Is it possible to Ready a spell to be cast just before the start of your next turn by having the trigger be...

Do generators produce a fixed load?

Modify locally tikzset

Past Perfect Tense

Pawn Sacrifice Justification

What does YCWCYODFTRFDTY mean?

Does a creature that is immune to a condition still make a saving throw?

A non-technological, repeating, visible object in the sky, holding its position in the sky for hours

Stateful vs non-stateful app

Find the coordinate of two line segments that are perpendicular

Where did the extra Pym particles come from in Endgame?

How to figure out whether the data is sample data or population data apart from the client's information?

What's the metal clinking sound at the end of credits in Avengers: Endgame?

What is the strongest case that can be made in favour of the UK regaining some control over fishing policy after Brexit?

What is the difference between `a[bc]d` (brackets) and `a{b,c}d` (braces)?

In gnome-terminal only 2 out of 3 zoom keys work

Counterexample: a pair of linearly ordered sets that are isomorphic to subsets of the other, but not isomorphic between them

Why do Ichisongas hate elephants and hippos?

How to set the font color of quantity objects (Version 11.3 vs version 12)?

Has any spacecraft ever had the ability to directly communicate with civilian air traffic control?

Help, my Death Star suffers from Kessler syndrome!

How to creep the reader out with what seems like a normal person?

Cannot populate data in lightning data table

If Earth is tilted, why is Polaris always above the same spot?

Why is the origin of “threshold” uncertain?



Is it possible to Ready a spell to be cast just before the start of your next turn by having the trigger be an ally's attack?


How long can a readied spell be held before it's lost?Timing of the Ready action when the trigger is associated with spell casting?Clarification On Staying Hidden For Long Range Spell SnipersAre there higher level spells that use attack rolls?Does a spell with a duration of one round end at the beginning or the end of my next turn?“Delay Action” instead of “Ready Action”Do you get Extra Attacks when you ready an attack and use it in your own turn?Under what circumstances does an antimagic field suppress the casting of a spell?Does Silence cancel a readied spell?Can I target multiple creatures with a readied spell that can target multiple creatures?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







3












$begingroup$


Can the trigger criteria for a readied action be as simple as casting after an ally's attack?



If so, are there measures to prevent a pseudo double spell casting like the following example?




Player B: "I would like to ready my action - to cast the Slow spell centered on 'this' enemy, right after Player A makes his attack." (Player A goes right before Player B in initiative.)



Right after Player A makes his attack the Slow Spell is cast.



Player A then ends his turn.



Player B now has a full turn.




Is this a plausible scenario, or does it break the game's mechanics in any way, shape, or form?



Granted, you delay the 1st turn's spell being cast, but you almost guarantee that your spells occur back-to-back without a chance for an end-of-turn save to remove the spell's effects.



Possible issue examples:




  • Slow -> disintegrate/fireball.


  • Hold Person -> Hex + Scorching Ray at higher levels











share|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Great question! I like your examples of possible useful applications of this idea. A small issue with the last one: Hold Person and Hex are both Concentration spells, so you couldn't have them both active at the same time. I get what you're going for, though. It is a very neat idea to hold a Hold Person spell until after that creature's turn.
    $endgroup$
    – Gandalfmeansme
    5 mins ago


















3












$begingroup$


Can the trigger criteria for a readied action be as simple as casting after an ally's attack?



If so, are there measures to prevent a pseudo double spell casting like the following example?




Player B: "I would like to ready my action - to cast the Slow spell centered on 'this' enemy, right after Player A makes his attack." (Player A goes right before Player B in initiative.)



Right after Player A makes his attack the Slow Spell is cast.



Player A then ends his turn.



Player B now has a full turn.




Is this a plausible scenario, or does it break the game's mechanics in any way, shape, or form?



Granted, you delay the 1st turn's spell being cast, but you almost guarantee that your spells occur back-to-back without a chance for an end-of-turn save to remove the spell's effects.



Possible issue examples:




  • Slow -> disintegrate/fireball.


  • Hold Person -> Hex + Scorching Ray at higher levels











share|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Great question! I like your examples of possible useful applications of this idea. A small issue with the last one: Hold Person and Hex are both Concentration spells, so you couldn't have them both active at the same time. I get what you're going for, though. It is a very neat idea to hold a Hold Person spell until after that creature's turn.
    $endgroup$
    – Gandalfmeansme
    5 mins ago














3












3








3





$begingroup$


Can the trigger criteria for a readied action be as simple as casting after an ally's attack?



If so, are there measures to prevent a pseudo double spell casting like the following example?




Player B: "I would like to ready my action - to cast the Slow spell centered on 'this' enemy, right after Player A makes his attack." (Player A goes right before Player B in initiative.)



Right after Player A makes his attack the Slow Spell is cast.



Player A then ends his turn.



Player B now has a full turn.




Is this a plausible scenario, or does it break the game's mechanics in any way, shape, or form?



Granted, you delay the 1st turn's spell being cast, but you almost guarantee that your spells occur back-to-back without a chance for an end-of-turn save to remove the spell's effects.



Possible issue examples:




  • Slow -> disintegrate/fireball.


  • Hold Person -> Hex + Scorching Ray at higher levels











share|improve this question











$endgroup$




Can the trigger criteria for a readied action be as simple as casting after an ally's attack?



If so, are there measures to prevent a pseudo double spell casting like the following example?




Player B: "I would like to ready my action - to cast the Slow spell centered on 'this' enemy, right after Player A makes his attack." (Player A goes right before Player B in initiative.)



Right after Player A makes his attack the Slow Spell is cast.



Player A then ends his turn.



Player B now has a full turn.




Is this a plausible scenario, or does it break the game's mechanics in any way, shape, or form?



Granted, you delay the 1st turn's spell being cast, but you almost guarantee that your spells occur back-to-back without a chance for an end-of-turn save to remove the spell's effects.



Possible issue examples:




  • Slow -> disintegrate/fireball.


  • Hold Person -> Hex + Scorching Ray at higher levels








dnd-5e spells readied-action






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 1 hour ago









V2Blast

28.1k5101171




28.1k5101171










asked 2 hours ago









WheeliumWheelium

574




574












  • $begingroup$
    Great question! I like your examples of possible useful applications of this idea. A small issue with the last one: Hold Person and Hex are both Concentration spells, so you couldn't have them both active at the same time. I get what you're going for, though. It is a very neat idea to hold a Hold Person spell until after that creature's turn.
    $endgroup$
    – Gandalfmeansme
    5 mins ago


















  • $begingroup$
    Great question! I like your examples of possible useful applications of this idea. A small issue with the last one: Hold Person and Hex are both Concentration spells, so you couldn't have them both active at the same time. I get what you're going for, though. It is a very neat idea to hold a Hold Person spell until after that creature's turn.
    $endgroup$
    – Gandalfmeansme
    5 mins ago
















$begingroup$
Great question! I like your examples of possible useful applications of this idea. A small issue with the last one: Hold Person and Hex are both Concentration spells, so you couldn't have them both active at the same time. I get what you're going for, though. It is a very neat idea to hold a Hold Person spell until after that creature's turn.
$endgroup$
– Gandalfmeansme
5 mins ago




$begingroup$
Great question! I like your examples of possible useful applications of this idea. A small issue with the last one: Hold Person and Hex are both Concentration spells, so you couldn't have them both active at the same time. I get what you're going for, though. It is a very neat idea to hold a Hold Person spell until after that creature's turn.
$endgroup$
– Gandalfmeansme
5 mins ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

This is valid by the rules, but might get called out as metagaming



As Token's answer adequately covers, what you've described is valid according to the rules for readying a spell. However, depending on the style of play used at your table, your DM may disallow it because it is metagaming; that is, having your character act based on out-of-character knowledge. Here's what the rules have to say about rounds and turns in combat (emphasis added):




A typical combat encounter is a clash between two sides, a flurry of weapon swings, feints, parries, footwork, and spellcasting. The game organizes the chaos of combat into a cycle of rounds and turns. A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world. During a round, each participant in a battle takes a turn. The order of turns is determined at the beginning of a combat encounter, when everyone rolls initiative. Once everyone has taken a turn, the fight continues to the next round if neither side has defeated the other.




Note the sentence I have highlighted in bold: within the fiction, characters in the battle aren't really taking turns. They're all fighting simultaneously and continuously, but because simulating real-time combat is not practical, we compromise realism in favor of simplicity and have them all take turns in initiative order. However, this means that the initiative order is part of the game, not part of the game world, and thus the initiative order of combat is out-of-character knowledge, which means using that knowledge to guide your character's actions constitutes metagaming.



So, if you attempt to use this "double-spell combo" at a table that values in-character role playing and frowns on metagaming, you will probably be called out for choosing a trigger condition that has nothing to do with your readied action. You are effectively trying to find a loophole that lets you specify "after the target's turn ends" as your trigger in order to deny the target an end-of-turn save. On the other hand, other tables are happy to embrace the turn-based gameplay and treat combat like a chess game, and will instead congratulate you on the neat trick you found. You probably already have a pretty good idea of which kind of table you're playing at, but if not, you should ask your DM ahead of time before you try to pull out this trick during a session.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I wouldn't rush to call this metagaming, since in combat (even in a fantasy world) actions you decide to take can be and often are influenced by what those around you are doing at any given moment. Thinking tactically about the situation and making decisions based on observations in the midst of a fight is exactly what someone with high intelligence (like a Wizard) would do. You can see your Fighter friend laying into some hapless Orc and decide you want to get in on that in the most advantageous way possible without it being metagaming.
    $endgroup$
    – Seidr
    10 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Seidr I would say that it is definitely metagaming if your motivation for choosing a trigger condition is to approximate an invalid trigger ("after the enemy's turn ends"). However, there is definitely a gray area. If the choice of trigger is strategically defensible but your real reason for choosing it to release the spell after the enemy's turn, is it metagaming? I think these things vary from table to table, which is why I said it might be disallowed as metagaming.
    $endgroup$
    – Ryan Thompson
    1 min ago



















6












$begingroup$

Yes, that can be a declared trigger for the ready Action.



The rules for readying that are applicable:




Ready, PHB p. 193



First, you decide what perceivable circumstances will trigger your
reaction... When the trigger occurs, you can either take your reaction
right after the trigger finishes or ignore the trigger.




This does allow for the pseudo double spellcasting that you mentioned, though this may not be as much of an issue as one might think.



To accomplish this the PC has take on a few risks or drawbacks:




  • He needs to maintain concentration on the spell throughout the entire round; if he loses concentration, he loses the spell.


  • It's also possible that the ally (by his own volition or otherwise) might not attack in order to complete the trigger. This would give the PC in question no opportunity to cast his spell.


  • The PC will not be able to use any other reaction. A hefty cost when considering counterspell and other useful reaction spells.


  • The PC will also not be able to concentrate on any other spell while he holds his readied spell. Also a hefty cost.


  • If the spell cast by the PC had any perceivable casting components, he has then telegraphed his next move. Hostile creatures that understand a spell is being cast may act accordingly. (The PC can't counter the counter!)



This does not break the action economy or constitute an exploit. I can't extrapolate the player's reasoning for doing this, but it does seem to be a rather suboptimal choice to incur all of those negatives instead of an exploit that breaks anything. There is the payoff of being able to disadvantage the creature on its saving throw against his next spell, but, at least to me, it doesn't seem to outweigh all of the opportunity cost involved.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    The issue isn't necessarily concentration - it's combo'ing spells as a solo PC. Slow specifically makes it that units affected are disadvantaged on DEX save throws which means you're free to shoot a Fireball/Disintegrate on your turn.
    $endgroup$
    – Wheelium
    1 hour ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    The mention of concentration was to show that this tactic has some risks attached to it, making it a bit more 'fair' and not so much a perceived exploit. I maintain that the rules seem to allow this.
    $endgroup$
    – Token
    1 hour ago








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I would also add that if the ally does not attack for whatever reason the spell slot is wasted, which is yet another risk. Not to mention the caster would be "wasting" their earlier turn in order to ready the spell. The turn is essentially just being pushed back in the order, it's not more "broken" than casting on your own turn, you only take on additional risk.
    $endgroup$
    – Seidr
    1 hour ago












  • $begingroup$
    I had a few more hits of inspiration and added that! Thank ya.
    $endgroup$
    – Token
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    It may also be worth noting that the PC in question casts the spell on their turn, but holds its energy using concentration (as you mention) - which means it's clear to anyone who sees them perform the V/S/M spell components that they have cast a spell but it hasn't taken effect yet. This might draw the focus of intelligent enemies who could guess that they're holding the spell's energy. (This is up to how the DM runs the enemy, though.)
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    1 hour ago












Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "122"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f147079%2fis-it-possible-to-ready-a-spell-to-be-cast-just-before-the-start-of-your-next-tu%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









3












$begingroup$

This is valid by the rules, but might get called out as metagaming



As Token's answer adequately covers, what you've described is valid according to the rules for readying a spell. However, depending on the style of play used at your table, your DM may disallow it because it is metagaming; that is, having your character act based on out-of-character knowledge. Here's what the rules have to say about rounds and turns in combat (emphasis added):




A typical combat encounter is a clash between two sides, a flurry of weapon swings, feints, parries, footwork, and spellcasting. The game organizes the chaos of combat into a cycle of rounds and turns. A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world. During a round, each participant in a battle takes a turn. The order of turns is determined at the beginning of a combat encounter, when everyone rolls initiative. Once everyone has taken a turn, the fight continues to the next round if neither side has defeated the other.




Note the sentence I have highlighted in bold: within the fiction, characters in the battle aren't really taking turns. They're all fighting simultaneously and continuously, but because simulating real-time combat is not practical, we compromise realism in favor of simplicity and have them all take turns in initiative order. However, this means that the initiative order is part of the game, not part of the game world, and thus the initiative order of combat is out-of-character knowledge, which means using that knowledge to guide your character's actions constitutes metagaming.



So, if you attempt to use this "double-spell combo" at a table that values in-character role playing and frowns on metagaming, you will probably be called out for choosing a trigger condition that has nothing to do with your readied action. You are effectively trying to find a loophole that lets you specify "after the target's turn ends" as your trigger in order to deny the target an end-of-turn save. On the other hand, other tables are happy to embrace the turn-based gameplay and treat combat like a chess game, and will instead congratulate you on the neat trick you found. You probably already have a pretty good idea of which kind of table you're playing at, but if not, you should ask your DM ahead of time before you try to pull out this trick during a session.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I wouldn't rush to call this metagaming, since in combat (even in a fantasy world) actions you decide to take can be and often are influenced by what those around you are doing at any given moment. Thinking tactically about the situation and making decisions based on observations in the midst of a fight is exactly what someone with high intelligence (like a Wizard) would do. You can see your Fighter friend laying into some hapless Orc and decide you want to get in on that in the most advantageous way possible without it being metagaming.
    $endgroup$
    – Seidr
    10 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Seidr I would say that it is definitely metagaming if your motivation for choosing a trigger condition is to approximate an invalid trigger ("after the enemy's turn ends"). However, there is definitely a gray area. If the choice of trigger is strategically defensible but your real reason for choosing it to release the spell after the enemy's turn, is it metagaming? I think these things vary from table to table, which is why I said it might be disallowed as metagaming.
    $endgroup$
    – Ryan Thompson
    1 min ago
















3












$begingroup$

This is valid by the rules, but might get called out as metagaming



As Token's answer adequately covers, what you've described is valid according to the rules for readying a spell. However, depending on the style of play used at your table, your DM may disallow it because it is metagaming; that is, having your character act based on out-of-character knowledge. Here's what the rules have to say about rounds and turns in combat (emphasis added):




A typical combat encounter is a clash between two sides, a flurry of weapon swings, feints, parries, footwork, and spellcasting. The game organizes the chaos of combat into a cycle of rounds and turns. A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world. During a round, each participant in a battle takes a turn. The order of turns is determined at the beginning of a combat encounter, when everyone rolls initiative. Once everyone has taken a turn, the fight continues to the next round if neither side has defeated the other.




Note the sentence I have highlighted in bold: within the fiction, characters in the battle aren't really taking turns. They're all fighting simultaneously and continuously, but because simulating real-time combat is not practical, we compromise realism in favor of simplicity and have them all take turns in initiative order. However, this means that the initiative order is part of the game, not part of the game world, and thus the initiative order of combat is out-of-character knowledge, which means using that knowledge to guide your character's actions constitutes metagaming.



So, if you attempt to use this "double-spell combo" at a table that values in-character role playing and frowns on metagaming, you will probably be called out for choosing a trigger condition that has nothing to do with your readied action. You are effectively trying to find a loophole that lets you specify "after the target's turn ends" as your trigger in order to deny the target an end-of-turn save. On the other hand, other tables are happy to embrace the turn-based gameplay and treat combat like a chess game, and will instead congratulate you on the neat trick you found. You probably already have a pretty good idea of which kind of table you're playing at, but if not, you should ask your DM ahead of time before you try to pull out this trick during a session.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I wouldn't rush to call this metagaming, since in combat (even in a fantasy world) actions you decide to take can be and often are influenced by what those around you are doing at any given moment. Thinking tactically about the situation and making decisions based on observations in the midst of a fight is exactly what someone with high intelligence (like a Wizard) would do. You can see your Fighter friend laying into some hapless Orc and decide you want to get in on that in the most advantageous way possible without it being metagaming.
    $endgroup$
    – Seidr
    10 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Seidr I would say that it is definitely metagaming if your motivation for choosing a trigger condition is to approximate an invalid trigger ("after the enemy's turn ends"). However, there is definitely a gray area. If the choice of trigger is strategically defensible but your real reason for choosing it to release the spell after the enemy's turn, is it metagaming? I think these things vary from table to table, which is why I said it might be disallowed as metagaming.
    $endgroup$
    – Ryan Thompson
    1 min ago














3












3








3





$begingroup$

This is valid by the rules, but might get called out as metagaming



As Token's answer adequately covers, what you've described is valid according to the rules for readying a spell. However, depending on the style of play used at your table, your DM may disallow it because it is metagaming; that is, having your character act based on out-of-character knowledge. Here's what the rules have to say about rounds and turns in combat (emphasis added):




A typical combat encounter is a clash between two sides, a flurry of weapon swings, feints, parries, footwork, and spellcasting. The game organizes the chaos of combat into a cycle of rounds and turns. A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world. During a round, each participant in a battle takes a turn. The order of turns is determined at the beginning of a combat encounter, when everyone rolls initiative. Once everyone has taken a turn, the fight continues to the next round if neither side has defeated the other.




Note the sentence I have highlighted in bold: within the fiction, characters in the battle aren't really taking turns. They're all fighting simultaneously and continuously, but because simulating real-time combat is not practical, we compromise realism in favor of simplicity and have them all take turns in initiative order. However, this means that the initiative order is part of the game, not part of the game world, and thus the initiative order of combat is out-of-character knowledge, which means using that knowledge to guide your character's actions constitutes metagaming.



So, if you attempt to use this "double-spell combo" at a table that values in-character role playing and frowns on metagaming, you will probably be called out for choosing a trigger condition that has nothing to do with your readied action. You are effectively trying to find a loophole that lets you specify "after the target's turn ends" as your trigger in order to deny the target an end-of-turn save. On the other hand, other tables are happy to embrace the turn-based gameplay and treat combat like a chess game, and will instead congratulate you on the neat trick you found. You probably already have a pretty good idea of which kind of table you're playing at, but if not, you should ask your DM ahead of time before you try to pull out this trick during a session.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$



This is valid by the rules, but might get called out as metagaming



As Token's answer adequately covers, what you've described is valid according to the rules for readying a spell. However, depending on the style of play used at your table, your DM may disallow it because it is metagaming; that is, having your character act based on out-of-character knowledge. Here's what the rules have to say about rounds and turns in combat (emphasis added):




A typical combat encounter is a clash between two sides, a flurry of weapon swings, feints, parries, footwork, and spellcasting. The game organizes the chaos of combat into a cycle of rounds and turns. A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world. During a round, each participant in a battle takes a turn. The order of turns is determined at the beginning of a combat encounter, when everyone rolls initiative. Once everyone has taken a turn, the fight continues to the next round if neither side has defeated the other.




Note the sentence I have highlighted in bold: within the fiction, characters in the battle aren't really taking turns. They're all fighting simultaneously and continuously, but because simulating real-time combat is not practical, we compromise realism in favor of simplicity and have them all take turns in initiative order. However, this means that the initiative order is part of the game, not part of the game world, and thus the initiative order of combat is out-of-character knowledge, which means using that knowledge to guide your character's actions constitutes metagaming.



So, if you attempt to use this "double-spell combo" at a table that values in-character role playing and frowns on metagaming, you will probably be called out for choosing a trigger condition that has nothing to do with your readied action. You are effectively trying to find a loophole that lets you specify "after the target's turn ends" as your trigger in order to deny the target an end-of-turn save. On the other hand, other tables are happy to embrace the turn-based gameplay and treat combat like a chess game, and will instead congratulate you on the neat trick you found. You probably already have a pretty good idea of which kind of table you're playing at, but if not, you should ask your DM ahead of time before you try to pull out this trick during a session.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 32 mins ago

























answered 1 hour ago









Ryan ThompsonRyan Thompson

12.8k24395




12.8k24395












  • $begingroup$
    I wouldn't rush to call this metagaming, since in combat (even in a fantasy world) actions you decide to take can be and often are influenced by what those around you are doing at any given moment. Thinking tactically about the situation and making decisions based on observations in the midst of a fight is exactly what someone with high intelligence (like a Wizard) would do. You can see your Fighter friend laying into some hapless Orc and decide you want to get in on that in the most advantageous way possible without it being metagaming.
    $endgroup$
    – Seidr
    10 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Seidr I would say that it is definitely metagaming if your motivation for choosing a trigger condition is to approximate an invalid trigger ("after the enemy's turn ends"). However, there is definitely a gray area. If the choice of trigger is strategically defensible but your real reason for choosing it to release the spell after the enemy's turn, is it metagaming? I think these things vary from table to table, which is why I said it might be disallowed as metagaming.
    $endgroup$
    – Ryan Thompson
    1 min ago


















  • $begingroup$
    I wouldn't rush to call this metagaming, since in combat (even in a fantasy world) actions you decide to take can be and often are influenced by what those around you are doing at any given moment. Thinking tactically about the situation and making decisions based on observations in the midst of a fight is exactly what someone with high intelligence (like a Wizard) would do. You can see your Fighter friend laying into some hapless Orc and decide you want to get in on that in the most advantageous way possible without it being metagaming.
    $endgroup$
    – Seidr
    10 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Seidr I would say that it is definitely metagaming if your motivation for choosing a trigger condition is to approximate an invalid trigger ("after the enemy's turn ends"). However, there is definitely a gray area. If the choice of trigger is strategically defensible but your real reason for choosing it to release the spell after the enemy's turn, is it metagaming? I think these things vary from table to table, which is why I said it might be disallowed as metagaming.
    $endgroup$
    – Ryan Thompson
    1 min ago
















$begingroup$
I wouldn't rush to call this metagaming, since in combat (even in a fantasy world) actions you decide to take can be and often are influenced by what those around you are doing at any given moment. Thinking tactically about the situation and making decisions based on observations in the midst of a fight is exactly what someone with high intelligence (like a Wizard) would do. You can see your Fighter friend laying into some hapless Orc and decide you want to get in on that in the most advantageous way possible without it being metagaming.
$endgroup$
– Seidr
10 mins ago




$begingroup$
I wouldn't rush to call this metagaming, since in combat (even in a fantasy world) actions you decide to take can be and often are influenced by what those around you are doing at any given moment. Thinking tactically about the situation and making decisions based on observations in the midst of a fight is exactly what someone with high intelligence (like a Wizard) would do. You can see your Fighter friend laying into some hapless Orc and decide you want to get in on that in the most advantageous way possible without it being metagaming.
$endgroup$
– Seidr
10 mins ago












$begingroup$
@Seidr I would say that it is definitely metagaming if your motivation for choosing a trigger condition is to approximate an invalid trigger ("after the enemy's turn ends"). However, there is definitely a gray area. If the choice of trigger is strategically defensible but your real reason for choosing it to release the spell after the enemy's turn, is it metagaming? I think these things vary from table to table, which is why I said it might be disallowed as metagaming.
$endgroup$
– Ryan Thompson
1 min ago




$begingroup$
@Seidr I would say that it is definitely metagaming if your motivation for choosing a trigger condition is to approximate an invalid trigger ("after the enemy's turn ends"). However, there is definitely a gray area. If the choice of trigger is strategically defensible but your real reason for choosing it to release the spell after the enemy's turn, is it metagaming? I think these things vary from table to table, which is why I said it might be disallowed as metagaming.
$endgroup$
– Ryan Thompson
1 min ago













6












$begingroup$

Yes, that can be a declared trigger for the ready Action.



The rules for readying that are applicable:




Ready, PHB p. 193



First, you decide what perceivable circumstances will trigger your
reaction... When the trigger occurs, you can either take your reaction
right after the trigger finishes or ignore the trigger.




This does allow for the pseudo double spellcasting that you mentioned, though this may not be as much of an issue as one might think.



To accomplish this the PC has take on a few risks or drawbacks:




  • He needs to maintain concentration on the spell throughout the entire round; if he loses concentration, he loses the spell.


  • It's also possible that the ally (by his own volition or otherwise) might not attack in order to complete the trigger. This would give the PC in question no opportunity to cast his spell.


  • The PC will not be able to use any other reaction. A hefty cost when considering counterspell and other useful reaction spells.


  • The PC will also not be able to concentrate on any other spell while he holds his readied spell. Also a hefty cost.


  • If the spell cast by the PC had any perceivable casting components, he has then telegraphed his next move. Hostile creatures that understand a spell is being cast may act accordingly. (The PC can't counter the counter!)



This does not break the action economy or constitute an exploit. I can't extrapolate the player's reasoning for doing this, but it does seem to be a rather suboptimal choice to incur all of those negatives instead of an exploit that breaks anything. There is the payoff of being able to disadvantage the creature on its saving throw against his next spell, but, at least to me, it doesn't seem to outweigh all of the opportunity cost involved.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    The issue isn't necessarily concentration - it's combo'ing spells as a solo PC. Slow specifically makes it that units affected are disadvantaged on DEX save throws which means you're free to shoot a Fireball/Disintegrate on your turn.
    $endgroup$
    – Wheelium
    1 hour ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    The mention of concentration was to show that this tactic has some risks attached to it, making it a bit more 'fair' and not so much a perceived exploit. I maintain that the rules seem to allow this.
    $endgroup$
    – Token
    1 hour ago








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I would also add that if the ally does not attack for whatever reason the spell slot is wasted, which is yet another risk. Not to mention the caster would be "wasting" their earlier turn in order to ready the spell. The turn is essentially just being pushed back in the order, it's not more "broken" than casting on your own turn, you only take on additional risk.
    $endgroup$
    – Seidr
    1 hour ago












  • $begingroup$
    I had a few more hits of inspiration and added that! Thank ya.
    $endgroup$
    – Token
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    It may also be worth noting that the PC in question casts the spell on their turn, but holds its energy using concentration (as you mention) - which means it's clear to anyone who sees them perform the V/S/M spell components that they have cast a spell but it hasn't taken effect yet. This might draw the focus of intelligent enemies who could guess that they're holding the spell's energy. (This is up to how the DM runs the enemy, though.)
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    1 hour ago
















6












$begingroup$

Yes, that can be a declared trigger for the ready Action.



The rules for readying that are applicable:




Ready, PHB p. 193



First, you decide what perceivable circumstances will trigger your
reaction... When the trigger occurs, you can either take your reaction
right after the trigger finishes or ignore the trigger.




This does allow for the pseudo double spellcasting that you mentioned, though this may not be as much of an issue as one might think.



To accomplish this the PC has take on a few risks or drawbacks:




  • He needs to maintain concentration on the spell throughout the entire round; if he loses concentration, he loses the spell.


  • It's also possible that the ally (by his own volition or otherwise) might not attack in order to complete the trigger. This would give the PC in question no opportunity to cast his spell.


  • The PC will not be able to use any other reaction. A hefty cost when considering counterspell and other useful reaction spells.


  • The PC will also not be able to concentrate on any other spell while he holds his readied spell. Also a hefty cost.


  • If the spell cast by the PC had any perceivable casting components, he has then telegraphed his next move. Hostile creatures that understand a spell is being cast may act accordingly. (The PC can't counter the counter!)



This does not break the action economy or constitute an exploit. I can't extrapolate the player's reasoning for doing this, but it does seem to be a rather suboptimal choice to incur all of those negatives instead of an exploit that breaks anything. There is the payoff of being able to disadvantage the creature on its saving throw against his next spell, but, at least to me, it doesn't seem to outweigh all of the opportunity cost involved.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    The issue isn't necessarily concentration - it's combo'ing spells as a solo PC. Slow specifically makes it that units affected are disadvantaged on DEX save throws which means you're free to shoot a Fireball/Disintegrate on your turn.
    $endgroup$
    – Wheelium
    1 hour ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    The mention of concentration was to show that this tactic has some risks attached to it, making it a bit more 'fair' and not so much a perceived exploit. I maintain that the rules seem to allow this.
    $endgroup$
    – Token
    1 hour ago








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I would also add that if the ally does not attack for whatever reason the spell slot is wasted, which is yet another risk. Not to mention the caster would be "wasting" their earlier turn in order to ready the spell. The turn is essentially just being pushed back in the order, it's not more "broken" than casting on your own turn, you only take on additional risk.
    $endgroup$
    – Seidr
    1 hour ago












  • $begingroup$
    I had a few more hits of inspiration and added that! Thank ya.
    $endgroup$
    – Token
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    It may also be worth noting that the PC in question casts the spell on their turn, but holds its energy using concentration (as you mention) - which means it's clear to anyone who sees them perform the V/S/M spell components that they have cast a spell but it hasn't taken effect yet. This might draw the focus of intelligent enemies who could guess that they're holding the spell's energy. (This is up to how the DM runs the enemy, though.)
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    1 hour ago














6












6








6





$begingroup$

Yes, that can be a declared trigger for the ready Action.



The rules for readying that are applicable:




Ready, PHB p. 193



First, you decide what perceivable circumstances will trigger your
reaction... When the trigger occurs, you can either take your reaction
right after the trigger finishes or ignore the trigger.




This does allow for the pseudo double spellcasting that you mentioned, though this may not be as much of an issue as one might think.



To accomplish this the PC has take on a few risks or drawbacks:




  • He needs to maintain concentration on the spell throughout the entire round; if he loses concentration, he loses the spell.


  • It's also possible that the ally (by his own volition or otherwise) might not attack in order to complete the trigger. This would give the PC in question no opportunity to cast his spell.


  • The PC will not be able to use any other reaction. A hefty cost when considering counterspell and other useful reaction spells.


  • The PC will also not be able to concentrate on any other spell while he holds his readied spell. Also a hefty cost.


  • If the spell cast by the PC had any perceivable casting components, he has then telegraphed his next move. Hostile creatures that understand a spell is being cast may act accordingly. (The PC can't counter the counter!)



This does not break the action economy or constitute an exploit. I can't extrapolate the player's reasoning for doing this, but it does seem to be a rather suboptimal choice to incur all of those negatives instead of an exploit that breaks anything. There is the payoff of being able to disadvantage the creature on its saving throw against his next spell, but, at least to me, it doesn't seem to outweigh all of the opportunity cost involved.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$



Yes, that can be a declared trigger for the ready Action.



The rules for readying that are applicable:




Ready, PHB p. 193



First, you decide what perceivable circumstances will trigger your
reaction... When the trigger occurs, you can either take your reaction
right after the trigger finishes or ignore the trigger.




This does allow for the pseudo double spellcasting that you mentioned, though this may not be as much of an issue as one might think.



To accomplish this the PC has take on a few risks or drawbacks:




  • He needs to maintain concentration on the spell throughout the entire round; if he loses concentration, he loses the spell.


  • It's also possible that the ally (by his own volition or otherwise) might not attack in order to complete the trigger. This would give the PC in question no opportunity to cast his spell.


  • The PC will not be able to use any other reaction. A hefty cost when considering counterspell and other useful reaction spells.


  • The PC will also not be able to concentrate on any other spell while he holds his readied spell. Also a hefty cost.


  • If the spell cast by the PC had any perceivable casting components, he has then telegraphed his next move. Hostile creatures that understand a spell is being cast may act accordingly. (The PC can't counter the counter!)



This does not break the action economy or constitute an exploit. I can't extrapolate the player's reasoning for doing this, but it does seem to be a rather suboptimal choice to incur all of those negatives instead of an exploit that breaks anything. There is the payoff of being able to disadvantage the creature on its saving throw against his next spell, but, at least to me, it doesn't seem to outweigh all of the opportunity cost involved.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 1 hour ago

























answered 1 hour ago









TokenToken

1,144119




1,144119












  • $begingroup$
    The issue isn't necessarily concentration - it's combo'ing spells as a solo PC. Slow specifically makes it that units affected are disadvantaged on DEX save throws which means you're free to shoot a Fireball/Disintegrate on your turn.
    $endgroup$
    – Wheelium
    1 hour ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    The mention of concentration was to show that this tactic has some risks attached to it, making it a bit more 'fair' and not so much a perceived exploit. I maintain that the rules seem to allow this.
    $endgroup$
    – Token
    1 hour ago








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I would also add that if the ally does not attack for whatever reason the spell slot is wasted, which is yet another risk. Not to mention the caster would be "wasting" their earlier turn in order to ready the spell. The turn is essentially just being pushed back in the order, it's not more "broken" than casting on your own turn, you only take on additional risk.
    $endgroup$
    – Seidr
    1 hour ago












  • $begingroup$
    I had a few more hits of inspiration and added that! Thank ya.
    $endgroup$
    – Token
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    It may also be worth noting that the PC in question casts the spell on their turn, but holds its energy using concentration (as you mention) - which means it's clear to anyone who sees them perform the V/S/M spell components that they have cast a spell but it hasn't taken effect yet. This might draw the focus of intelligent enemies who could guess that they're holding the spell's energy. (This is up to how the DM runs the enemy, though.)
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    1 hour ago


















  • $begingroup$
    The issue isn't necessarily concentration - it's combo'ing spells as a solo PC. Slow specifically makes it that units affected are disadvantaged on DEX save throws which means you're free to shoot a Fireball/Disintegrate on your turn.
    $endgroup$
    – Wheelium
    1 hour ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    The mention of concentration was to show that this tactic has some risks attached to it, making it a bit more 'fair' and not so much a perceived exploit. I maintain that the rules seem to allow this.
    $endgroup$
    – Token
    1 hour ago








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    I would also add that if the ally does not attack for whatever reason the spell slot is wasted, which is yet another risk. Not to mention the caster would be "wasting" their earlier turn in order to ready the spell. The turn is essentially just being pushed back in the order, it's not more "broken" than casting on your own turn, you only take on additional risk.
    $endgroup$
    – Seidr
    1 hour ago












  • $begingroup$
    I had a few more hits of inspiration and added that! Thank ya.
    $endgroup$
    – Token
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    It may also be worth noting that the PC in question casts the spell on their turn, but holds its energy using concentration (as you mention) - which means it's clear to anyone who sees them perform the V/S/M spell components that they have cast a spell but it hasn't taken effect yet. This might draw the focus of intelligent enemies who could guess that they're holding the spell's energy. (This is up to how the DM runs the enemy, though.)
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    1 hour ago
















$begingroup$
The issue isn't necessarily concentration - it's combo'ing spells as a solo PC. Slow specifically makes it that units affected are disadvantaged on DEX save throws which means you're free to shoot a Fireball/Disintegrate on your turn.
$endgroup$
– Wheelium
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
The issue isn't necessarily concentration - it's combo'ing spells as a solo PC. Slow specifically makes it that units affected are disadvantaged on DEX save throws which means you're free to shoot a Fireball/Disintegrate on your turn.
$endgroup$
– Wheelium
1 hour ago




2




2




$begingroup$
The mention of concentration was to show that this tactic has some risks attached to it, making it a bit more 'fair' and not so much a perceived exploit. I maintain that the rules seem to allow this.
$endgroup$
– Token
1 hour ago






$begingroup$
The mention of concentration was to show that this tactic has some risks attached to it, making it a bit more 'fair' and not so much a perceived exploit. I maintain that the rules seem to allow this.
$endgroup$
– Token
1 hour ago






2




2




$begingroup$
I would also add that if the ally does not attack for whatever reason the spell slot is wasted, which is yet another risk. Not to mention the caster would be "wasting" their earlier turn in order to ready the spell. The turn is essentially just being pushed back in the order, it's not more "broken" than casting on your own turn, you only take on additional risk.
$endgroup$
– Seidr
1 hour ago






$begingroup$
I would also add that if the ally does not attack for whatever reason the spell slot is wasted, which is yet another risk. Not to mention the caster would be "wasting" their earlier turn in order to ready the spell. The turn is essentially just being pushed back in the order, it's not more "broken" than casting on your own turn, you only take on additional risk.
$endgroup$
– Seidr
1 hour ago














$begingroup$
I had a few more hits of inspiration and added that! Thank ya.
$endgroup$
– Token
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
I had a few more hits of inspiration and added that! Thank ya.
$endgroup$
– Token
1 hour ago




1




1




$begingroup$
It may also be worth noting that the PC in question casts the spell on their turn, but holds its energy using concentration (as you mention) - which means it's clear to anyone who sees them perform the V/S/M spell components that they have cast a spell but it hasn't taken effect yet. This might draw the focus of intelligent enemies who could guess that they're holding the spell's energy. (This is up to how the DM runs the enemy, though.)
$endgroup$
– V2Blast
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
It may also be worth noting that the PC in question casts the spell on their turn, but holds its energy using concentration (as you mention) - which means it's clear to anyone who sees them perform the V/S/M spell components that they have cast a spell but it hasn't taken effect yet. This might draw the focus of intelligent enemies who could guess that they're holding the spell's energy. (This is up to how the DM runs the enemy, though.)
$endgroup$
– V2Blast
1 hour ago


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f147079%2fis-it-possible-to-ready-a-spell-to-be-cast-just-before-the-start-of-your-next-tu%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

What is the “three and three hundred thousand syndrome”?Who wrote the book Arena?What five creatures were...

Gersau Kjelder | Navigasjonsmeny46°59′0″N 8°31′0″E46°59′0″N...

Hestehale Innhaldsliste Hestehale på kvinner | Hestehale på menn | Galleri | Sjå òg |...