Again, we see not allowing multiple attacks as part of a readied attack action as an unfair take away from the characters skill level. It’s no different than a character taking two attacks on their turn and then using a reaction to take a single opportunity attack. In the case of a readied attack, the character readies it then uses their two attacks when the readied trigger takes place but they have now used their reaction. What I’m saying is we don’t see it as a matter of not enough time.
Did you miss my reply #36 above? I think I gave a very good reason for why RAW is the way that it is.
Again, we see not allowing multiple attacks as part of a readied attack action as an unfair take away from the characters skill level. It’s no different than a character taking two attacks on their turn and then using a reaction to take a single opportunity attack. In the case of a readied attack, the character readies it then uses their two attacks when the readied trigger takes place but they have now used their reaction. What I’m saying is we don’t see it as a matter of not enough time.
Did you miss my reply #36 above? I think I gave a very good reason for why RAW is the way that it is.
Yes, I saw it, but I don’t agree with it. A melee weapon user can loose an attack action if the trigger never unfolds as well as a spell caster loosing a spell slot. It’s the risk one takes with the ready action.
I'm not sure you really follow. Spellcasters lose a spell slot if the trigger never happens. They spent the spell slot to start casting (and even if it's not a concentration spell they need to concentrate to ready it - don't forget that). So spellcasters have to drop a spell if they're already concentrating - they risk losing their spell slot if they're attacked and they risk losing the spell slot if the trigger never happens. Martials lose no resources if their ready action never happens.
I'm not sure you really follow. Spellcasters lose a spell slot if the trigger never happens. They spent the spell slot to start casting (and even if it's not a concentration spell they need to concentrate to ready it - don't forget that). So spellcasters have to drop a spell if they're already concentrating - they risk losing their spell slot if they're attacked and they risk losing the spell slot if the trigger never happens. Martials lose no resources if their ready action never happens.
Also - what about the part about timing?
I follow what your saying, I just think that’s a risk of reading a spell. Spell casting and melee attacks are two different animals.
I don’t think timing is an issue at all. Let’s say a 5th level fighter takes two attacks on his turn and then takes an opportunity attack in the same round as a reaction. I don’t see how reading to attack and then attacking with both attacks which uses up ones reaction can take anymore time. Deciding to ready an attack if something happens is a split second decision.
My intention isn’t to change anyone’s mind or prove I’m right. I just wanted to add to the discussion as to why we have the house rule we do and the why we feel the rules aren’t crystal clear on this subject.
We also feel that if the rule writers intended to limit attacks to one attack when taking a readied attack, they would have spelled it out clearly in the description of the readied action. Just like it’s clearly spelled out that an opportunity attack is a single attack under the opportunity attack description and the reaction description clearly refers to the opportunity attack description, leaving no doubt about the rules intentions.
There is absolutely no reason to include the text "on your turn" in the definition of Extra Attack other than to restrict the use of Extra Attack to being on your turn. The wording of Extra Attack without those additional 3 words would make the ability work when you take the Attack action as the Readied action (or in any other case where you would be allowed to perform an Attack action outside of your own turn).
My understanding is that the "on your turn" requirements are there to stop people using Ready. It is the same reason why Delay is not an option. It avoids stupid situations where everyone delays, and the round takes twice as long as it should.
I'm not kidding about the "everyone delays." I played in a 4E combat where every single player at the table used Delay on their turn, which meant every round took twice as long. First the GM went through everyone in initiative order, and everyone said "I delay." Then the GM had to go through everyone again i9n initiative order, and everyone had their actual turn.
Sheesh. On your turn, just have your turn!
Also, you can certainly use Ready to take the Attack Action. This is what lets you Ready a grapple or shove (something you can't do with an Opportunity Attack).
We also feel that if the rule writers intended to limit attacks to one attack when taking a readied attack, they would have spelled it out clearly in the description of the readied action. Just like it’s clearly spelled out that an opportunity attack is a single attack under the opportunity attack description and the reaction description clearly refers to the opportunity attack description, leaving no doubt about the rules intentions.
There is absolutely no reason to include the text "on your turn" in the definition of Extra Attack other than to restrict the use of Extra Attack to being on your turn. The wording of Extra Attack without those additional 3 words would make the ability work when you take the Attack action as the Readied action (or in any other case where you would be allowed to perform an Attack action outside of your own turn).
Maybe so, but we find it odd that it wasn’t better defined under the ready action description. That’s all I’m saying, the writers could easily have made their intentions much clearer. Im down to redundantly repeating myself so I’ll say we’ve all been happy the way we play it, DM and players and alike. Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
I must say that I agree that Extra Attack doesn't work with Ready unless the trigger occurs on your turn. I might house rule it differently, but this is Rules and Game Mechanics, so we are discussing RAW (and/or RAI). The 3 words "on your turn" make RAW pretty clear IMHO.
The "Everyone delays" issue is solved by the fact that a reaction must have a specific trigger. If everyone tries to use Ready, it's highly unlikely that any of them will be triggered.
You can't prepare move and attack as a readied action, you have to pick one. Also, you only get one attack even if you would normally get more than that.
RAW implies that it can only be an action, so you can't ready movement.
RAW implies no such thing. RAW states clearly that you can ready movement.
Then, you choose the action you will take in response to that trigger, or you choose to move up to your speed in response to it.
I think the focus should be more on that or than on the move up to your speed part of things. You choose an action in response to the trigger or you move up to your speed in response to it, i.e. more or less taking the dash action as a reaction.
You can't prepare move and attack as a readied action, you have to pick one. Also, you only get one attack even if you would normally get more than that.
RAW implies that it can only be an action, so you can't ready movement.
RAW implies no such thing. RAW states clearly that you can ready movement.
Then, you choose the action you will take in response to that trigger, or you choose to move up to your speed in response to it.
I think the focus should be more on that or than on the move up to your speed part of things. You choose an action in response to the trigger or you move up to your speed in response to it, i.e. more or less taking the dash action as a reaction.
Yes? How is that a different argument than "you can ready movement"?
Maybe so, but we find it odd that it wasn’t better defined under the ready action description. That’s all I’m saying, the writers could easily have made their intentions much clearer. Im down to redundantly repeating myself so I’ll say we’ve all been happy the way we play it, DM and players and alike. Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
I don't think it would be sensible for the rulebook to refer out to lots of other places from the "Ready action" section, when a simple inclusion of "on your turn" would implicitly exclude any ability from working with a Readied action.
I have a question concerning the Ready action to Cast a Spell. And the question revolves around having to meet the conditions for the spell:
Range. Let's say there is an opponent who is 70 feet away, but the range of my spell is 60 feet. The trigger is "when that enemy gets within range this spell will discharge". Can I ready this spell with that enemy as the target, even though the enemy is not within range?
Enemy in Sight. Okay there is an Orc barreling down the hallway on the other side of the door. I can clearly hear it huffing and puffing. I am going to Ready a spell, and the trigger is "when that blasted Orc comes through the door...". But the condition for the spell includes, "... a creature you can see...". Can I still Ready that spell even though I cannot see that creature during the casting?
Why is this important? Well, the bottom line is that the spell is actually cast on the turn, the caster is just holding the energy by concentrating on it. So if the spell has already been cast, then an enemy could not Counterspell it because it has already been cast.
I have a question concerning the Ready action to Cast a Spell. And the question revolves around having to meet the conditions for the spell:
Range. Let's say there is an opponent who is 70 feet away, but the range of my spell is 60 feet. The trigger is "when that enemy gets within range this spell will discharge". Can I ready this spell with that enemy as the target, even though the enemy is not within range?
Enemy in Sight. Okay there is an Orc barreling down the hallway on the other side of the door. I can clearly hear it huffing and puffing. I am going to Ready a spell, and the trigger is "when that blasted Orc comes through the door...". But the condition for the spell includes, "... a creature you can see...". Can I still Ready that spell even though I cannot see that creature during the casting?
Why is this important? Well, the bottom line is that the spell is actually cast on the turn, the caster is just holding the energy by concentrating on it. So if the spell has already been cast, then an enemy could not Counterspell it because it has already been cast.
Any thoughts? (he wrote on a form thread...)
Thanks in advance.
Found this in SAC:
For readying a spell or other action, does the target have to be in range? Your target must be within range when you take a readied action, not when you first ready it.
So, yes you can ready a spell that has no viable targets at the time.
It makes for an interesting situation where you can ready a spell behind cover, then walk out and release it on a target without any casting components that would allow counterspell. That's a lot of work just to beat counterspell, but it works as a proof of concept.
Oh, right. That was just an example. The gist of my question revolved around whether or not the conditions to cast a spell needed to be met in order to Ready a spell.
It makes for an interesting situation where you can ready a spell behind cover, then walk out and release it on a target without any casting components that would allow counterspell. That's a lot of work just to beat counterspell, but it works as a proof of concept.
You're still in the process of casting a spell when you have it readied. That's why it requires your concentration to keep the spell incomplete.
Counterspell doesn't require knowledge of any casting components.
It makes for an interesting situation where you can ready a spell behind cover, then walk out and release it on a target without any casting components that would allow counterspell. That's a lot of work just to beat counterspell, but it works as a proof of concept.
You're still in the process of casting a spell when you have it readied. That's why it requires your concentration to keep the spell incomplete.
Counterspell doesn't require knowledge of any casting components.
I can't tell if you are suggesting something I said in my example is incorrect.
I think they're saying you can, in fact, Counterspell a Readied spell, since you're still "casting" it when you have it Readied, but before you loose it, and because Counterspell doesn't require knowledge of any casting components.
I'm inclined to agree. Generally, somatic or verbal components are taken as "required" for Counterspell, since you need to know a spell is being cast in order to stop it. But there is no such actual requirement. A spell cast behind cover can still be perceivable (certainly if it has a verbal component), and when the caster comes out of cover to loose the spell, and finish the casting, they're still "casting" the spell, so it could be interrupted. Whether a spell with somatic components but without verbal components, cast from hiding/cover, and loosed out in the open can be interrupted with Counterspell might be more iffy, since the only clue as to the spell being cast (somatic components) was not perceived by the counterspeller, so you can probably conclude that they had no knowledge of the spell being cast, and therefore no ability to interrupt it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Did you miss my reply #36 above? I think I gave a very good reason for why RAW is the way that it is.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
Yes, I saw it, but I don’t agree with it. A melee weapon user can loose an attack action if the trigger never unfolds as well as a spell caster loosing a spell slot. It’s the risk one takes with the ready action.
I'm not sure you really follow. Spellcasters lose a spell slot if the trigger never happens. They spent the spell slot to start casting (and even if it's not a concentration spell they need to concentrate to ready it - don't forget that).
So spellcasters have to drop a spell if they're already concentrating - they risk losing their spell slot if they're attacked and they risk losing the spell slot if the trigger never happens. Martials lose no resources if their ready action never happens.
Also - what about the part about timing?
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
I follow what your saying, I just think that’s a risk of reading a spell. Spell casting and melee attacks are two different animals.
I don’t think timing is an issue at all. Let’s say a 5th level fighter takes two attacks on his turn and then takes an opportunity attack in the same round as a reaction. I don’t see how reading to attack and then attacking with both attacks which uses up ones reaction can take anymore time. Deciding to ready an attack if something happens is a split second decision.
My intention isn’t to change anyone’s mind or prove I’m right. I just wanted to add to the discussion as to why we have the house rule we do and the why we feel the rules aren’t crystal clear on this subject.
There is absolutely no reason to include the text "on your turn" in the definition of Extra Attack other than to restrict the use of Extra Attack to being on your turn. The wording of Extra Attack without those additional 3 words would make the ability work when you take the Attack action as the Readied action (or in any other case where you would be allowed to perform an Attack action outside of your own turn).
My understanding is that the "on your turn" requirements are there to stop people using Ready. It is the same reason why Delay is not an option. It avoids stupid situations where everyone delays, and the round takes twice as long as it should.
I'm not kidding about the "everyone delays." I played in a 4E combat where every single player at the table used Delay on their turn, which meant every round took twice as long. First the GM went through everyone in initiative order, and everyone said "I delay." Then the GM had to go through everyone again i9n initiative order, and everyone had their actual turn.
Sheesh. On your turn, just have your turn!
Also, you can certainly use Ready to take the Attack Action. This is what lets you Ready a grapple or shove (something you can't do with an Opportunity Attack).
Maybe so, but we find it odd that it wasn’t better defined under the ready action description. That’s all I’m saying, the writers could easily have made their intentions much clearer. Im down to redundantly repeating myself so I’ll say we’ve all been happy the way we play it, DM and players and alike. Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
I must say that I agree that Extra Attack doesn't work with Ready unless the trigger occurs on your turn. I might house rule it differently, but this is Rules and Game Mechanics, so we are discussing RAW (and/or RAI). The 3 words "on your turn" make RAW pretty clear IMHO.
The "Everyone delays" issue is solved by the fact that a reaction must have a specific trigger. If everyone tries to use Ready, it's highly unlikely that any of them will be triggered.
I think the focus should be more on that or than on the move up to your speed part of things. You choose an action in response to the trigger or you move up to your speed in response to it, i.e. more or less taking the dash action as a reaction.
Yes? How is that a different argument than "you can ready movement"?
Apologies! I misinterpreted what you were saying via the reply boxes! I see now what you were saying!
I don't think it would be sensible for the rulebook to refer out to lots of other places from the "Ready action" section, when a simple inclusion of "on your turn" would implicitly exclude any ability from working with a Readied action.
I have a question concerning the Ready action to Cast a Spell. And the question revolves around having to meet the conditions for the spell:
Range. Let's say there is an opponent who is 70 feet away, but the range of my spell is 60 feet. The trigger is "when that enemy gets within range this spell will discharge". Can I ready this spell with that enemy as the target, even though the enemy is not within range?
Enemy in Sight. Okay there is an Orc barreling down the hallway on the other side of the door. I can clearly hear it huffing and puffing. I am going to Ready a spell, and the trigger is "when that blasted Orc comes through the door...". But the condition for the spell includes, "... a creature you can see...". Can I still Ready that spell even though I cannot see that creature during the casting?
Why is this important? Well, the bottom line is that the spell is actually cast on the turn, the caster is just holding the energy by concentrating on it. So if the spell has already been cast, then an enemy could not Counterspell it because it has already been cast.
Any thoughts? (he wrote on a form thread...)
Thanks in advance.
Found this in SAC:
So, yes you can ready a spell that has no viable targets at the time.
It makes for an interesting situation where you can ready a spell behind cover, then walk out and release it on a target without any casting components that would allow counterspell. That's a lot of work just to beat counterspell, but it works as a proof of concept.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Oh, right. That was just an example. The gist of my question revolved around whether or not the conditions to cast a spell needed to be met in order to Ready a spell.
You're still in the process of casting a spell when you have it readied. That's why it requires your concentration to keep the spell incomplete.
Counterspell doesn't require knowledge of any casting components.
I can't tell if you are suggesting something I said in my example is incorrect.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I think they're saying you can, in fact, Counterspell a Readied spell, since you're still "casting" it when you have it Readied, but before you loose it, and because Counterspell doesn't require knowledge of any casting components.
I'm inclined to agree. Generally, somatic or verbal components are taken as "required" for Counterspell, since you need to know a spell is being cast in order to stop it. But there is no such actual requirement. A spell cast behind cover can still be perceivable (certainly if it has a verbal component), and when the caster comes out of cover to loose the spell, and finish the casting, they're still "casting" the spell, so it could be interrupted. Whether a spell with somatic components but without verbal components, cast from hiding/cover, and loosed out in the open can be interrupted with Counterspell might be more iffy, since the only clue as to the spell being cast (somatic components) was not perceived by the counterspeller, so you can probably conclude that they had no knowledge of the spell being cast, and therefore no ability to interrupt it.