I'd have to side with those saying the interaction has no issues with RAW or, very possibly, with RAI. While it's true that the DMG says not to attack your allies, the full line is actually talking about the activation of abilities and not using out-of-combat attacks to cheese the rules. That would seem to indicate it's referring more to things like punching an ally with the Gloves of Soul Catching to gain advantage on an ability check rather than the War Caster interaction.
Furthermore, by using War Caster, you're borrowing the AoO trigger, but you're explicitly not making an attack against an ally. With the "hostile" term removed from the AoO description, this works RAW and the removal would potentially seem to indicate this is also a RAI change.
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.
Of course, if you want to allow it, it’s your table and that cool. Just it is, technically, not RAW.
An AoO is a player's reflexes kicking in when someone zooms by them or flees from them
If you have War Caster which allows you to strike out with a spell instead of a weapon, and you're a healer and see a wounded party mate run by instead... I just don't see that as the equivalent of attacking an ally to trigger a feature that might help them, or something along those lines. You're casting the spell to do what it was intended to do, and not violating that guideline per RAW
I get it. I see the argument for it. It’s just Opportunity Attack has “attack” right in the name. Which is what the DMG is saying not to allow.
Doesn't really matter what opportunity attack is, you're casting a spell instead of that.
Avoiding Opportunity Attacks also doesn't indicate allies but foes/enemy.
Avoiding Opportunity Attacks. 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.
This line of reasoning falls apart pretty quick. If the party fighter gets mind controlled and told to attack the rest of the party, trying to argue to the DM that he isn't allowed to make opportunity attacks against his allies isn't going to get you anywhere.
You've picked a very rare unusual scenario here but if the fighter gets mind controlled and attack the party, they're considered enemies when fighting against them.
Enemy: A creature is your enemy if it fights against you in combat, actively works to harm you, or is designated as your enemy by the rules or DM.
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.
Of course, if you want to allow it, it’s your table and that cool. Just it is, technically, not RAW.
An AoO is a player's reflexes kicking in when someone zooms by them or flees from them
If you have War Caster which allows you to strike out with a spell instead of a weapon, and you're a healer and see a wounded party mate run by instead... I just don't see that as the equivalent of attacking an ally to trigger a feature that might help them, or something along those lines. You're casting the spell to do what it was intended to do, and not violating that guideline per RAW
I get it. I see the argument for it. It’s just Opportunity Attack has “attack” right in the name. Which is what the DMG is saying not to allow.
Doesn't really matter what opportunity attack is, you're casting a spell instead of that.
Avoiding Opportunity Attacks also doesn't indicate allies but foes/enemy.
Avoiding Opportunity Attacks. 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.
This line of reasoning falls apart pretty quick. If the party fighter gets mind controlled and told to attack the rest of the party, trying to argue to the DM that he isn't allowed to make opportunity attacks against his allies isn't going to get you anywhere.
You've picked a very rare unusual scenario here but if the fighter gets mind controlled and attack the party, they're considered enemies when fighting against them.
Enemy: A creature is your enemy if it fights against you in combat, actively works to harm you, or is designated as your enemy by the rules or DM.
That would be a fun one if the mind control is a spell, dispel magic gets into a very strange edge case here.
Ultimately I'd agree that opportunity attacks are RAI for hostile creatures only and that war caster is limited to that but this edge case does sound very fun. Personally I'd say that the fighter is considered hostile in this situation and that would be a valid usage.
So if it's really intended, i will have to change my decades-long preconcive notion about Opportunity Attacks as it'd be the first time since it's introduction in AD&D that such attack can also be provoked by allies for as far as i can remember :)
So if it's really intended, i will have to change my expectations as it'd be the first time since it's introduction in AD&D that such attack can also be provoked by alliesfor as far as i can remember.
Again, adding War Caster into the mix specifically removes the requirement that this is an attack. At no point in this discussion has anyone suggested attacking an ally is OK
Reactive Spell. When a creature provokes an Opportunity Attack from you by leaving your reach, you can take a Reaction to cast a spell at the creature rather than making an Opportunity Attack. The spell must have a casting time of one action and must target only that creature.
As I see it, the debate really comes down to whether you think that because the conditions for an Opportunity Attack require an enemy, a reaction casting via War Caster has the same restriction
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Im my opinion if there's no Opportunity Attack provoked, War Caster is not usable.
I see it this way, with the possibility of casting any spell to that foe that fulfills the rule "the spell must have a casting time of one action and must target only that creature."
So if it's really intended, i will have to change my decades-long preconcive notion about Opportunity Attacks as it'd be the first time since it's introduction in AD&D that such attack can also be provoked by allies for as far as i can remember :)
While I agree that it is probably not RAI I will say that all the examples are going to use enemies as even if you CAN AoO a ally, you just aren't going to 99.9999999999% of the time. A DM wont need to ask about it each time they leave their reach as the assumed answer is no, but if a player decides to pipe up hey I want to backstab Frank I use my reaction to AoO them, maybe its technically okay.
Personally I go with AoO is only for enemies with or without war caster, as much as I'd love to use it myself. My assumption is when enemies are nearby you are constantly looking for openings while trying to make sure you don't create one. Whereas with an ally you aren't, its sort of a safe square that you don't have to pay much attention to. I have no idea what the intent is in this edition, as like in many sections the language leaves open many interpretations.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'd have to side with those saying the interaction has no issues with RAW or, very possibly, with RAI. While it's true that the DMG says not to attack your allies, the full line is actually talking about the activation of abilities and not using out-of-combat attacks to cheese the rules. That would seem to indicate it's referring more to things like punching an ally with the Gloves of Soul Catching to gain advantage on an ability check rather than the War Caster interaction.
Furthermore, by using War Caster, you're borrowing the AoO trigger, but you're explicitly not making an attack against an ally. With the "hostile" term removed from the AoO description, this works RAW and the removal would potentially seem to indicate this is also a RAI change.
You've picked a very rare unusual scenario here but if the fighter gets mind controlled and attack the party, they're considered enemies when fighting against them.
That would be a fun one if the mind control is a spell, dispel magic gets into a very strange edge case here.
Ultimately I'd agree that opportunity attacks are RAI for hostile creatures only and that war caster is limited to that but this edge case does sound very fun. Personally I'd say that the fighter is considered hostile in this situation and that would be a valid usage.
All i can say is that all 3 examples relating to Opportunity Attacks only cite foes or enemies, not allies.
But in effect apply to Creature which include PC.
So if it's really intended, i will have to change my decades-long preconcive notion about Opportunity Attacks as it'd be the first time since it's introduction in AD&D that such attack can also be provoked by allies for as far as i can remember :)
Again, adding War Caster into the mix specifically removes the requirement that this is an attack. At no point in this discussion has anyone suggested attacking an ally is OK
As I see it, the debate really comes down to whether you think that because the conditions for an Opportunity Attack require an enemy, a reaction casting via War Caster has the same restriction
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Im my opinion if there's no Opportunity Attack provoked, War Caster is not usable.
I see it this way, with the possibility of casting any spell to that foe that fulfills the rule "the spell must have a casting time of one action and must target only that creature."
While I agree that it is probably not RAI I will say that all the examples are going to use enemies as even if you CAN AoO a ally, you just aren't going to 99.9999999999% of the time. A DM wont need to ask about it each time they leave their reach as the assumed answer is no, but if a player decides to pipe up hey I want to backstab Frank I use my reaction to AoO them, maybe its technically okay.
Personally I go with AoO is only for enemies with or without war caster, as much as I'd love to use it myself. My assumption is when enemies are nearby you are constantly looking for openings while trying to make sure you don't create one. Whereas with an ally you aren't, its sort of a safe square that you don't have to pay much attention to. I have no idea what the intent is in this edition, as like in many sections the language leaves open many interpretations.