and provokes an opportunity attack.  I have the War Caster feat.  I cast Command on the creature and tell it to flee (note that this occurs on the creature's turn, not mine).  If it fails its save, it will spend it's "next turn" doing the thing I commanded.  So.... did I just cause the creature to flee and otherwise lose its turn both during its current turn AND during its "next turn"?   If so...  I like this very much and war caster will be my next feat!    I think this works from my reading, but I thought I would ask a broader audience.

 You're correct. I don't think there's any ambiguity here. When it's your turn, your next turn is not your current turn. If you have an ability that you use on your turn, which lasts until "the end of your next turn", it definitely doesn't end now, but a full round later. (And there have been plenty of examples of those.)

(I don't actually think it's really that good a combo, but that's beside the point.)

Just sharing this post I saw recently in the Rules & Game Mechanics subforum.

Quote from Plaguescarred >>

An Opportunity Attack is triggered when a creature that you can see leaves your reach, which is when War Caster can be used. 

How it's intended was clarified by 2 D&D Devs to Dungeon Dudes  A Final Discussion on Warcaster and Opportunity Attacks. refering back to the introduction of Opportunity Attacks in Playing The Game, which are not meant to be provoked by allies.

Opportunity Attacks: Combatants watch for enemies to drop their guard. If you move heedlessly past your foes, you put yourself in danger by provoking an Opportunity Attack.

Quote from TarodNet >>

Just sharing this post I saw recently in the Rules & Game Mechanics subforum.

Quote from Plaguescarred >>

An Opportunity Attack is triggered when a creature that you can see leaves your reach, which is when War Caster can be used. 

How it's intended was clarified by 2 D&D Devs to Dungeon Dudes  A Final Discussion on Warcaster and Opportunity Attacks. refering back to the introduction of Opportunity Attacks in Playing The Game, which are not meant to be provoked by allies.

Opportunity Attacks: Combatants watch for enemies to drop their guard. If you move heedlessly past your foes, you put yourself in danger by provoking an Opportunity Attack.

 I really wish we'd get these clarifications from official sources, instead of "some dudes' YouTube channel". AFAIK, the closest we ever got to an official clarification on the light weapon mechanics was a comment on a YouTube video, saying that the commenter had talked to Crawford. 

It'd be ok (if annoying) if they didn't want to make official statements on rules interpretation outside of sage advice, but this is silly.

Quote from jl8e >>

 I really wish we'd get these clarifications from official sources, instead of "some dudes' YouTube channel".

I mean, all it's saying is "that wasn't something we intended", which shouldn't really surprise anyone; there's no actual ruling against it.

Quote from jl8e >>

Quote from TarodNet >>

Just sharing this post I saw recently in the Rules & Game Mechanics subforum.

Quote from Plaguescarred >>

An Opportunity Attack is triggered when a creature that you can see leaves your reach, which is when War Caster can be used. 

How it's intended was clarified by 2 D&D Devs to Dungeon Dudes  A Final Discussion on Warcaster and Opportunity Attacks. refering back to the introduction of Opportunity Attacks in Playing The Game, which are not meant to be provoked by allies.

Opportunity Attacks: Combatants watch for enemies to drop their guard. If you move heedlessly past your foes, you put yourself in danger by provoking an Opportunity Attack.

 I really wish we'd get these clarifications from official sources, instead of "some dudes' YouTube channel". AFAIK, the closest we ever got to an official clarification on the light weapon mechanics was a comment on a YouTube video, saying that the commenter had talked to Crawford. 

It'd be ok (if annoying) if they didn't want to make official statements on rules interpretation outside of sage advice, but this is silly.

 Fully agree. Nick, Hide, True Strike... more compiled here: Errata and Sage Advice: What’s Next for the New Core Rules? - Rules & Game Mechanics

A lot of topics I'd love to see in the 5.5e SAC.

Quote from erraticpaladin5 >>

This section from the 2024 DMG should pretty much clear this up:

Players Exploiting the Rules

Some players enjoy poring over the D&D rules and looking for optimal combinations. This kind of optimizing is part of the game (see “Know Your Players” in chapter 2), but it can cross a line into being exploitative, interfering with everyone else’s fun.

Setting clear expectations is essential when dealing with this kind of rules exploitation. Bear these principles in mind:

Rules Aren’t Physics. The rules of the game are meant to provide a fun game experience, not to describe the laws of physics in the worlds of D&D, let alone the real world. Don’t let players argue that a bucket brigade of ordinary people can accelerate a spear to light speed by all using the Ready action to pass the spear to the next person in line. The Ready action facilitates heroic action; it doesn’t define the physical limitations of what can happen in a 6-second combat round.

The Game Is Not an Economy. The rules of the game aren’t intended to model a realistic economy, and players who look for loopholes that let them generate infinite wealth using combinations of spells are exploiting the rules.

Combat Is for Enemies. Some rules apply only during combat or while a character is acting in Initiative order. Don’t let players attack each other or helpless creatures to activate those rules.

Rules Rely on Good-Faith Interpretation. The rules assume that everyone reading and interpreting the rules has the interests of the group’s fun at heart and is reading the rules in that light.

Outlining these principles can help hold players’ exploits at bay. If a player persistently tries to twist the rules of the game, have a conversation with that player outside the game and ask them to stop.

Also, I agree with the statement that this is an Opportunity Attack, if you want to attack an ally as they move out of range then that's a totally different issue, but they can't run by you and then you cast a healing spell or buff of some sort. People want to argue that the first line of the Opportunity Attack section is "flavor text" when it's actually the context of the rule. Coming back and rules-lawyering the specific wording as your free pass is exploitation. You know dang well what the intention of it is to be. "Combatants" sets up the entire context of the rule, the rest is bad faith purposeful misinterpretation. 

Did they miss-word it? Yes. Should they update and issue an errata once they've determined a lot of these rules are being taken out of context? Also yes.

If a DM wants to allow it at their table, that's their prerogative. But clear intent is there and ignoring it is just inane. 2024 Rules are optional at best, meant to clarify or offer new takes on existing 5e. I'll just look a player in the eye and state "then we use 2014 rules on opportunity attacks" and shut that down for good.

First time writing a forum post on DndBeyond and they've pretty much weighed in at this point that at least in 5.5e this interpretation works raw but not rai, but I did want to chime in here:

I don't believe that that this part applies to this use of warcaster: "Some rules apply only during combat or while a character is acting in Initiative order. Don’t let players attack each other or helpless creatures to activate those rules."

Maybe I'm wrong, I'm not the most educated in DnD rules or wording, but that sounds to me like it's saying players should not be able to trigger combat just to exploit initiative order or combat-only rules. If you are already in combat, and those rules are already active, then the use of warcaster for a heal or buff is not doing what the above phrase tells DMs to disallow. It is simply a creative interpretation of the feat that, in my opinion, clashes with the definition of opportunity attacks in 2014 rules but not in 2024 rules.

I'd also defend this use of warcaster a little bit from the flavor arguments that allies would not be looking out for attacks from other allies, and players would not be vigilant for their friends running by them. This is missing the point, in my opinion. In a given round my cleric has ~6 seconds to do x, y, and z. One of the things they can do is react to something around him. War Caster allows me to cast a spell on my turn, and then quickly cast another spell at someone running past me. Flavor wise, I don't see why it makes any less sense for that to be a heal towards an ally that it would for that to be a damage spell towards an enemy.

Quote from Flamepulse >>

Ive been coming across claims that people are saying that you can now cast a healing or buff spell on an ally that walks past your spellcaster that has war caster feat because they are leaving your threatened area and you can do do an opportunity attack on them. This is wrong an her is why.

Opportunity Attacks

Combatants watch for enemies to drop their guard. If you move heedlessly past your foes, you put yourself in danger by provoking an Opportunity Attack.

Avoiding Opportunity Attack. You can avoid provoking an Opportunity Attack by taking the Disengage action. You also don’t provoke an Opportunity Attack when you Teleport or when you are moved without using your movement, action, Bonus Action, or Reaction. For example, you don’t provoke an Opportunity Attack if an explosion hurls you out of a foe’s reach or if you fall past an enemy.

Making an Opportunity Attack. You can make an Opportunity Attack when a creature that you can see leaves your reach. To make the attack, take a Reaction to make one melee attack with a weapon or an Unarmed Strike against that creature. The attack occurs right before it leaves your reach.

 

You cannot make opportunity attacks against allies.

 But what if I really, REALLY don't like my ally?

If you really want a rule that prevents this stuff but doesn't disallow legitimate situations where you might want to attack allies is to change

The spell must have a casting time of one action and must target only that creature.

to

The spell must have a casting time of one action, must target only that creature, and require either an attack roll or a save.