You can cast a spell as an action, bonus action, or reaction... it all depends on the casting time.
The bonus action rule doesn't say you can't cast a spell as an action, it actually says you must cast a spell as an action.
The only time reaction spells can be cast is when their trigger is met.
Not quite. What it says is that IF you cast a spell, it must be an Action, and it must be a cantrip.
And it is certainly possible for a PC to cast a spell as a Bonus Action, like Dragon’s Breath for example, which prompts a villain to cast Counterspell, which would be a valid trigger for the PC to cast Counterspell, but shucks, they cast Dragon’s Breath as a Bonus Action, and since Counterspell fulfills neither of the two requirements:
being a Cantrip; nor
having a casting time of 1 Action;
therefore that PC cannot Counterspell the Counterspell.
You can if your turn is over. If you choose the counterspell you are no longer in your turn so you can. It might involve giving up your action or your movement.
Again, we are not talking about in a round, we are talking about within the same specific turn. So your point is completely irrelevant.
You said the order of events can't happen. I was showing you that that particular instance order of events can happen. True, not during the same turn but it can still happen.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
Reactions are not an exception to the general rules, they are the general rules. The limit on what you’re able to cast in combination with a bonus action spell is the exception to that general rule.
I very sincerely have no idea how this can be unclear to you or anyone. You’ve consistently failed to provide any justification for your statement that reactions are a specific exception to something else. What is the reaction description an exception to? Please, enlighten us.
Bonus action spells get specific about spell economy, when bonus action spells are cast. I won't repeat it, we all know the text by now.
HOWEVER!
Reaction spells ALSO have a specific rule, and I won't quote the whole text so I can emphasize the SPECIFIC part: "...the spell description tells you exactly when you can do so."
Now, do any reaction spells provide a description of EXACTLY WHEN that contradicts the Bonus Action spell specific rule? Here's a list of reaction spells:
The only spell that can really be used in combat during your turn is Counterspell. It has the following rule for when it can be cast: " - which you take when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell"
So there are 2 specific rulings for Reaction spells:
Requires a trigger
The spell says when you can use it
As far as I see it, there are two sets of specific rules, meant to supersede the general spell casting rules. Both of these specific rules contradict each other. There is no precedent (that I know of) that says what specific rule applies first.
If you use your reaction to cast counterspell (because the spell defines when you can cast it as a reaction), then you break the bonus action spell rule.
If you don't let the player use the counterspell reaction because of the bonus action spell rule, then you break the specific counterspell rule.
So no one in this thread is correct. Doesn't matter what you choose, you break one rule or the other.
Now, let me move on to actual game play. Combat can be tedious and ruin immersion for many. Most people (I'm generalizing) prefer combat to be fast paced and full of tension and uncertainty. DM's strive to keep the action going and keep players engaged. There's nothing that's going to bring combat to a screeching grinding halt more suddenly than a DM that stops combat to tell a player he can't use his reaction because the spell he cast was a bonus action. This can erupt into full blown argument at the table when a previous caster (or the same caster on a previous turn) cast an action spell, and DID get to cast counterspell to counter counterspell.
If the DM holds to the Bonus Action spell rule, while the player holds to the Reaction spell rule, which both contradict each other, is the DM really going to breed animosity at his table to have the last word? I know DM's have final say for rulings, and in the heat of the moment I also hold to this. But after the game is over, if the player brings the subject up, I can't see why a DM would hold to his guns on this paradox. Why piss off your player(s)?
As for me, I house rule this issue: Each spell you cast on your turn has to take one from column A and column B. Mix and match as you wish. Reactions are separate.
COLUMN A | COLUMN B
Cantrip | Action
Spell Slot | Bonus Action
There really aren't that many combos that make this rule overpowered, and it's simpler to explain to everyone at the table.
You can cast a spell as an action, bonus action, or reaction... it all depends on the casting time.
The bonus action rule doesn't say you can't cast a spell as an action, it actually says you must cast a spell as an action.
The only time reaction spells can be cast is when their trigger is met.
Not quite. What it says is that IF you cast a spell, it must be an Action, and it must be a cantrip.
And it is certainly possible for a PC to cast a spell as a Bonus Action, like Dragon’s Breath for example, which prompts a villain to cast Counterspell, which would be a valid trigger for the PC to cast Counterspell, but shucks, they cast Dragon’s Breath as a Bonus Action, and since Counterspell fulfills neither of the two requirements:
being a Cantrip; nor
having a casting time of 1 Action;
therefore that PC cannot Counterspell the Counterspell.
You can if your turn is over. If you choose the counterspell you are no longer in your turn so you can. It might involve giving up your action or your movement.
Again, we are not talking about in a round, we are talking about within the same specific turn. So your point is completely irrelevant.
You said the order of events can't happen. I was showing you that that particular instance order of events can happen. True, not during the same turn but it can still happen.
No, it can’t. If you cast Dragon’s Breath as a bonus action on your turn, and your opponent counterspells you (still on your turn), you can’t counterspell that counterspell, because it’s still the same turn. Sure, you can counterspell some different counterspell that occurs off your turn, but that’s exactly what Sposta is saying no one is talking about.
You can cast a spell as an action, bonus action, or reaction... it all depends on the casting time.
The bonus action rule doesn't say you can't cast a spell as an action, it actually says you must cast a spell as an action.
The only time reaction spells can be cast is when their trigger is met.
Not quite. What it says is that IF you cast a spell, it must be an Action, and it must be a cantrip.
And it is certainly possible for a PC to cast a spell as a Bonus Action, like Dragon’s Breath for example, which prompts a villain to cast Counterspell, which would be a valid trigger for the PC to cast Counterspell, but shucks, they cast Dragon’s Breath as a Bonus Action, and since Counterspell fulfills neither of the two requirements:
being a Cantrip; nor
having a casting time of 1 Action;
therefore that PC cannot Counterspell the Counterspell.
You can if your turn is over. If you choose the counterspell you are no longer in your turn so you can. It might involve giving up your action or your movement.
Again, we are not talking about in a round, we are talking about within the same specific turn. So your point is completely irrelevant.
You said the order of events can't happen. I was showing you that that particular instance order of events can happen. True, not during the same turn but it can still happen.
Since I was only ever saying that the order of events can’t happen in the same turn, your comment is still completely irrelevant. (No offense intended.)
Bonus action spells get specific about spell economy, when bonus action spells are cast. I won't repeat it, we all know the text by now.
HOWEVER!
Reaction spells ALSO have a specific rule, and I won't quote the whole text so I can emphasize the SPECIFIC part: "...the spell description tells you exactly when you can do so."
Now, do any reaction spells provide a description of EXACTLY WHEN that contradicts the Bonus Action spell specific rule? Here's a list of reaction spells:
The only spell that can really be used in combat during your turn is Counterspell. It has the following rule for when it can be cast: " - which you take when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell"
So there are 2 specific rulings for Reaction spells:
Requires a trigger
The spell says when you can use it
As far as I see it, there are two sets of specific rules, meant to supersede the general spell casting rules. Both of these specific rules contradict each other. There is no precedent (that I know of) that says what specific rule applies first.
If you use your reaction to cast counterspell (because the spell defines when you can cast it as a reaction), then you break the bonus action spell rule.
If you don't let the player use the counterspell reaction because of the bonus action spell rule, then you break the specific counterspell rule.
So no one in this thread is correct. Doesn't matter what you choose, you break one rule or the other.
That’s the exact same prima facie invalid reasoning that suggests you don’t need a spell slot (or even an available reaction) to cast a spell as a reaction.
Try to use semantics to circumnavigate the reaction rule won't work... when they say 'when' they mean 'whether'... or 'hotdog' or any others words you want to use to befuddle the rule.
If the Counterspell says I can cast it on my turn, then I can cast it on my turn... but if I have already cast a Bonus Action spell them I am breaking a rule.
If I have already cast a Bonus Action spell and therefore cannot cast a Reaction spell... then I am breaking a rule.
This is the contradiction. How can it be resolved? (It probably can't?)
Again, it’s resolved in the Basic Rules section I linked explaining that the specific rule overrides the general one. Easy.
Try to use semantics to circumnavigate the reaction rule won't work... when they say 'when' they mean 'whether'... or 'hotdog' or any others words you want to use to befuddle the rule.
If the Counterspell says I can cast it on my turn, then I can cast it on my turn... but if I have already cast a Bonus Action spell them I am breaking a rule.
If I have already cast a Bonus Action spell and therefore cannot cast a Reaction spell... then I am breaking a rule.
This is the contradiction. How can it be resolved? (It probably can't?)
It can easily be resolved. What you are continually ignoring is that the Reaction Rules say “If this: then this” and the bonus action rules say “if that: then that” and if “that” means that “this” cannot happen then it cannot happen.
Like, the rules of physics say that a car cannot go while the breaks are on. The rules of driving say that when the light turns green, you can go. But if the light turns green and you still have your breaks on it doesn’t cause some contradiction that invalidates physics. Truth, 0 shits given what color the light is, if you got the breaks on you ain’t goin’ nowhere.
The reaction rules are the green light, the bonus action rules are the breaks.
The rules for Reaction spells tell you Generally when you are able to cast one. From the Basic Rules:
Reactions
Some spells can be cast as reactions. These spells take a fraction of a second to bring about and are cast in response to some event. If a spell can be cast as a reaction, the spell description tells you exactly when you can do so
If your argument is that this is the only rule that governs when you can cast a Reaction spell, you are wrong. In other sections it is made clear that there are other requirements to be able to cast a reaction spell, including
You must have a spell slot available (from the spell slot rules elsewhere in Chapter 10, section titled "Spell Slots")
You must have a reaction available (from the reaction rules in Chapter 9, section titled "Your Turn")
I'm not sure why you think the rules for a Reaction spell are an island to themselves when they are clearly governed by other rules in other areas. If you admit that, then you have to admit that it can also be governed by the Bonus action spell rule, which specifically prohibits other spells from being cast (with one, very specific type of spell excepted)
Also, the rule in question is stated as a "you can" rule. Such rules are open to modification by other rules that say "you can't" because those create exceptions to the "you can" rule. For example:
If I meet the trigger for Counterspell, but don't have a 3rd level or higher spell slot, then I can't cast Counterspell (because the spell slots rule says I can't)
If I meet the trigger for Counterspell, but don't have a reaction available, I can't cast Counterspell (because the reactions rule says I can't)
And likewise:
If I meet the trigger for Counterspell, but its my turn and I have cast a bonus action spell (or want to before the turn ends), then I can't cast Counterspell (because the bonus action spellcasting rule says I can't)
This relationship doesn't work in reverse, because if it did then reaction spells could be cast without spell slots and without needing a reaction available. Looking at it another way helps as well: A rule that says "you can" always gives you the choice to do so or not; it's not an imperative ( It doesn't mean that "you must"). However, a rule that says "you can't" is an imperative, and without a clear exception to that imperative, has to be obeyed.
PHB: Chapter 10 -> Casting a Spell -> Casting Time
Bonus Action
A spell cast with a bonus action is especially swift. You must use a bonus action on your turn to cast the spell, provided that you haven't already taken a bonus action this turn. You can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
Reactions
Some spells can be cast as reactions. These spells take a fraction of a second to bring about and are cast in response to some event. If a spell can be cast as a reaction, the spell description tells you exactly when you can do so.
These are two paragraphs that provide specifics to an otherwise general rule, ie: "Most spells require a single action to cast"
Notice that for reactions, it says, "IF A SPELL CAN BE CAST AS A REACTION,..." and not "IF A REACTION SPELL CAN BE CAST,..."
The first implies all spells that have a casting time of "a reaction". The latter, which would be used to follow the general logic of this thread, would imply that the ruling about when to use the reaction hinges on being able to cast it in the first place.
But it is not written that way. They are separate distinct paragraphs, each providing a specification to a general rule and no order of precedence is provided. So each individual reaction spell specifically says when you can use them.
PHB: Chapter 10 -> Casting a Spell -> Casting Time
Bonus Action
A spell cast with a bonus action is especially swift. You must use a bonus action on your turn to cast the spell, provided that you haven't already taken a bonus action this turn. You can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
Reactions
Some spells can be cast as reactions. These spells take a fraction of a second to bring about and are cast in response to some event. If a spell can be cast as a reaction, the spell description tells you exactly when you can do so.
These are two paragraphs that provide specifics to an otherwise general rule, ie: "Most spells require a single action to cast"
Notice that for reactions, it says, "IF A SPELL CAN BE CAST AS A REACTION,..." and not "IF A REACTION SPELL CAN BE CAST,..."
The first implies all spells that have a casting time of "a reaction". The latter, which would be used to follow the general logic of this thread, would imply that the ruling about when to use the reaction hinges on being able to cast it in the first place.
But it is not written that way. They are separate distinct paragraphs, each providing a specification to a general rule and no order of precedence is provided. So each individual reaction spell specifically says when you can use them.
Wrong...One provides an option, the other an imperative. Reactions give you the Option to cast a reaction when the trigger is met. If it wasn't an option you would be forced to cast it every time you met the trigger. The Bonus action gives you an imperative to obey. You have to obey it, unless a specific exception is met.
If they both have the same force; you would be required to cast Counterspell against any spell you could see within range, but that is not the case.
General Rules that say "you can" can always be overridden by a general or specific rule that says "you can't". General Rules that say "you can't" only get overridden by either direct exceptions in the rule or by specific examples. That's not a written rule, its logic, and without it, all of the rules breakdown (see my post above)
Notice that for reactions, it says, "IF A SPELL CAN BE CAST AS A REACTION,..." and not "IF A REACTION SPELL CAN BE CAST,..."
The first implies all spells that have a casting time of "a reaction". The latter, which would be used to follow the general logic of this thread, would imply that the ruling about when to use the reaction hinges on being able to cast it in the first place.
But it is not written that way. They are separate distinct paragraphs, each providing a specification to a general rule and no order of precedence is provided. So each individual reaction spell specifically says when you can use them.
What you’re missing is that if it said “IF A REACTION SPELL CAN BE CAST,...” that would be a rule about when spells can be cast as reactions. It isn’t though.
As you pointed out, it clearly says “IF A SPELL CAN BE CAST AS A REACTION,...” which means that this is instead simply telling us where we can find the various triggers for each individual spell, specifically, in the descriptions for those individual spells.
So this “rule” isn’t actually a rule about when spells are allowed to be cast as reactions. This is just telling us where to look for the appropriate trigger for each reaction spell.
On the other hand, this is a simple “if: then” statement:
Bonus Action
A spell cast with a bonus action is especially swift. You must use a bonus action on your turn to cast the spell, provided that you haven't already taken a bonus action this turn. You can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
“If: You cast a spell as a bonus action.... Then: You cannot cast any other spells this turn except for Cantrips that take an action to cast.”
OK, let's try it this way. It's your turn, you are in an antimagic-shell, you move out of the reach of a monster, and you would like to cast shield to protect yourself against an incoming AoO (so "reaction spell" on your turn, right ?).
Can you do it ? No, of course, because there is another rule preventing you from casting the goddam spell even though the rules about reactions spells says you can.
It's exactly the same thing if you have already cast a spell as a bonus action. An additional restriction. How hard is it to understand ?
Read the description. The field doesn't prevent the spell from being cast, because the spell slot is still consumed. The field just prevents the magic from actually doing anything.
As you pointed out, it clearly says “IF A SPELL CAN BE CAST AS A REACTION,...” which means that this is instead simply telling us where we can find the various triggers for each individual spell, specifically, in the descriptions for those individual spells.
You are cherry picking to validate your argument. You will happily interpret the first part the way you want, to justify your argument. But then you completely ignore the second part, which is EXPLICIT in telling you WHEN you can use the reaction.
The paragraph on Reactions is a SPECIFIC rule FOR reactions.
There are two specific rules and they contradict each other.
Why is the Bonus an exception and not the Reaction?... neither says they are exceptions.
They both appear in the PHB. under casting times of spells.
Why are they not both the common ways to cast Bonus or Reaction spells?
The Bonus Action rule:
Bonus Action
A spell cast with a bonus action is especially swift. You must use a bonus action on your turn to cast the spell, provided that you haven't already taken a bonus action this turn. You can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
The Reaction rule:
Reactions
Some spells can be cast as reactions. These spells take a fraction of a second to bring about and are cast in response to some event. If a spell can be cast as a reaction, the spell description tells you exactly when you can do so.
No matter which rule is enforced over the other, they contradict each other... it can easily be argued that the Reaction rule is an exception also and therefore whenever their triggers are met they can be cast... so a Reaction spell can be cast on your turn even if you've already cast a Bonus Action spell.
And just because you say the Bonus Action rule is an exception doesn't make it so... it appears to just be listed as a casting time rule.
Okay, I'll make it really simple for you. Exceptions happen under specific circumstances. In general, you're able to cast a spell with a cast time of a reaction as a reaction in reaction to the trigger. But under specific exceptional circumstances, that general rule is superseded. For example, if you don't have a spell slot to cast the spell with, you can't cast it. If you don't have an available reaction, you can't cast it. If you've already cast a spell as a bonus action in the same turn, you can't cast it.
The reason the bonus action text is the specific rule and the reaction text is the general rule is because that is fundamentally what specific and general mean.
The bonus action text obviously creates an exception, because it includes text that overrides other general rules on what you can and cannot do with your action economy: "You can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action."
The reaction text doesn't create any exception at all. If you think the reaction text is an exception to some general rule, please point it out. I asked you to do this in my last response to you, and you've yet failed to do so.
As you pointed out, it clearly says “IF A SPELL CAN BE CAST AS A REACTION,...” which means that this is instead simply telling us where we can find the various triggers for each individual spell, specifically, in the descriptions for those individual spells.
You are cherry picking to validate your argument. You will happily interpret the first part the way you want, to justify your argument. But then you completely ignore the second part, which is EXPLICIT in telling you WHEN you can use the reaction.
The paragraph on Reactions is a SPECIFIC rule FOR reactions.
There are two specific rules and they contradict each other.
Please explain how the reaction rule is an imperative that overrides the bonus action rule, or even how the reaction rule is an imperative at all. It presents you an option only (it doesn't force you to use the reaction on the trigger), while the bonus action is an actual imperative you have to obey unless the specific exception given is met.
If they were both imperatives then there would be a contradiction, but because the reaction rule is not an imperative (it tells you when you have the option, not that you must), there is no conflict here because only one of the rules is actually an imperative.
As you pointed out, it clearly says “IF A SPELL CAN BE CAST AS A REACTION,...” which means that this is instead simply telling us where we can find the various triggers for each individual spell, specifically, in the descriptions for those individual spells.
The paragraph on Reactions is a SPECIFIC rule FOR reactions.
That's an egregiously absurd statement. The paragraph on reactions is a general rule, because it applies generally to all reactions regardless of circumstance. The text in the bonus action section is a specific exception, because it applies only to reactions used to cast spells in the same turn in which a spell has been cast with a bonus action.
The bonus action text creates a specific RULE to trump the general rule, that spells take actions to cast. If you want to use your action to cast again, then there is a specific requirement.
The reaction text also creates a specific RULE, and has MANY specific requirements defined by the numerous spells themselves. Or, if you insist, the spell text has many exceptions for when it can't be cast (of which, the bonus action text is not part of any of them).
The reaction spells themselves create specific rules, and the text ruling on how to use Reactions says to look at the spells themselves.
Absorb Elements: Can it be cast if you take Force, Bludgeoning, Slashing, Piercing, Psychic, etc??? No, there are very specific requirements to when you can use this.
Counterspell: If I am suffering from the Blinded condition, but I hear a caster casting a spell with a Verbal component, can I cast counterspell? No, there are very specific requirements to when you can use this.
Feather Fall: Can you cast this BEFORE you jump and start falling? No, there are very specific requirements to when you can use this.
Gift of Gab: Ehh, maybe it could be interpreted as not working if you use thieve's cant?
Hellish Rebuke You're fighting a single creature in melee. It hits you, but you are suffering from the Blind conditions, can you cast it? No, there are very specific requirements to when you can use this.
Shield: pretty specific. Can't imagine why you'd want to use it before you get hit...
Soul Cage: Can you use this against a monstrosity? Against a beast? Against a.. you get the point. No, it has a very specific requirements to when you can use this.
Temporal Shunt: Again, if you're blind. SOL. Very specific requirement to when it can be cast. Or if you insist on using "exception" then the spell has a very specific exception to when it CAN'T be cast.
You said the order of events can't happen. I was showing you that that particular instance order of events can happen. True, not during the same turn but it can still happen.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Reactions are not an exception to the general rules, they are the general rules. The limit on what you’re able to cast in combination with a bonus action spell is the exception to that general rule.
I very sincerely have no idea how this can be unclear to you or anyone. You’ve consistently failed to provide any justification for your statement that reactions are a specific exception to something else. What is the reaction description an exception to? Please, enlighten us.
General vs. specific rules.
Bonus action spells get specific about spell economy, when bonus action spells are cast. I won't repeat it, we all know the text by now.
HOWEVER!
Reaction spells ALSO have a specific rule, and I won't quote the whole text so I can emphasize the SPECIFIC part: "...the spell description tells you exactly when you can do so."
Now, do any reaction spells provide a description of EXACTLY WHEN that contradicts the Bonus Action spell specific rule? Here's a list of reaction spells:
The only spell that can really be used in combat during your turn is Counterspell. It has the following rule for when it can be cast: " - which you take when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell"
So there are 2 specific rulings for Reaction spells:
As far as I see it, there are two sets of specific rules, meant to supersede the general spell casting rules. Both of these specific rules contradict each other. There is no precedent (that I know of) that says what specific rule applies first.
So no one in this thread is correct. Doesn't matter what you choose, you break one rule or the other.
Now, let me move on to actual game play. Combat can be tedious and ruin immersion for many. Most people (I'm generalizing) prefer combat to be fast paced and full of tension and uncertainty. DM's strive to keep the action going and keep players engaged. There's nothing that's going to bring combat to a screeching grinding halt more suddenly than a DM that stops combat to tell a player he can't use his reaction because the spell he cast was a bonus action. This can erupt into full blown argument at the table when a previous caster (or the same caster on a previous turn) cast an action spell, and DID get to cast counterspell to counter counterspell.
If the DM holds to the Bonus Action spell rule, while the player holds to the Reaction spell rule, which both contradict each other, is the DM really going to breed animosity at his table to have the last word? I know DM's have final say for rulings, and in the heat of the moment I also hold to this. But after the game is over, if the player brings the subject up, I can't see why a DM would hold to his guns on this paradox. Why piss off your player(s)?
As for me, I house rule this issue: Each spell you cast on your turn has to take one from column A and column B. Mix and match as you wish. Reactions are separate.
COLUMN A | COLUMN B
Cantrip | Action
Spell Slot | Bonus Action
There really aren't that many combos that make this rule overpowered, and it's simpler to explain to everyone at the table.
No, it can’t. If you cast Dragon’s Breath as a bonus action on your turn, and your opponent counterspells you (still on your turn), you can’t counterspell that counterspell, because it’s still the same turn. Sure, you can counterspell some different counterspell that occurs off your turn, but that’s exactly what Sposta is saying no one is talking about.
The spell description tells you when you can cast a reaction spell. It does not tell you whether you can cast it.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Since I was only ever saying that the order of events can’t happen in the same turn, your comment is still completely irrelevant. (No offense intended.)
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
That’s the exact same prima facie invalid reasoning that suggests you don’t need a spell slot (or even an available reaction) to cast a spell as a reaction.
Again, it’s resolved in the Basic Rules section I linked explaining that the specific rule overrides the general one. Easy.
Respectfully, this statement is objectively incorrect.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
It can easily be resolved. What you are continually ignoring is that the Reaction Rules say “If this: then this” and the bonus action rules say “if that: then that” and if “that” means that “this” cannot happen then it cannot happen.
Like, the rules of physics say that a car cannot go while the breaks are on. The rules of driving say that when the light turns green, you can go. But if the light turns green and you still have your breaks on it doesn’t cause some contradiction that invalidates physics. Truth, 0 shits given what color the light is, if you got the breaks on you ain’t goin’ nowhere.
The reaction rules are the green light, the bonus action rules are the breaks.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The rules for Reaction spells tell you Generally when you are able to cast one. From the Basic Rules:
If your argument is that this is the only rule that governs when you can cast a Reaction spell, you are wrong. In other sections it is made clear that there are other requirements to be able to cast a reaction spell, including
I'm not sure why you think the rules for a Reaction spell are an island to themselves when they are clearly governed by other rules in other areas. If you admit that, then you have to admit that it can also be governed by the Bonus action spell rule, which specifically prohibits other spells from being cast (with one, very specific type of spell excepted)
Also, the rule in question is stated as a "you can" rule. Such rules are open to modification by other rules that say "you can't" because those create exceptions to the "you can" rule. For example:
And likewise:
This relationship doesn't work in reverse, because if it did then reaction spells could be cast without spell slots and without needing a reaction available. Looking at it another way helps as well: A rule that says "you can" always gives you the choice to do so or not; it's not an imperative ( It doesn't mean that "you must"). However, a rule that says "you can't" is an imperative, and without a clear exception to that imperative, has to be obeyed.
PHB: Chapter 10 -> Casting a Spell -> Casting Time
Bonus Action
A spell cast with a bonus action is especially swift. You must use a bonus action on your turn to cast the spell, provided that you haven't already taken a bonus action this turn. You can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
Reactions
Some spells can be cast as reactions. These spells take a fraction of a second to bring about and are cast in response to some event. If a spell can be cast as a reaction, the spell description tells you exactly when you can do so.
These are two paragraphs that provide specifics to an otherwise general rule, ie: "Most spells require a single action to cast"
Notice that for reactions, it says, "IF A SPELL CAN BE CAST AS A REACTION,..." and not "IF A REACTION SPELL CAN BE CAST,..."
The first implies all spells that have a casting time of "a reaction". The latter, which would be used to follow the general logic of this thread, would imply that the ruling about when to use the reaction hinges on being able to cast it in the first place.
But it is not written that way. They are separate distinct paragraphs, each providing a specification to a general rule and no order of precedence is provided. So each individual reaction spell specifically says when you can use them.
Wrong...One provides an option, the other an imperative. Reactions give you the Option to cast a reaction when the trigger is met. If it wasn't an option you would be forced to cast it every time you met the trigger. The Bonus action gives you an imperative to obey. You have to obey it, unless a specific exception is met.
If they both have the same force; you would be required to cast Counterspell against any spell you could see within range, but that is not the case.
General Rules that say "you can" can always be overridden by a general or specific rule that says "you can't". General Rules that say "you can't" only get overridden by either direct exceptions in the rule or by specific examples. That's not a written rule, its logic, and without it, all of the rules breakdown (see my post above)
What you’re missing is that if it said “IF A REACTION SPELL CAN BE CAST,...” that would be a rule about when spells can be cast as reactions. It isn’t though.
As you pointed out, it clearly says “IF A SPELL CAN BE CAST AS A REACTION,...” which means that this is instead simply telling us where we can find the various triggers for each individual spell, specifically, in the descriptions for those individual spells.
So this “rule” isn’t actually a rule about when spells are allowed to be cast as reactions. This is just telling us where to look for the appropriate trigger for each reaction spell.
On the other hand, this is a simple “if: then” statement:
“If: You cast a spell as a bonus action....
Then: You cannot cast any other spells this turn except for Cantrips that take an action to cast.”
What part of this is unclear to people?!?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Assuming you mean Antimagic Field, then you are WRONG here.
Read the description. The field doesn't prevent the spell from being cast, because the spell slot is still consumed. The field just prevents the magic from actually doing anything.
You are cherry picking to validate your argument. You will happily interpret the first part the way you want, to justify your argument. But then you completely ignore the second part, which is EXPLICIT in telling you WHEN you can use the reaction.
The paragraph on Reactions is a SPECIFIC rule FOR reactions.
There are two specific rules and they contradict each other.
Okay, I'll make it really simple for you. Exceptions happen under specific circumstances. In general, you're able to cast a spell with a cast time of a reaction as a reaction in reaction to the trigger. But under specific exceptional circumstances, that general rule is superseded. For example, if you don't have a spell slot to cast the spell with, you can't cast it. If you don't have an available reaction, you can't cast it. If you've already cast a spell as a bonus action in the same turn, you can't cast it.
The reason the bonus action text is the specific rule and the reaction text is the general rule is because that is fundamentally what specific and general mean.
The bonus action text obviously creates an exception, because it includes text that overrides other general rules on what you can and cannot do with your action economy: "You can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action."
The reaction text doesn't create any exception at all. If you think the reaction text is an exception to some general rule, please point it out. I asked you to do this in my last response to you, and you've yet failed to do so.
Please explain how the reaction rule is an imperative that overrides the bonus action rule, or even how the reaction rule is an imperative at all. It presents you an option only (it doesn't force you to use the reaction on the trigger), while the bonus action is an actual imperative you have to obey unless the specific exception given is met.
If they were both imperatives then there would be a contradiction, but because the reaction rule is not an imperative (it tells you when you have the option, not that you must), there is no conflict here because only one of the rules is actually an imperative.
That's an egregiously absurd statement. The paragraph on reactions is a general rule, because it applies generally to all reactions regardless of circumstance. The text in the bonus action section is a specific exception, because it applies only to reactions used to cast spells in the same turn in which a spell has been cast with a bonus action.
Your language is confusing.
The bonus action text creates a specific RULE to trump the general rule, that spells take actions to cast. If you want to use your action to cast again, then there is a specific requirement.
The reaction text also creates a specific RULE, and has MANY specific requirements defined by the numerous spells themselves. Or, if you insist, the spell text has many exceptions for when it can't be cast (of which, the bonus action text is not part of any of them).
The reaction spells themselves create specific rules, and the text ruling on how to use Reactions says to look at the spells themselves.