But the casting time is the action used to cast the spell, that's the thing. Wether you have ways to cast spell with a different action than the one originally listed, what is important is that you can't cast a spell before or after one cast as a bonus action, except for cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
booming blade is a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
Yes. But when using it with War Caster, the casting time is a reaction instead. That would be my ruling anyways, other DMs are free to rule otherwise.
You have warcaster, and BA Misty Step up to an enemy. That enemy had a Readied Action to move away if anyone got close and takes it, moving. This triggers you to be able to use your Reaction forr Op Attack, which you then convert into A Booming Blade cantrip.
This wouldn't work at my table. If you cast Misty Step as a bonus action on a turn, you can't use your reaction to cast Booming Blade before or after it, because it doesn't have a casting time of one action even though it's a cantrip. The reference of 1 action casting time in the feat is the original casting time the spell must have to be eligible. You use a reaction to cast it now.
This is the correct way to play it. No Reactions are allowed on the same turn you’ve cast (or will cast) a Bonus Action spell. Specifically the War Caster Feat says
“you can use your reaction to cast a spell at the creature, rather than making an opportunity attack.”
This is entirely false. Reactions, generally, are not impacted in any way by casting a bonus action spell. You can still take reactions. In that example(quoted above), if they simply didn't substitute for Booming Blade and took the Reaction opportunity attack it would be incontrovertibly allowable.
No, this is not false at all - no other spell may be case on your turn other than an Action Cantrip. This has like hundreds of threads and pages that you can venture down, but it’s been resolved for what feels like centuries now.
But the casting time is the action used to cast the spell, that's the thing. Wether you have ways to cast spell with a different action than the one originally listed, what is important is that you can't cast a spell before or after one cast as a bonus action, except for cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
booming blade is a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
It's right there in the book :) The only time this changes is if you cast booming blade as a quickened spell, and then the casting time of the spell is changed to a bonus action, per the quickened spell metamagic description. The wording of the war caster feat makes no such change to the casting time of the spell.
But the casting time is the action used to cast the spell, that's the thing. Wether you have ways to cast spell with a different action than the one originally listed, what is important is that you can't cast a spell before or after one cast as a bonus action, except for cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
booming blade is a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
Yes. But when using it with War Caster, the casting time is a reaction instead. That would be my ruling anyways, other DMs are free to rule otherwise.
Yes, this comports with RAW, but you’re right - many DMs rule differently. I’d say it might even be a majority of DMs that rule Reactions can be cast on the same turns as Bonus Action spells. Who knows - I wouldn’t be worried *too* much about RAW here, it’s a highly disputed topic in hundreds of threads.
Well it depends if you think a casting time is the action written in the book, or if it's the one used to actually cast the spell. If one insist that it remains 1 action, there could be DMs saying you must then also use an action as to do so since it's the casting time written and the feat makes no change to that. ☺
But the casting time is the action used to cast the spell, that's the thing. Wether you have ways to cast spell with a different action than the one originally listed, what is important is that you can't cast a spell before or after one cast as a bonus action, except for cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
booming blade is a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
It's right there in the book :) The only time this changes is if you cast booming blade as a quickened spell, and then the casting time of the spell is changed to a bonus action, per the quickened spell metamagic description. The wording of the war caster feat makes no such change to the casting time of the spell.
“you can use your reaction to cast a spell at the creature”
You cast the spell as a Reaction.
If you instead try to view it as “well it’s still only costing an action”, then that means you’ve used your action (via the Spell) AND reaction (via the Feat) whenever you use War Caster Feat. So I guess you could interpret it that way but… that seems silly.
You have warcaster, and BA Misty Step up to an enemy. That enemy had a Readied Action to move away if anyone got close and takes it, moving. This triggers you to be able to use your Reaction forr Op Attack, which you then convert into A Booming Blade cantrip.
This wouldn't work at my table. If you cast Misty Step as a bonus action on a turn, you can't use your reaction to cast Booming Blade before or after it, because it doesn't have a casting time of one action even though it's a cantrip. The reference of 1 action casting time in the feat is the original casting time the spell must have to be eligible. You use a reaction to cast it now.
This is the correct way to play it. No Reactions are allowed on the same turn you’ve cast (or will cast) a Bonus Action spell. Specifically the War Caster Feat says
“you can use your reaction to cast a spell at the creature, rather than making an opportunity attack.”
This is entirely false. Reactions, generally, are not impacted in any way by casting a bonus action spell. You can still take reactions. In that example(quoted above), if they simply didn't substitute for Booming Blade and took the Reaction opportunity attack it would be incontrovertibly allowable.
No, this is not false at all - no other spell may be case on your turn other than an Action Cantrip. This has like hundreds of threads and pages that you can venture down, but it’s been resolved for what feels like centuries now.
You said:
"No Reactions are allowed on the same turn you’ve cast (or will cast) a Bonus Action spell."
It is false.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
You have warcaster, and BA Misty Step up to an enemy. That enemy had a Readied Action to move away if anyone got close and takes it, moving. This triggers you to be able to use your Reaction forr Op Attack, which you then convert into A Booming Blade cantrip.
This wouldn't work at my table. If you cast Misty Step as a bonus action on a turn, you can't use your reaction to cast Booming Blade before or after it, because it doesn't have a casting time of one action even though it's a cantrip. The reference of 1 action casting time in the feat is the original casting time the spell must have to be eligible. You use a reaction to cast it now.
This is the correct way to play it. No Reactions are allowed on the same turn you’ve cast (or will cast) a Bonus Action spell. Specifically the War Caster Feat says
“you can use your reaction to cast a spell at the creature, rather than making an opportunity attack.”
This is entirely false. Reactions, generally, are not impacted in any way by casting a bonus action spell. You can still take reactions. In that example(quoted above), if they simply didn't substitute for Booming Blade and took the Reaction opportunity attack it would be incontrovertibly allowable.
No, this is not false at all - no other spell may be case on your turn other than an Action Cantrip. This has like hundreds of threads and pages that you can venture down, but it’s been resolved for what feels like centuries now.
You said:
"No Reactions are allowed on the same turn you’ve cast (or will cast) a Bonus Action spell."
It is false.
No, sorry… that’s how the rules have been worded and interpreted since the beginning of time, and argued over here and every other website for a long time.
Often the confusion is around the SA section that says “Can I use my Reaction on my turn?” And the answer is yes… but not when it’s specifically limited by a Bonus Action spell.
You have warcaster, and BA Misty Step up to an enemy. That enemy had a Readied Action to move away if anyone got close and takes it, moving. This triggers you to be able to use your Reaction forr Op Attack, which you then convert into A Booming Blade cantrip.
This wouldn't work at my table. If you cast Misty Step as a bonus action on a turn, you can't use your reaction to cast Booming Blade before or after it, because it doesn't have a casting time of one action even though it's a cantrip. The reference of 1 action casting time in the feat is the original casting time the spell must have to be eligible. You use a reaction to cast it now.
This is the correct way to play it. No Reactions are allowed on the same turn you’ve cast (or will cast) a Bonus Action spell. Specifically the War Caster Feat says
“you can use your reaction to cast a spell at the creature, rather than making an opportunity attack.”
This is entirely false. Reactions, generally, are not impacted in any way by casting a bonus action spell. You can still take reactions. In that example(quoted above), if they simply didn't substitute for Booming Blade and took the Reaction opportunity attack it would be incontrovertibly allowable.
Of course bonus action spell don't have any incidence on reaction of any kind that aren't spells. Brewsky is not talking about reaction in general, but spell cast as reaction.
I'm failing to see how the point you're making is different from the point I'm making. It comes down to the same thing, doesn't it? You're still casting two spells, one is a cantrip, one is leveled, one is a bonus action, and one is an action. The order you do them in is functionally and mechanically identical. If the rules, for some reason, make it impossible to change a cantrip into a bonus action (despite QS having the ability to do so, and a major part of 5e's design philosophy being that specific trumps general rules), then you can just use QS on the leveled spell and cast the cantrip as a full action. Doing so is functionally identical to casting the cantrip as a bonus action with QS and using the full action on the leveled spell; you're spending the same about of spell slots and sorcery points, so from a functional, mechanical standpoint I'm going to conclude that this is one of those rules that the introduction of Quickend Spell essentially circumnavigates.
Not it's not the same thing. No leveled or reaction spell before or after a bonus action spell, which is what Scenario 2 is attemting to do. It doesn't matter if the bonus action spell is cantrip or level, but the spells cast before or after it does matter.
Scenario 1: Leveled spell as bonus action, + cantrip as action
Scenario 2: Cantrip as bonus action + leveled spell as an action
I get that the two scenarios are different, I just do not think they are meaningfully different. You could say I'm arguing RAI or maybe even rules-as-logically-interprable, but my point is this: if you look at both scenarios holistically, they cost all the same amount of resources. You are still using 1, a bonus action, 2, an action, 3, a leveled spell spot, 4, a cantrip, and 5, two sorcery points for either option. They are different in paper, but they are functionally identical, so there is no reason to have a separate ruling for each scenario. Logically, by the transitive property, if you have two options that reach the same outcome and consume the same resources, then if one is legal the other should be legal. The rule holds just fine until the specific case of Quickend Spell is applied to the scenario, and then there is no meaningful difference between whether you can use a cantrip as a bonus action or not unless you've already used your bonus action that turn.
What I think is that the Bonus Action rule is poorly written, and I think it's clear intention was to explain just that you can't use your bonus action to cast a leveled spell if you already cast a leveled spell with your action. Essentially; one leveled spell, one cantrip, and it is worded the way it is (must be a cantrip that takes 1 action) because they want to clarify that you *cannot* use two bonus actions on a turn. It's poorly worded because it sounds on the surface like it's saying "if you're casting two spells on one turn, one of them *must* be a leveled bonus action and the other *must* be a 1 action cantrip", whereas it's intention seems to be more "you cannot cast two leveled spells on a turn and you cannot cast two bonus actions on a turn."
As I mentioned earlier, I have run into this situation myself. You're most likely fine, but if you allow a quickened cantrip and then an action leveled spell, just be sure not to let someone add a different metamagic to the leveled spell or else you do run into a situation the rules would normally prohibit.
I get that the two scenarios are different, I just do not think they are meaningfully different. You could say I'm arguing RAI or maybe even rules-as-logically-interprable, but my point is this: if you look at both scenarios holistically, they cost all the same amount of resources. You are still using 1, a bonus action, 2, an action, 3, a leveled spell spot, 4, a cantrip, and 5, two sorcery points for either option.
I don't think what you advocate is RAI neither, i doubt it's intended. It's certainly not a big deal but will require DM fiat.
You have warcaster, and BA Misty Step up to an enemy. That enemy had a Readied Action to move away if anyone got close and takes it, moving. This triggers you to be able to use your Reaction forr Op Attack, which you then convert into A Booming Blade cantrip.
This wouldn't work at my table. If you cast Misty Step as a bonus action on a turn, you can't use your reaction to cast Booming Blade before or after it, because it doesn't have a casting time of one action even though it's a cantrip. The reference of 1 action casting time in the feat is the original casting time the spell must have to be eligible. You use a reaction to cast it now.
This is the correct way to play it. No Reactions are allowed on the same turn you’ve cast (or will cast) a Bonus Action spell. Specifically the War Caster Feat says
“you can use your reaction to cast a spell at the creature, rather than making an opportunity attack.”
This is entirely false. Reactions, generally, are not impacted in any way by casting a bonus action spell. You can still take reactions. In that example(quoted above), if they simply didn't substitute for Booming Blade and took the Reaction opportunity attack it would be incontrovertibly allowable.
Of course bonus action spell don't have any incidence on reaction of any kind that aren't spells. Brewsky is not talking about reaction in general, but spell cast as reaction.
This yea - sorry, not specifically talking about Reactions, only spells cast as a Reaction.
How about Action to cast Ray of Frost, bonus action to misty step over to the edge of a cliff, movement to jump off, reaction to cast Feather Fall. Three spells, one turn.
How about Action to cast Ray of Frost, bonus action to misty step over to the edge of a cliff, movement to jump off, reaction to cast Feather Fall. Three spells, one turn.
The point is that you can't do that. You can't cast a bonus action spell (misty step) and a reaction spell (feather fall) in the same turn.
To answer TexasDevlin's question (sorry for misunderstanding it), a valid case of three spells is as follows.
I mean, you could potentially even cast four spells on their turn. I really wasn't questioning whether someone could cast three spells in a turn. I was questioning how someone could cast a reaction spell on the same turn as a bonus action spell. And it turns out you technically can't, but Rav's example shows a way to do it anyway for all intents and purposes.
Here's my four spell hypothesis for a Bladesinger 6, Fighter 1 who someone has cast haste upon:
Bonus action cast misty step
Action: cast ray of frost
Hasted action: Attack! (bladesinger casts ray of frost)
Action surge action: cast ray of frost
and then because we're being silly, we can use Ravnodaus' war caster example to throw in one more ray of frost as a reaction, lol.
I mean, you could potentially even cast four spells on their turn. I really wasn't questioning whether someone could cast three spells in a turn. I was questioning how someone could cast a reaction spell on the same turn as a bonus action spell. And it turns out you technically can't, but Rav's example shows a way to do it anyway for all intents and purposes.
Here's my four spell hypothesis for a Bladesinger 6, Fighter 1 who someone has cast haste upon:
Bonus action cast misty step
Action: cast ray of frost
Hasted action: Attack! (bladesinger casts ray of frost)
Action surge action: cast ray of frost
and then because we're being silly, we can use Ravnodaus' war caster example to throw in one more ray of frost as a reaction, lol.
There has been a lot of debate about Hasted Actions and Bladesinger interactions with it in another thread so I do not wish to stir up that hornets nest, but my personal opinion is you cannot use the Hasted Attack Action to cast a cantrip.
Obviously you may do it differently at your table but this should not be assumed as a fact that all tables follow your interpretation of that rule.
Yes. But when using it with War Caster, the casting time is a reaction instead. That would be my ruling anyways, other DMs are free to rule otherwise.
No, this is not false at all - no other spell may be case on your turn other than an Action Cantrip. This has like hundreds of threads and pages that you can venture down, but it’s been resolved for what feels like centuries now.
It's right there in the book :) The only time this changes is if you cast booming blade as a quickened spell, and then the casting time of the spell is changed to a bonus action, per the quickened spell metamagic description. The wording of the war caster feat makes no such change to the casting time of the spell.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Yes, this comports with RAW, but you’re right - many DMs rule differently. I’d say it might even be a majority of DMs that rule Reactions can be cast on the same turns as Bonus Action spells. Who knows - I wouldn’t be worried *too* much about RAW here, it’s a highly disputed topic in hundreds of threads.
Well it depends if you think a casting time is the action written in the book, or if it's the one used to actually cast the spell. If one insist that it remains 1 action, there could be DMs saying you must then also use an action as to do so since it's the casting time written and the feat makes no change to that. ☺
“you can use your reaction to cast a spell at the creature”
You cast the spell as a Reaction.
If you instead try to view it as “well it’s still only costing an action”, then that means you’ve used your action (via the Spell) AND reaction (via the Feat) whenever you use War Caster Feat. So I guess you could interpret it that way but… that seems silly.
You said:
It is false.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
No, sorry… that’s how the rules have been worded and interpreted since the beginning of time, and argued over here and every other website for a long time.
https://thinkdm.org/2019/10/12/bonus-action-spell-limitation/amp/
@Greenstone_Walker does a great breakdown in here:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/rules-game-mechanics/85145-spell-action-economy?page=8
Sage advice, etc.
Often the confusion is around the SA section that says “Can I use my Reaction on my turn?” And the answer is yes… but not when it’s specifically limited by a Bonus Action spell.
Of course bonus action spell don't have any incidence on reaction of any kind that aren't spells. Brewsky is not talking about reaction in general, but spell cast as reaction.
I get that the two scenarios are different, I just do not think they are meaningfully different. You could say I'm arguing RAI or maybe even rules-as-logically-interprable, but my point is this: if you look at both scenarios holistically, they cost all the same amount of resources. You are still using 1, a bonus action, 2, an action, 3, a leveled spell spot, 4, a cantrip, and 5, two sorcery points for either option. They are different in paper, but they are functionally identical, so there is no reason to have a separate ruling for each scenario. Logically, by the transitive property, if you have two options that reach the same outcome and consume the same resources, then if one is legal the other should be legal. The rule holds just fine until the specific case of Quickend Spell is applied to the scenario, and then there is no meaningful difference between whether you can use a cantrip as a bonus action or not unless you've already used your bonus action that turn.
What I think is that the Bonus Action rule is poorly written, and I think it's clear intention was to explain just that you can't use your bonus action to cast a leveled spell if you already cast a leveled spell with your action. Essentially; one leveled spell, one cantrip, and it is worded the way it is (must be a cantrip that takes 1 action) because they want to clarify that you *cannot* use two bonus actions on a turn. It's poorly worded because it sounds on the surface like it's saying "if you're casting two spells on one turn, one of them *must* be a leveled bonus action and the other *must* be a 1 action cantrip", whereas it's intention seems to be more "you cannot cast two leveled spells on a turn and you cannot cast two bonus actions on a turn."
As I mentioned earlier, I have run into this situation myself. You're most likely fine, but if you allow a quickened cantrip and then an action leveled spell, just be sure not to let someone add a different metamagic to the leveled spell or else you do run into a situation the rules would normally prohibit.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I don't think what you advocate is RAI neither, i doubt it's intended. It's certainly not a big deal but will require DM fiat.
This yea - sorry, not specifically talking about Reactions, only spells cast as a Reaction.
Action - cast fireball.
An enemy caster counterspells it, so you use your reaction counterspell their counterspell.
Action Surge - cast fireball again.
Three spells in one turn.
None of those are bonus action spells. I think you may have misinterpreted the intention behind my question.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
How about Action to cast Ray of Frost, bonus action to misty step over to the edge of a cliff, movement to jump off, reaction to cast Feather Fall. Three spells, one turn.
The point is that you can't do that. You can't cast a bonus action spell (misty step) and a reaction spell (feather fall) in the same turn.
To answer TexasDevlin's question (sorry for misunderstanding it), a valid case of three spells is as follows.
Action - cast ray of frost.
Action Surge Action - cast ray of frost.
Bonus Action - cast misty step.
In this case you can't cast a spell as a Reaction on that turn.
I mean, you could potentially even cast four spells on their turn. I really wasn't questioning whether someone could cast three spells in a turn. I was questioning how someone could cast a reaction spell on the same turn as a bonus action spell. And it turns out you technically can't, but Rav's example shows a way to do it anyway for all intents and purposes.
Here's my four spell hypothesis for a Bladesinger 6, Fighter 1 who someone has cast haste upon:
and then because we're being silly, we can use Ravnodaus' war caster example to throw in one more ray of frost as a reaction, lol.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
There has been a lot of debate about Hasted Actions and Bladesinger interactions with it in another thread so I do not wish to stir up that hornets nest, but my personal opinion is you cannot use the Hasted Attack Action to cast a cantrip.
Obviously you may do it differently at your table but this should not be assumed as a fact that all tables follow your interpretation of that rule.
Yeah, I know I pushed the line on that one
"Not all those who wander are lost"