how 'low magic is OotA?

[Camman1984]

I am thinking of picking up mage slayer for my rogue to go hunting casters. I have heard that the campaign is very low magic? is that just magic items or low on casters as I wouldn't want to burn a feat (however much I want it for flavour) if I am never going to use it?

no spoilers please, just vague answers :)

[Misterwhisper]

I am thinking of picking up mage slayer for my rogue to go hunting casters. I have heard that the campaign is very low magic? is that just magic items or low on casters as I wouldn't want to burn a feat (however much I want it for flavour) if I am never going to use it?

no spoilers please, just vague answers :)

Keep in mind that whatever spell they cast gets to go off first so many times you will never get to use the feat anyway.

Caster uses Shocking Grasp, which is what most casters would do if you were in range, oh well, no attack for you because you do not get to make a reaction.
Caster casts any of the many travel spells, they are gone before you can attack.
Essentially the feat will only be useful if the GM wants to let you get an attack.

I would not waste the feat on it.

[DivisibleByZero]

Keep in mind that whatever spell they cast gets to go off first .

This is true.
Reactions happen after the trigger, unless timing is specifically stated otherwise.
Mage Slayer doesn't interrupt the caster, it punishes the caster if they are still there to receive their punishment.

[Orion3T]

I am thinking of picking up mage slayer for my rogue to go hunting casters. I have heard that the campaign is very low magic? is that just magic items or low on casters as I wouldn't want to burn a feat (however much I want it for flavour) if I am never going to use it?

no spoilers please, just vague answers :)

I am currently about half way through the campaign, I think I am level 9. So far I would not have had much use from it even if I tried to use it. It might have come into effect 'occasionally'.

Of course I can't comment on how useful it might be in future. The posts above suggest it isn't that useful even if there is a prevalence of casters.

[Asmotherion]

Feat judgment aside (with which I agree btw), I can't really see OotA as a Low-Magic campain. Everything in the Underdark is either Demonic, Magical or Psionic. I mean, unless you only fight Vanilla Drow (who still have some spells usable once per day), I don't think it's the best setting/campain combination for a low-magic scenario.

Thus, I think your DM meant that you, the players, won't be getting magic items at all, or very few of them. This makes sence, as OotA has a central feeling of a survival, and even simple magic items can contradict that, by giving a sence of security. Especially with bounded accuracy, even a +1 weapon is a huge bonus, as it means a +1 to attack rolls; The limited AC most MM entries have, means this +1 will make a huge impact. Even a potion of healing or a cantrip spell scroll can turn tables in this edition (if used right), and might mess with the "Non-Magical Resource Managment" sub-theme the DM may have planed. Finding water sources, keeping food, making sure the food is not poisonous, attracting predators (not rangers) due to walking around with food... this can all make OotA much more interesting, if you're into that kind of games.

[Cespenar]

We had a Barbarian with the Mage Slayer feat in this campaign, it didn't help.

Our Abjurer with Counterspell helped a lot more.

Maybe a Shadow Monk with Silence could have helped too, I guess.

Baseline is I don't recommend Mage Slayer.

[Telok]

It's not low magic. You start off facing clerics and casters with magic items and never really stop. Many side quests have magic item loot, there are magic item sellers several times, and there are sections that work on the assumption that the party has magic items from side quests.

[LordVonDerp]

This is true.
Reactions happen after the trigger, unless timing is specifically stated otherwise.
Mage Slayer doesn't interrupt the caster, it punishes the caster if they are still there to receive their punishment.
It's a really common misconception. Reactions actually happen at the same time as the trigger.

[Camman1984]

well thank you for your opinions :) I like the feat and even if the caster does shocking grasp/teleport, that is a round that he hasn't used doing something more offensive, and all I have used is the threat of a reaction. if he uses low end combat teleports I should be able to keep up with my speed :), it also means my own wizard gets to save his slots for more offensive spells

and it's competition is a list of feats that don't appeal to me or +2 dex, I find straight numerical boosts dull as dishwater.

My post was really to find whether I would be up against casters that I can try and hunt :) ...effectively or not

[Camman1984]

i do totally understand all your skepticism and the limitations of the ability

[DivisibleByZero]

It's a really common misconception. Reactions actually happen at the same time as the trigger.

It's really not a misconception.
The misconception is that reactions interrupt. They only do so when it specifies that they do. When that specificity doesn't occur, they happen after. Not during, not simultaneously, but after.
Just like it says in the rules for reactions.
If you still disagree, I can show proof. Just let me know.

edit:
I'll be proactive.
Proof. (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/06/24/caster-near-mage-slayer/)
Even more proof. (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/06/02/shocking-grasp-on-a-mage-slayer/)
Need I continue?

[Camman1984]

that was my understanding that the spell goes off first.

I know certain reactions happen simultaneously, like attacks of opportunity (attacking after they move out of your threatened area would be impossible) but I think they are specific and the general rule is after

[DivisibleByZero]

that was my understanding that the spell goes off first.

I know certain reactions happen simultaneously, like attacks of opportunity (attacking after they move out of your threatened area would be impossible) but I think they are specific and the general rule is after

Correct. They happen after, unless the description for said reaction specifies otherwise.

[Misterwhisper]

It's a really common misconception. Reactions actually happen at the same time as the trigger.

No, it doesn't.

Unless the ability specifies that it happens before the triggering action then it happens after the trigger completes.

You ready an action to shoot someone as they move by an open window. Sorry, they get to finish the movement first, you get no shot.
You ready an action to hit a caster when they start to cast a spell so you can stop them from leaving. Sorry, he gets his teleport/d-door/misty step, you get no attack.
You have mage slayer and sentinel and are behind a caster you just jumped out of the shadows and sneak attacks. He casts teleport/d-door/misty step, nothing you can do to stop it.
Same situation, assassin with Mage Slayer and Sentinel you jump him with surprise and sneak attack him. He casts Shocking grasp at you and just walks off, nothing you can do about it.

However.

Shield, Counterspell, and absorb elements all specifically say that they take place before the incident and can stop them.


Yes, it was intentionally designed so that only spells interrupt the action that triggered them, except sentinel and that was magic bulleted also due to teleport effects "do not cost movement" so they do not trigger sentinel.

Gee, it is almost like they wanted to make sure that casters could never be stopped by anything but other casters at levels over 10.

[MrStabby]

A tangential post here, but maybe relevant...

I find mage slayer to not be a good feat at low levels. Casters are kind of frequent but at low levels they don't tend to have either many spell slots or hitpoints. An extra attack or reaction isn't a big deal.

Likewise blowing a concentration effect is not so much of an issue when one more hit will kill them anyway.

Advantage on saves for things next to you is always nice though.


Now this next bit might just be me, but I find this feat becomes obscenely powerful at higher levels. As a DM I tend to introduce more casters at higher levels - usually by ensuring that almost everyone has some spells or supernatural abilities - misty step, shield at the bottom end through to dispel magic, fly and counterspell at higher levels. In this kind of environment the reaction attacks are frequent, spell saves are common and the ability to break concentration is vital.

If this isn't the campaign for it you can save the desire for the feat for a higher level game where some of this may come into play.

[Corran]

Caster casts any of the many travel spells, they are gone before you can attack.

There is a potential way to go around this one.
Vengeance paladin's level 7 aura allows for some movement (from what I remember it's half speed), so if the enemy caster teleports away from you, yet ''close enough'', you can move to them and still make your attack from mage slayer.
Helps if you have a reach weapon and/or if you have casted haste. So I could probably see mage slayer to be a good enough feat for a vengeance paly (their OA's are not as strong as the rogue's, yet they can be pretty good with IDS and the potential to stack a divine smite on top of them). Just throwing this out there, sorry if it was completelly out of topic.

[DivisibleByZero]

There is a potential way to go around this one.
Vengeance paladin's level 7 aura allows for some movement (from what I remember it's half speed), so if the enemy caster teleports away from you, yet ''close enough'', you can move to them and still make your attack from mage slayer.

Technically it doesn't work.
The movement happens as a part of the attack, which you can't take if they aren't there any longer.
But as I've said before in other threads, I would totally allow it anyway.

[Corran]

Technically it doesn't work.
The movement happens as a part of the attack, which you can't take if they aren't there any longer.
But as I've said before in other threads, I would totally allow it anyway.
Oh, I see. Shame, thought I had found sth cool...

[LordVonDerp]

It's really not a misconception.
The misconception is that reactions interrupt. They only do so when it specifies that they do. When that specificity doesn't occur, they happen after. Not during, not simultaneously, but after.
Just like it says in the rules for reactions.
If you still disagree, I can show proof. Just let me know.

edit:
I'll be proactive.
Proof. (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/06/24/caster-near-mage-slayer/)
Even more proof. (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/06/02/shocking-grasp-on-a-mage-slayer/)
Need I continue?

Nope, no need to continue.
"Reactions

Certain Special Abilities, Spells, and situations allow you to take a Special action called a reaction. A reaction is an instant response to a trigger of some kind, which can occur on your turn or on someone else’s. "

So yeah, they happen at the same time unless you completely ignore the rules in favor of only focusing on the word "reaction".

[DivisibleByZero]

Nope, no need to continue.
"Reactions

Certain Special Abilities, Spells, and situations allow you to take a Special action called a reaction. A reaction is an instant response to a trigger of some kind, which can occur on your turn or on someone else’s. "

So yeah, they happen at the same time unless you completely ignore the rules in favor of only focusing on the word "reaction".

The funny part is that someone tried to use that to argue in that string of tweets.
JC shot it down and explained why it was wrong.
I mean, JC literally refuted that exact argument in the link I posted, which you quoted in the post wherein you argued it.
You just didn't bother reading it.
So I ask again, shall I continue?

[Koningkrush]

I personally house-rule in all my games that reactions result in a Dexterity contest between the trigger and the reactor.

The reasons the rules are as they are for reactions is for play speed and ease of play. If you can afford a few more dice rolls, then I suggest trying out my method.
Although I play on Roll20 and have access to automatic macros, so if you play using real dice on tabletop then this might not be ideal.

[Kalashak]

Nope, no need to continue.
"Reactions

Certain Special Abilities, Spells, and situations allow you to take a Special action called a reaction. A reaction is an instant response to a trigger of some kind, which can occur on your turn or on someone else’s. "

So yeah, they happen at the same time unless you completely ignore the rules in favor of only focusing on the word "reaction".

Page 252 of the DMG says that if the reaction doesn't specify the timing, or is unclear, that it occurs after its trigger finishes

[SharkForce]

if i make an instant response to your post as soon as you make it, does my post travel back in time and occur at the exact same instant as your post?

[Corran]

if i make an instant response to your post as soon as you make it, does my post travel back in time and occur at the exact same instant as your post?
Isn't that how shield works?

ps: Yeah, I know that shield is an exception to how reactions generally work.

[Misterwhisper]

Isn't that how shield works?

ps: Yeah, I know that shield is an exception to how reactions generally work.

It is an exception the same as endure elements and counterspell.

Nothing a martial does can interrupt except using the sentinel feat, off the top of my head, every reaction spell takes priority except for hellish rebuke.

I am sure none of those are coincidence, and neither is it coincidence that only warlocks get the only reaction spell that does not take priority.

Also, if the person used a spell to move, sentinel does not trigger either.

[Camman1984]

haha, all I wanted to know was whether there were some casters for me to slap about in the campaign I was on 😚

even with these limitations i am still keen enough on the feat to take it, but if there are no casters it is pointless. there isn't a lot of interesting feats for a rogue, except maybe the new sword feat from UA but even that I wonder about it's value compared to just more dex. I have made 1 movement attack of opportunity in 5 levels

[Contrast]

and it's competition is a list of feats that don't appeal to me or +2 dex, I find straight numerical boosts dull as dishwater.

I'm inclined to agree that +dex is a very compelling option for most rogues. That said there are a number of very useful feats.

Skulker depends on how your DM runs hiding and lighting/how much hiding you intend to be doing.

Lucky is very good and broadly applicable. Useful for rogues in that it can help mitigate the 'whoops, flubbed my one attack roll, guess I don't do any damage this round'.

Mobile makes you insanely good at flitting around combat as suddenly you can dash away instead of disengaging, in addition to the extra movement and ignoring difficult terrain.

[Camman1984]

mobile is handy but as a swashbuckler, I already have access to its most useful benefit. skulker would be nice but my dm is REALLY flexible with hiding and I have a cloak of elvenkind. I don't hide in combat as I am a skirmisher rogue instead of a sneak rogue.

lucky is an amazingly flexible and useful feat, I have considered it on many occasions, but I feel it is too easily picked by pretty much everyone and I don't like feats that almost feel like an autopick (like the old close quarter shooting for ranged characters). maybe I should just suck it up and go +2 dex until higher levels when I have more feel for what the campaign needs.

[Contrast]

Fair enough. If you're really stumped healer and inspiring leader (if you have a decent cha) have always been on my list of things I wish someone in the party had but could never quite justify taking myself :smallbiggrin:

Magic Initiate would let you pick up a familiar (or other spell of your choice) and booming blade which would be a significant boost in power in a number of ways and gives some roleplaying options.

[Camman1984]

haha, I also have booming blade from sword coast half elf 😉

I think that's maybe my problem, picked up so many of the options I really wanted very early on, so now its mostly feats for flavour rather than power.