Question about Action Surge

[Tonden Ockay]

Under Action Surge is say you can take one additional action so can you cast a spell with this additional action?

If so then you would think its like an extra round and if its like an extra round then if they are just going to melee they should get another round of attacks.

I'm just saying that casters can cast one spell in there action while fighters can attack up to 4 times in their action.

Am I looking at this right or not? If not could someone explain it.

[asorel]

Yes, you can use Action Surge to cast a spell. The only thing that limits how many spells you can cast on your turn is casting a spell as a bonus action. Doing so prevents you from using your action to cast non-cantrip spells.

[Giant2005]

casters can cast one spell in there action while fighters can attack up to 4 times in their action.
The above statement is correct.
The only disparity comes in the form of opportunity attacks in that casters (With the Warcaster Feat) can cast a spell but a melee combatant can only get off a single attack (Not a full action's worth of attacks).

[Tonden Ockay]

The only disparity comes in the form of opportunity attacks in that casters (With the Warcaster Feat) can cast a spell but a melee combatant can only get off a single attack (Not a full action's worth of attacks).

Well this doesn't sound fair at all?

[Giant2005]

Well this doesn't sound fair at all?

It's not really... but the magic version comes at the cost of a feat so I guess that at least partially mitigates the issue.

[Tonden Ockay]

If a caster can take a feat in order to use their bonus action so they can cast another spell.

Then it would only be fair that a fighter could take one to turn their bonus action into another round of attacks.

I think this is only fair.

[Tonden Ockay]

Ya " War Caster " - When a hostile creature's movement provokes an opportunity attack from you, you can use your reaction to cast a spell with a casting time one 1 action.

[SliceandDiceKid]

If a caster can take a feat in order to use their bonus action so they can cast another spell.

Then it would only be fair that a fighter could take one to turn their bonus action into another round of attacks.

I think this is only fair.

Lol if you want everyone to be the same, just make them all roll the same class. Or go play 4e.

Also, I'm sure it depends on DM play style, but opportunity attacks are relatively uncommon... (Excluding polearm master)

[Chronos]

Fighters can attack four times with a single action. Spellcasters can also attack four times with a single action. A single spell will almost always do more than a single attack.

[SharkForce]

If a caster can take a feat in order to use their bonus action so they can cast another spell.

Then it would only be fair that a fighter could take one to turn their bonus action into another round of attacks.

I think this is only fair.

not bonus action (which you get every round). opportunity attack.

in other words, for this to matter, they have to be in melee range with your caster and then leave, pretty much (there are other scenarios, but they tend to be a bit sketchy or otherwise improbable). it's more like the free attack that you get in 2nd edition against a fleeing opponent.

the caster can spend a feat to use a cantrip instead of a melee attack for that attack, not for anything else. it's nice, if you ever get it, but you're not likely to get it very often (again, this typically requires an enemy running past you, or away from you).

[Myzz]

Soooo...

Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action... Short rest reset... One more time at L17.

A L7 Eldritch Knight can Cast a Cantrip then use bonus action to make a weapon attack. Action Surge and Cast a Cantrip and make another Bonus weapon attack?


Where does it limit spells cast per round to only 1? I only ever found where it says it uses 1 Action... If action surge gives that back... Then Every Caster should dip 2 Fighter just to be able to cast 2 fireballs a round!

[calebrus]

Yes, you can use Action Surge to cast a spell. The only thing that limits how many spells you can cast on your turn is casting a spell as a bonus action. Doing so prevents you from using your action to cast non-cantrip spells.

I'd like to note that this is an *extremely* strict reading of the RAW, and it was not intended to apply to Action Surge actions.
That's fine if you want to run your game that way, but you're penalizing Action Surge because of a rule which was written without Action Surge in mind.
The rule about actions is a general rule. The rules regarding Action Surge is the specific rule. Action Surge's specific trumps the general rules.

Acton Surge can be used to perform anything which can normally be done in one action, with no restrictions. When you start placing restrictions on it, you are defeating the purpose of the ability.

[Giant2005]

A L7 Eldritch Knight can Cast a Cantrip then use bonus action to make a weapon attack. Action Surge and Cast a Cantrip and make another Bonus weapon attack?
You only get one bonus action per turn, so the EK would cast two Cantrips but only have a sinle weapon attack.


Where does it limit spells cast per round to only 1? I only ever found where it says it uses 1 Action... If action surge gives that back... Then Every Caster should dip 2 Fighter just to be able to cast 2 fireballs a round!
It doesn't. Spellcasters can cast as many spells per round as they have actions although if they cast a spell as a bonus action, they can only cast a Cantrip. Action Surge however is not a bonus action so the Action Surging caster could go ahead and cast two spells of any level but imo the dip isn't worth it - two levels is a lot of spell slots to be losing, spell slots that would get used up even faster due to the action surge. Personally I don't think a second level of Fighter is worth it even if you took a level of Fighter for your first level for the Constitution save proficiency and Heavy Armor. Not until high levels at least.

[Myzz]

You only get one bonus action per turn, so the EK would cast two Cantrips but only have a sinle weapon attack.

I think that's actually wrong...
" On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action"

That implies that if you used all your attacks as an action and used your bonus action, Action Surge replenishes both!

" On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action"

Meaning if you used your bonus action you get another one. If you did not, then you don't get 2. Which is why its merely a possibility.


It doesn't. Spellcasters can cast as many spells per round as they have actions although if they cast a spell as a bonus action, they can only cast a Cantrip. Action Surge however is not a bonus action so the Action Surging caster could go ahead and cast two spells of any level but imo the dip isn't worth it - two levels is a lot of spell slots to be losing, spell slots that would get used up even faster due to the action surge.

Casting a spell normally takes a full action, and far as I can see the only way to get an extra ACTION is to take Fighter to 2 for Action Surge... All the other Extras give Extra Attacks (not actual actions)


Personally I don't think a second level of Fighter is worth it even if you took a level of Fighter for your first level for the Constitution save proficiency and Heavy Armor. Not until high levels at least.

If your not going to play in a high level campaign, it would totally be worth it at L6... By L8 you get to 1/short rest double all your AE's up!

At high levels you might take it after you got your L9 spells...

Or, could start with it. Like you said to get Con Saves and Heavy Armor. Gives you some survivability at lower levels (more HPs and higher AC), while delaying your spell progression and requiring you to invest into 13 STR at creation AND giving your terrible wizard skills. For example you wouldn't have Arcana.

[Giant2005]

Meaning if you used your bonus action you get another one. If you did not, then you don't get 2. Which is why its merely a possibility.

It is merely a possibility because you might not even have the ability to use a bonus action.
The rules are pretty specific - you can only use one bonus action per turn.

[Myzz]

It is merely a possibility because you might not even have the ability to use a bonus action.
The rules are pretty specific - you can only use one bonus action per turn.

yeah its only possible that you used your bonus action... and if you had it would be replenished so you could use it again!

[calebrus]

Meaning if you used your bonus action you get another one. If you did not, then you don't get 2. Which is why its merely a possibility.

No, it doesn't replenish your bonus action.
You get one bonus action per round, not one per action.

An EK7 could cast a cantrip for some damage, then he could cast a spell or make a single weapon attack as a bonus action, then he could use action surge to cast any other spell he wants. (cantrip + spell-or-weapon + spell)
If he uses his first action to cast a non-cantrip spell, then his bonus action can only be the weapon attack, then he could action surge any other spell he wants. (2 spells + 1 weapon attack)

But he only gets one action surge per short rest and few spell slots, so it's not like he can keep this up all day long.

[Giant2005]

yeah its only possible that you used your bonus action... and if you had it would be replenished so you could use it again!

No.
As you quoted, you can take one additional action. No mention is made of any mythical additional bonus actions.

[Galen]

I think that's actually wrong...
" On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action"

That implies that if you used all your attacks as an action and used your bonus action, Action Surge replenishes both!

Customer: I'd like two of those SuperPacks.
Cashier: Sorry, there's a limit of one SuperPack per customer.
Customer: So, does that mean I can take both?
Cashier: No, sir, there's a limit on one per customer.
Customer: Ok, I'm taking both then.
Cashier: One. Just one.
Customer: Right. Both. I'll take both.
Cashier: You can't.
Customer: Why not? You just said there's a limit of one. That means I can take this one, and that one right? Both.
Cashier: Security in checkout line 4, please.

[Elderand]

yeah its only possible that you used your bonus action... and if you had it would be replenished so you could use it again!

No you wouldn't.

On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action.

You break this in : (On your turn), (you can take one additional action) (on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action.)

Those are the three units of this phrase.

On your turn is clear.

You can take one additional action: this is what action surge gets you.

On top of your regular action and a possible bonus action: This is merely a reminder of what is possible normaly whitout action surge. One normal action and a bonus action if you have a class feature or feat that grant you one.

The reading you propose is : (On your turn), (you can take one additional action [on top of your regular action] and a possible bonus action.)

If that reading was intended there would have been some additional punctuation in the phrase ultimately looking something like this: On your turn, you can take one additional action (on top of your regular action) and a possible bonus action.

[Knaight]

If a caster can take a feat in order to use their bonus action so they can cast another spell.

Then it would only be fair that a fighter could take one to turn their bonus action into another round of attacks.

I think this is only fair.

It's not a bonus action, it's an AoO. This is important, because while they do get a whole spell instead of just one attack, melee combatants are way more likely to be in position to actually take an AoO than anyone else. The spells you can use are also tightly restricted, so there's that.

[Chronos]

Without Action Surge, you get one action and possibly one bonus action. With Action Surge, you get that, and in addition get another action.

[Myzz]

No, it doesn't replenish your bonus action.
You get one bonus action per round, not one per action.[QUOTE=calebrus;18919382]

Where does it state this?


[QUOTE=calebrus;18919382]But he only gets one action surge per short rest and few spell slots, so it's not like he can keep this up all day long.

For a Warlock it hardly impacts him at all... For all other casters getting off 2 AE's to begin Combat would be HUGE. Especially before the enemy can scatter!


No mention is made of any mythical additional bonus actions.

Action surge says: "Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

there is the 'Mythical' bonus action... why mention this mythical bonus action if the ability only pertains to actual use of your action and not bonus action. Without this blurb about a possible bonus action, your right you only get 1 bonus action...

With this blurb now you an "additional action and possible bonus action"...

the additional action is on top of your regular action
the possible bonus action is on top your regular bonus action...

This as actually my biggest gripe about 5e... these silly wording and poor editing like here... Dependent on where the AND falls in your reading of this ability determines if you get this additional bonus action or not...

"Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional: action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

see the problem now?

[calebrus]

Where does it state this?

Look up bonus action in the index, turn to the page it tells you to, and read it.
One bonus action on your turn. Not one bonus action per action taken.

[Giant2005]

Action surge says: "Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

there is the 'Mythical' bonus action... why mention this mythical bonus action if the ability only pertains to actual use of your action and not bonus action. Without this blurb about a possible bonus action, your right you only get 1 bonus action...

With this blurb now you an "additional action and possible bonus action"...

the additional action is on top of your regular action
the possible bonus action is on top your regular bonus action...

This as actually my biggest gripe about 5e... these silly wording and poor editing like here... Dependent on where the AND falls in your reading of this ability determines if you get this additional bonus action or not...

"Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional: action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

Sure.
Take as many bonus actions as you like.

[Myzz]

It's not a bonus action, it's an AoO. This is important, because while they do get a whole spell instead of just one attack, melee combatants are way more likely to be in position to actually take an AoO than anyone else. The spells you can use are also tightly restricted, so there's that.

If your referring to WarCaster... casting a spell occurs in place of an AoO and utilizes their Reaction. War Caster specifically states that you may cast a spell rather than make an AoO. Then goes on to dictate the restrictions of that spell. Casting time <1 action AND only target that creature! Although at that point technically you could twin it!

I think the suggestion was to have a feat that allowed Casters to use thier bonus action to cast more spells!

[Myzz]

Look up bonus action in the index, turn to the page it tells you to, and read it.
One bonus action on your turn. Not one bonus action per action taken.

Yeah you only get 1 action too...

Unless you have Action Surge.

Again, you'd still only get 2 Bonus Actions, IF you had already used one PRIOR to triggering Action Surge!

[Galen]

Myzz, you seem to be confused between "action" and "turn". Both are game terms, and are well defined. On your turn you get an allotment of different actions you can do. Action Surge gives you one additional action to add to this budget. Not a turn full of additional actions.

[calebrus]

Yeah you only get 1 action too...

Unless you have Action Surge.

Again, you'd still only get 2 Bonus Actions, IF you had already used one PRIOR to triggering Action Surge!

No.
You get one bonus action on your turn. Full Stop.

Action Surge isn't telling you that you can take an additional bonus action. Action surge is telling you that you can take an additional action.
On your turn you get to:
1) move
2) take one action
3) take one bonus action (if available)
Action Surge says, in addition to these three things, you get to do #2 one more time.
That's it.
That's all it does.

You're reading the action surge line incorrectly.
--added parenthesis to show the meaning--
"On your turn, you can take one additional action (on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action)"
See the difference?

[Myzz]

"Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional: action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

see the problem now?

[calebrus]

You're reading the action surge line incorrectly.
--added parenthesis to show the meaning--
"On your turn, you can take one additional action (on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action)"
See the difference?

Do you see the problem now?

I can rearrange my sentence and it still makes sense.
On your turn, on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action, you can take one additional action.
Can you do the same with your struck out words still fitting in?

[Giant2005]

On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action

I can do it too!

[Myzz]

I'm not saying you 'should' get a bonus action... Or that it is RAI

I'm kind of playing Devil's Advocate here...

The reading of Action Surge can possibly say that indeed you do! Pure RAW there is an argument that it does indeed give an additional action and possible bonus action (if a bonus action has already been taken)

AND TBH, from a TWF stance that makes the most sense... Action Surge then Gives him ALL of his weapon attacks back! But that is the only example of where getting an additional Bonus Action is not STUPIDLY OP!

[calebrus]

I'm not saying you 'should' get a bonus action... Or that it is RAI

I'm kind of playing Devil's Advocate here...

The reading of Action Surge can possibly say that indeed you do! Pure RAW there is an argument that it does indeed give an additional action and possible bonus action (if a bonus action has already been taken)

AND TBH, from a TWF stance that makes the most sense... Action Surge then Gives him ALL of his weapon attacks back! But that is the only example of where getting an additional Bonus Action is not STUPIDLY OP!

Sorry, devil's advocate, but you're wrong.
The rules say you're wrong.
The RAW says that you're wrong.
The RAI says that you're wrong.
The players are saying that you're wrong.
The designers say that you're wrong. (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/11/12/bonus-action-index-card/)
The designers say that you're wrong yet again. (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/10/11/one-extra-bonus-action/)


I'm sorry, but you're just wrong.
There is no devil's advocate here. The rules are clear. One bonus action on your turn. Action surge gives you one extra action (but does not include a bonus action in that action).

[Myzz]

Do you see the problem now?

I can rearrange my sentence and it still makes sense.
On your turn, on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action, you can take one additional action.
Can you do the same with your struck out words still fitting in?

That's kind of my point, why bring up bonus actions at all? What about reactions and movement?

If your going to discuss all the things that are possible on your turn, why bother?

Action allows you to do specific things.

Bonus Action allows you to do specific OTHER things.

IF you only have 1, then don't mention it in an ability that gives you an additional Action... giving and additional ACTION would not give an additional BONUS ACTION. Adding Bonus Action to the statement without putting in proper punctuation leaves this extremely ambiguous.

Ex 1: "Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

Ex 2: "Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action (on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action)... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

Ex 3: "Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action (on top of your regular action) and (a possible) bonus action... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

Ex 4: "Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action, not just an extra attack... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

Ex 5: "Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action, not just an extra attack, and bonus action if you have already used a bonus action... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

Ex 1 = Written as is

Ex 2 = your interpretation

Ex 3 = the interpretation I'm defending

Ex 4 = how Ex 2 should have been written to provide your interpretation

Ex 5 = how it should have been written to allow a bonus action

[Galen]

The designers say that you're wrong. (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/11/12/bonus-action-index-card/)
The designers say that you're wrong yet again. (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/10/11/one-extra-bonus-action/)

To take a page from Myzz's playbook, Mearl's answer

no extra bonus action
could also be read as

no, extra bonus action!

[Chronos]

Ordinarily you can do some things (namely, one action and possibly one bonus action). Action Surge lets you do more (namely, an additional action). It mentions the "possible bonus action" for the same reason it mentions the regular action: To say what it's in addition to. Arguing that Action Surge lets you have a total of two bonus actions is like arguing that it lets you have a total of three actions (the original one, and then giving you a regular one and one in addition to it).


Adding Bonus Action to the statement without putting in proper punctuation leaves this extremely ambiguous.
True, it would. Which means it's a good thing that they used the proper punctuation, because as it's written, it's clear.

[Myzz]

To take a page from Myzz's playbook, Mearl's answer

could also be read as

lol

better answer would be that Sage Advice has been pointed out to NOT be an official source. AND after reading that I'm left with more questions... but no real answers...

the second link didnt have an actual answer in regards to action surge giving an additional Bonus Action if Bonus action was already used.

The first looked weird... and chopped up!

[calebrus]

AND after reading that I'm left with more questions... but no real answers...

Nice try.
You have your answer. You just don't like it.

[ProphetSword]

Let's play with words some more:

(PHB, pg 189)
You can take only one bonus action on your turn, so you must choose which bonus action to use when you have more than one available.

Does this mean that you can:

a) only choose from one of many things you can do on a bonus action (like utilizing "cunning action" or making an off-hand attack), or

b) only choose one bonus action from the many bonus actions you accumulate on a turn (via something like action surge)?

Answer:
It's a trick question. Both interpretations invalidate the argument Myzz is making, so read it however you want.

[Submortimer]

I'd like to note that this is an *extremely* strict reading of the RAW, and it was not intended to apply to Action Surge actions.
That's fine if you want to run your game that way, but you're penalizing Action Surge because of a rule which was written without Action Surge in mind.
The rule about actions is a general rule. The rules regarding Action Surge is the specific rule. Action Surge's specific trumps the general rules.

Acton Surge can be used to perform anything which can normally be done in one action, with no restrictions. When you start placing restrictions on it, you are defeating the purpose of the ability.

Not at all. The limit comes from the extra bonus action, something not tied to Action Surge at all. You can fireball, fireball, or you can Hex, Eldritch blast, Eldritch Blast, but not Hex, Fireball, Fireball. It's not an overly strict reading of the rule, its just what the rule reads: If you cast a spell with a bonus action, no other spells may be cast during the same turn, except a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.

[ProphetSword]

Not at all. The limit comes from the extra bonus action, something not tied to Action Surge at all. You can fireball, fireball, or you can Hex, Eldritch blast, Eldritch Blast, but not Hex, Fireball, Fireball. It's not an overly strict reading of the rule, its just what the rule reads: If you cast a spell with a bonus action, no other spells may be cast during the same turn, except a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.

I agree with this. The wording is quite clear. If an individual DM at the table wants to change the ruling in cases where extra actions are involved, that's up to them.

[calebrus]

Not at all. The limit comes from the extra bonus action, something not tied to Action Surge at all. You can fireball, fireball, or you can Hex, Eldritch blast, Eldritch Blast, but not Hex, Fireball, Fireball. It's not an overly strict reading of the rule, its just what the rule reads: If you cast a spell with a bonus action, no other spells may be cast during the same turn, except a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.

General action economy rules:
-- You can move up to your speed.
-- You can take one action.
-- You can take one bonus action if you have one available.
-- You can only cast one spell that uses a spell slot (that's why the cantrip/bonus-action-spell rules exist, so that you can only cast one spell that uses a slot on your turn).
-- You can take one reaction

Action surge is a specific rule which breaks general rules.
Look in the index.
General rules are listed in lower case. Specific rules are capitalized.
Bonus action is lower case. Action is lower case. Casting a spell is lower case. These are all general rules.
Action Surge is capitalized. It is a specific rule, and therefore trumps the general rules.

It trumps all of the general rules. It is a specific ability which allows you to break the normal action economy once per short rest. That is it's entire purpose for existing. It lets you break the action economy rules once per short rest.
Not all of the general action economy rules.... except that one. All of them.... including that one.
Because specific trumps general.

[Xetheral]

General action economy rules:
-- You can move up to your speed.
-- You can take one action.
-- You can take one bonus action if you have one available.
-- You can only cast one spell that uses a spell slot (that's why the cantrip/bonus-action-spell rules exist, so that you can only cast one spell that uses a slot on your turn).
-- You can take one reaction

Action surge is a specific rule which breaks general rules.
Look in the index.
General rules are listed in lower case. Specific rules are capitalized.
Bonus action is lower case. Action is lower case. Casting a spell is lower case. These are all general rules.
Action Surge is capitalized. It is a specific rule, and therefore trumps the general rules.

It trumps all of the general rules. It is a specific ability which allows you to break the normal action economy once per short rest. That is it's entire purpose for existing. It lets you break the action economy rules once per short rest.
Not all of the general action economy rules.... except that one. All of them.... including that one.
Because specific trumps general.

While I'm inclined to agree with you RAI, I believe RAW they have the right of it. Action Surge is silent on its interaction with bonus action spells, and therefore can't be read as a Specific>General trump.

[calebrus]

While I'm inclined to agree with you RAI, I believe RAW they have the right of it. Action Surge is silent on its interaction with bonus action spells, and therefore can't be read as a Specific>General trump.

It doesn't have to specify its interaction with bonus action spells.
The rules implicate this on their own.
Remember, AS is a specific rule.
Casting spells is a general rule.
The specific rule states that you gain one extra action which can be used to do anything that a normal action can do.
A normal action can cast a spell.
The general rule states that only one spell slot can be used on your turn.
The specific rule allows for a second.
They don't have to specify the interaction, because there is no interaction. You get one extra action, and you can use it for anything you want. Period. Because that's what the specific rule states.

[Galen]

I have to disagree with calebrus on the spellcasting issue. The rules state:


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
So, during the same turn, you can't cast another spell. Exception made for cantrips, yadda yadda.

Action Surge says "take an action". It doesn't need to say "this action needs to be legal and adhere to the rules of the game", because this is already implied - all the actions in the game must adhere to the general rules, unless an exception is made.

Is an exception made? Do we have a case of "specific trumps general" in Action Surge? Doesn't look like it. First, Action Surge clearly takes place on the same turn. Second, Action Surge says nothing about "oh, by the way, you can ignore the spellcasting rules for this purpose". So, there are basically no specific rules that could have trumped a general rule.

Spellcasting during the action given by Action Surge must obey the general spellcasting rules, because no exception was made.

[Galen]

The specific rule states that you gain one extra action which can be used to do anything that a normal action can do.

And a normal action could not be used to cast a non-cantrip spell if you have already cast a spell with a casting time of Bonus Action this turn! Tadam!!



They don't have to specify the interaction, because there is no interaction. You get one extra action, and you can use it for anything you want. Period. Because that's what the specific rule states.
Admittedly, I don't have the book in front of me, but I'd be very surprised if "anything you want" is an accurate quote :smallbiggrin: I'm pretty sure the extra action is not "anything you want", but rather "anything the rules of the game allow you to do". And the rules do not allow you to do this thing you're trying to do.

[calebrus]

And a normal action could not be used to cast a non-cantrip spell if you have already cast a spell with a casting time of Bonus Action this turn! Tadam!!

What has happened previously in the turn is irrelevant.
You used your turn.
You now use a specific ability, which uses a specific rule, to gain another action.
What happened previously in the round is irrelevant.

The ability was designed to break action economy. Imposing action economy limits upon it is illogical.

[Galen]

What has happened previously in the turn is irrelevant.
You used your turn.
You now use a specific ability, which uses a specific rule, to gain another action.
What happened previously in the round is irrelevant.

The ability was designed to break action economy. Imposing action economy limits upon it is illogical.You are wrong. It's still the same turn. Please look at the definition of "turn". And the rules of spellcasting are specific - can't cast a spell on the same turn, yadda yadda. Action Surge provides no exception, no you-may-ignore-spellcasting-rules.

[JFahy]

"After three rounds of action, we go to the judge's scorecards for a decision..."

[Knaight]

What has happened previously in the turn is irrelevant.
You used your turn.
You now use a specific ability, which uses a specific rule, to gain another action.
What happened previously in the round is irrelevant.

The ability was designed to break action economy. Imposing action economy limits upon it is illogical.

It's still your turn, you just get to take a turn with two actions in it instead of one. As for the ability being designed to break action economy - it's designed to be an exception to the standard action economy rules in a particular way. That's not even remotely the same thing as it being designed to completely ignore every action economy limit.

[calebrus]

You are wrong. It's still the same turn. Please look at the definition of "turn". And the rules of spellcasting are specific - can't cast a spell on the same turn, yadda yadda. Action Surge provides no exception, no you-may-ignore-spellcasting-rules.

I think you're wrong on this one.
Hopefully we'll find out soon. I just tweeted (https://twitter.com/calebrus44/status/573939450427801600) the boys about it.

[Myzz]

It doesn't have to specify its interaction with bonus action spells.
The rules implicate this on their own.
Remember, AS is a specific rule.
Casting spells is a general rule.
The specific rule states that you gain one extra action which can be used to do anything that a normal action can do.
A normal action can cast a spell.
The general rule states that only one spell slot can be used on your turn.
The specific rule allows for a second.
They don't have to specify the interaction, because there is no interaction. You get one extra action, and you can use it for anything you want. Period. Because that's what the specific rule states.

I'm inclined to agree.

The problem I have is with the actual word choice and lack of punctuation choice. I'm a fairly intelligent person, and fairly well versed in the English language. BUT to be on the safe side I took my PHB to the English teacher at the school I work at. Her interpretation (with no knowledge of RPG's at all) based strictly off how the English language functions ruled that the AND in :

"Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

applies to both the additional action and possible bonus action. AND because of the sentence structure, if comma was to be added that 2 would be needed to read:

"Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action, on top of your regular action, and a possible bonus action... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

That due to guidelines of the English Language you can not put a comma thus:
"Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action, on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

Basically she said "You get an additional action AND maybe a bonus action, from using it." But she had no idea what that maybe would be. And that the way it reads you would for sure have a bonus action after using Action Surge (and whether you used one prior to action surge is irrelevant).


NOW I know... This teacher is no authority on D&D nor the Wizards of the Coast. She is an authority on the English Language. So IF Mearls had intended it to be utilized in the manner he tweated... Thats RAI... But it is NOT RAW.

I actually would prefer Mearls version. The problem is AGAIN how they worded the ability. Due to the way its WRITTEN (the W in RAW) there is only 1 proper way to read Action Surge:

"Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action and bonus action (if you already used a bonus action)... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

That's what the statement means as WRITTEN.

If they wanted:

"Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action... Short rest reset... One more time at L17."

Then they should have WRITTEN it that way.

AT my table I'll probably follow Mearls guidelines, that being the version I prefer as a DM. But under player pressure would likely follow the RAW.

[Galen]

While I appreciate the attempt to move from RAW to RAI (and by the way, I'm not being cynical here, I like RAI as much as the next guy, and I am genuinely interested at what JC has to say), I must say I find it slightly disingenuous of you. We've been arguing RAW here, you ran out of arguments, and now you're basically shifting the goalposts - oh, it's not what the text says, it's what Jeremy Crawford intends it to say!

Regardless of what JC will say, RAW is on my side. If you have integrity, you should at least admit it before shifting the focus to RAI.

[calebrus]

While I appreciate the attempt to move from RAW to RAI (and by the way, I'm not being cynical here, I like RAI as much as the next guy), I must say I find it slightly disingenuous of you. We've been arguing RAW here, you ran out of arguments, and now you're basically shifting the goalposts - oh, it's not what the text says, it's what it intends!

Regardless of what JC will say, RAW is on my side.

I'm not shifting the goalposts at all.
Specific trumps general. Those are the goalposts.
Casting a spell is general. Using Action Surge is specific. So using Action Surge to gain an extra action trumps the general rules placing limitations on bonus action spells regarding spellcasting.
Because the specific rule lets you use that action for anything that can normally be done with an action.

Not anything that can normally be done with an action, following general rules placing limitations on those actions based on other actions taken during that turn.
Anything that can normally be done with an action. Period.

[Myzz]

While I appreciate the attempt to move from RAW to RAI (and by the way, I'm not being cynical here, I like RAI as much as the next guy), I must say I find it slightly disingenuous of you. We've been arguing RAW here, you ran out of arguments, and now you're basically shifting the goalposts - oh, it's not what the text says, it's what it intends!

Regardless of what JC will say, RAW is on my side.

I think I'm with Calebrus on this one... Thats a more general rule about spell casting that is Broken by action surge!

Bonus Action Spell then Cantrip with cast time of 1 Action. Action Surge. Then Bonus Action Spell then Cantrip with cast time of 1 Action.

Although Calebrus would say you can't cast that second Bonus Action Spell...

[JFahy]

Action Surge overrides the general rule that 'you only get one Action per turn', but I don't see how that turns into 'Action Surge negates any rule that might inconvenience you in the use of your extra Action'.

[Galen]

I'm sorry, you don't seem to really understand what Specific Trumps General means. There is no Specific in Action Surge to trump the General spellcasting rules. It gives you an Action. That Action must follow the rules of D&D. No exceptions are given. Period.

[Elderand]

To resume.

Normaly:
-If you cast a non cantrip spell, you cannot use your bonus action for spell that has a casting time of bonus action.
-If you cast a cantrip spell, you can use your bonus action to cast a bonus action casting time spell. And vice versa, if you used a bonus action to cast a spell you can only cast a cantrip type spell with your normal action (or do something else like swing a sword or such)

With action surge we have therefore two possibilities

(a) you gain another action that must still obey the rules above, so normal spell twice but no bonus action spells, or cantrip twice and bonus action spell.
or
(b) you gain another action that is not subject to the rule above but your normal actions do, so you could cast cantrip, bonus spell and then action surge non cantrip spell.

Personaly, I think the correct answer is (a)

[calebrus]

With action surge we have therefore two possibilities

Yep, that's basically it.
The reason that I am firmly in Camp B is because Action Surge allows you to break the rules and use two spell slots in one round.
Why would that suddenly not be true if one of those slots were a bonus action casting?

Under this:
"-If you cast a non cantrip spell, you cannot use your bonus action for spell that has a casting time of bonus action."
... you are allowed to use two slots on your turn via Action Surge.
But under this:
"-If you cast a cantrip spell, you can use your bonus action to cast a bonus action casting time spell. And vice versa, if you used a bonus action to cast a spell you can only cast a cantrip type spell with your normal action (or do something else like swing a sword or such)"
.... you can only Action Surge to cast a cantrip.

It doesn't make any sense that way whatsoever. Why would one use of Action Surge allow two slots, and a different use of Action Surge only allow one slot and a cantrip?

That's why I am firmly on the Specific trumps general side of the fence.

[JFahy]

Yep, that's basically it.
The reason that I am firmly in Camp B is because Action Surge allows you to break the rules and use two spell slots in one round.


That's a pretty dishonest rephrasing. AS allows you to break one rule ('you get one action per turn'), and have two actions in one turn.

The rest of the book should still stand, when it comes to determining what that second action can do.

[Elderand]

Yeah, I'm firmly with JFahy on that one. The only thing action surge modify is the number of action you get, not what you can do with it.

[Xetheral]

That's why I am firmly on the Specific trumps general side of the fence.

For specific to trump general the rules must conflict in the first place. Here, RAW, they don't. Every word in Action Surge can be given effect and every word in the Bonus Action Spell rules can simultaneously be given effect. There is no conflict that requires consideration of priority to resolve.

[calebrus]

That's a pretty dishonest rephrasing. AS allows you to break one rule ('you get one action per turn'), and have two actions in one turn.

It's not a dishonest rephrasing at all.
The reason that you can only cast a cantrip on your turn if you have cast a bonus action spell is to keep you to one spell slot per turn.
That's why that rule exists.

Action Surge exists to break the normal action economy rules.
That's why AS exists.

To impose stipulations of action economy onto an ability designed to specifically break those stipulations is what's dishonest.

[Submortimer]

I'm not shifting the goalposts at all.
Specific trumps general. Those are the goalposts.
Casting a spell is general. Using Action Surge is specific. So using Action Surge to gain an extra action trumps the general rules placing limitations on bonus action spells regarding spellcasting.
Because the specific rule lets you use that action for anything that can normally be done with an action.

Not anything that can normally be done with an action, following general rules placing limitations on those actions based on other actions taken during that turn.
Anything that can normally be done with an action. Period.

Right, anything that can normally be done with an action. If I'm a warlock, and I cast Hex (A bonus action), I can then use my action normally , as well as any other actions i'd get this turn, to cast a cantrip, or make an attack, or something along those lines, because nothing stated allows you to break the "Cantrip Restriction"

[Tonden Ockay]

So a EK at 7th level could cast cantrip Ray of Frost (slow movement buy 10) and take one shot with a bow. So they could kite someone or something that doesn't have a ranged attack right?

[Galen]

So a EK at 7th level could cast cantrip Ray of Frost (slow movement buy 10) and take one shot with a bow. So they could kite someone or something that doesn't have a ranged attack right?

Seems legit.

[calebrus]

So a EK at 7th level could cast cantrip Ray of Frost (slow movement buy 10) and take one shot with a bow. So they could kite someone or something that doesn't have a ranged attack right?

Yes, but so can anyone with the ability to cast Ray of Frost. An EK just kills it quicker than they do because of the bonus action weapon attack.

[Galen]

I think you're wrong on this one.
Hopefully we'll find out soon. I just tweeted (https://twitter.com/calebrus44/status/573939450427801600) the boys about it.
And Crawford said no ...

[JFahy]

The part of me that hates multiclass dipping is pleased.

[Chronos]

Also assuming, of course, that you have enough open space to kite in. In actual play, you'll often find yourself up against a wall before kiting becomes relevant.

[calebrus]

And Crawford said no ...

Yep, he did.
And I continue to think that's dumb, as per this post:

It's not a dishonest rephrasing at all.
The reason that you can only cast a cantrip on your turn if you have cast a bonus action spell is to keep you to one spell slot per turn.
That's why that rule exists.

Action Surge exists to break the normal action economy rules.
That's why AS exists.

To impose stipulations of action economy onto an ability designed to specifically break those stipulations is what's dishonest.

So AS allows you to break action economy just fine.... as long as you don't cast a bonus action spell. If you do that, then AS doesn't perform it's intended function.
So House Rule it is.
Because that's just dumb.

[JFahy]

Also assuming, of course, that you have enough open space to kite in. In actual play, you'll often find yourself up against a wall before kiting becomes relevant.

Oh, you're one of those "not every battle occurs on an infinite featureless plane" weirdos. :smallwink:

[Naanomi]

Extra bonus action... Warlock/sorcerer/fighter could spit out 16-20 Eldritch Blast beams in a single turn then?

[Sullivan]

I understand the argument that an action triggers a bonus action, but on p.g. 7 they say specific beats general. The rules on bonus actions are pretty specific you get one even if you get two to choose from you still get one and this shouldn't be read "The rules on bonus actions are pretty specific you get one even if you get two to choose from you still get one", but while we're on this I've been thinking. FireBall reads "..8d6 fire damage" but if we move the d in the sentence and add a 12 then it does 86d12 fire damage!

[Galen]

Yep, he did.
And I continue to think that's dumb, as per this post:


So AS allows you to break action economy just fine.... as long as you don't cast a bonus action spell. If you do that, then AS doesn't perform it's intended function.
So House Rule it is.
Because that's just dumb.

OMG, calebrus, I just saw, you are actually bickering with Crawford on twitter, and now you're rehashing that "specific trumps general" argument at him? If nothing else, you got hutzpah, man. *adds twitter thread to favorites, grabs popcorn*

[calebrus]

If nothing else, you got hutzpah, man. *adds twitter thread to favorites, grabs popcorn*

:biggrin: :smallwink:

[ProphetSword]

I see he gave the same answer that Xetheral gave above, which is this:

Specific trumps general only if there's a conflict between them.

During the course of this thread, I have watched two people argue positions while a host of people have told them flatly that they are wrong. At what point do the people arguing come to the realization that people aren't telling them they're wrong just for fun and might actually be on to something? :smalltongue:

[Tonden Ockay]

The part of me that hates multiclass dipping is pleased.

My player wants to do 12 levels of EK and 8 levels as a Wizard

[Elderand]

During the course of this thread, I have watched two people argue positions while a host of people have told them flatly that they are wrong. At what point do the people arguing come to the realization that people aren't telling them they're wrong just for fun and might actually be on to something? :smalltongue:

For added irony, Calebrus is now doing the exact same thing he was arguing against earlier.

He got his answer, he just doesn't like it.

[calebrus]

For added irony, Calebrus is now doing the exact same thing he was arguing against earlier.

He got his answer, he just doesn't like it.

To be fair, I had a few people agreeing with me to begin with, rather than every single person telling me otherwise.
And once I got my answer I made allowances that it is now a house rule.
I'm not arguing what is RAW any longer.
There's a difference.

[ProphetSword]

For added irony, Calebrus is now doing the exact same thing he was arguing against earlier.

I noticed that too. But, we're all friends here (I hope). So, what's our next rules argument?

[Giant2005]

I think you're wrong on this one.
Hopefully we'll find out soon. I just tweeted (https://twitter.com/calebrus44/status/573939450427801600) the boys about it.

Ugh... I can't believe you got a response so quickly! I have been waiting patiently since February 6 for a response to my last question.

[MeeposFire]

Yep, he did.
And I continue to think that's dumb, as per this post:


So AS allows you to break action economy just fine.... as long as you don't cast a bonus action spell. If you do that, then AS doesn't perform it's intended function.
So House Rule it is.
Because that's just dumb.

The rule is dumb but it is dumb in a lot of ways. Think on this if you cast shillelagh then you cannot cast a normal action spell you still have to cast a cantrip even though shillelagh is already a cantrip. Casting that spell also prevents you from using reaction spells that are not cantrips.

Also note that by strict RAW youc an make the point that the rule only applies if you cast the bonus action first. If you cast magic missile and then cast healing word technically that is allowed (the rule says you cannot cast a non-cantrip action spell after you cast a bonus action spell). Of course his reading means the rule would be useless so you should not read it that way but it is actually true.

The problem is the wording of the rule. Personally I believe what they really want to do is make it that you cast a cantrip in the round you use a bonus action spell. My house rule is this..

"In any round where you cast multiple spells and one of those is a bonus action spell at least one of the spells that were cast must be a cantrip."

As far as I can tell this rule would fulfill the intent of the rule as I see it (force you to use cantrips when you cast a bonus action spell in a round) while closing the loophole (now the order of casting makes no difference), allows casting of reaction spells, and allows action surge to work with no worries no matter what spells you choose.

This I think is good rule to sue that actually makes the game simpler and easier.

[Galen]

The rule is dumb but it is dumb in a lot of ways. Think on this if you cast shillelagh then you cannot cast a normal action spell you still have to cast a cantrip even though shillelagh is already a cantrip. Casting that spell also prevents you from using reaction spells that are not cantrips. Wrong.


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.Since Reactions are not used on your turn, there's no problem with Reactions.


Also note that by strict RAW youc an make the point that the rule only applies if you cast the bonus action first. If you cast magic missile and then cast healing word technically that is allowed (the rule says you cannot cast a non-cantrip action spell after you cast a bonus action spell). Of course his reading means the rule would be useless so you should not read it that way but it is actually true.
As I quoted before, there's no word "after" in the rule. The wording is "during the same turn". Any combination on non-cantrip spell and bonus action spell on the same turn is illegal.

You are reading problems where there are none.

[Mellack]

What has happened previously in the turn is irrelevant.
You used your turn.
You now use a specific ability, which uses a specific rule, to gain another action.
What happened previously in the round is irrelevant.

The ability was designed to break action economy. Imposing action economy limits upon it is illogical.

If you follow this theory, then do you allow a rogue with action surge get another sneak attack?

[MeeposFire]

Wrong.

Since Reactions are not used on your turn, there's no problem with Reactions.


As I quoted before, there's no word "after" in the rule. The wording is "during the same turn". Any combination on non-cantrip spell and bonus action spell on the same turn is illegal.

You are reading problems where there are none.


Firstly reactions can be used on your own turn so yes it can conflict. Typically reaction spells have no restrictions (unlike bonus action spells) so they were intended to work with normal spells. If you cast a bonus action spell then you cannot use a reaction spell on your turn which is an additional restriction. Was that intended and even if it is it a good rule? I don't think so. Notice that if a reaction spell was a cantrip it would still not work due to the rule specifying 1 action on the cantrip.

Secondly I am not going to argue with you on whether the bonus action rule is retroactive or not (I personally rule that it does and I don't care about the wording in that case) as I find that reading that way is silly. The fact is that it is possible to get that reading is all the importance it ever has.


You are also wrong in your last section of your post. the rule is very specific that you cannot cast another spell (the other spell is assumed to be the bonus action spell) during that turn except for a cantrip and it even specifies that it must be cast as an action.

This means that if you cast shillelagh (bonus action spell) then you cannot cast magic missile despite the bonus action spell being a cantrip because the rule is very specific that the action spell must be a cantrip with a casting time of one action.

Heck if we want to get really stupid you could emphasize the fact that it says "a spell" as being explicit for being used for a singular spell which further would enforce that you can only cast that one cantrip that turn outside of the bonus action spell (which of course only screws over action surge since that is one of the only ways to get an extra action to cast another spell).

Once again that would be dumb but it can be read that way which is just further reason why this rule is silly (now watch somebody is going to go after this one silly interpretation that is not even being used as that important instead of going after the real problem parts of the post).

I contend the rule is bad because it restricts you in many ways that I do not think it was intended to restrict.

[JFahy]

My player wants to do 12 levels of EK and 8 levels as a Wizard

Good luck! I hope the character gives you and your group many hours of enjoyment.

[:smallfurious:]

[SliceandDiceKid]

I'm not saying you 'should' get a bonus action... Or that it is RAI

I'm kind of playing Devil's Advocate here...

The reading of Action Surge can possibly say that indeed you do! Pure RAW there is an argument that it does indeed give an additional action and possible bonus action (if a bonus action has already been taken)

AND TBH, from a TWF stance that makes the most sense... Action Surge then Gives him ALL of his weapon attacks back! But that is the only example of where getting an additional Bonus Action is not STUPIDLY OP!

You never get 2 bonus actions in one round. Please stop.

[Vogonjeltz]

Fighters can attack four times with a single action. Spellcasters can also attack four times with a single action. A single spell will almost always do more than a single attack.

Are you referencing the fact the Eldritch Knight gets 4 attacks at 20th level? If so, the use of Spellcasters is overly broad as none of the other casters can do this.

If you meant to reference Eldritch Blast that is actually just '1' attack with up to '4' targets. It also isn't comparable to the attack action in that it can't be used for contests or improvised actions the way a real attack can.

That a spell will "almost always" do "more" than a single attack is also highly dubious as a proposition.

[Chen]

As I quoted before, there's no word "after" in the rule. The wording is "during the same turn". Any combination on non-cantrip spell and bonus action spell on the same turn is illegal.

You are reading problems where there are none.

The way they put the tenses here is what is causing the problem. They only used the present tense of "cast" which puts the restriction on the other spell, not the bonus spell. If you use your bonus action to cast a spell, the sentence says you may not cast another spell unless its a 1 action cantrip. But if I cast a regular action spell first, there's nothing in the paragraph that says I cannot cast a bonus action spell. In fact the sentence right before says I MUST use a bonus action to cast a spell with that as the cast time. The precise wording should have been "can't cast or have casted" or they should have added "if you want to cast a spell as a bonus action" to the end of the sentence.