Action surge and casting spells

[Dmdork]

I'm a fighter/wizard. Can I cast a spell, then action surge and cast a spell?

[AttilatheYeon]

Yes, there is no rule against multiple spells in a turn. People confuse the bonus action spell rule to mean 1 spell a turn.

[Safety Sword]

Yes, there is no rule against multiple spells in a turn. People confuse the bonus action spell rule to mean 1 spell a turn.

The rule actually says that if you cast a bonus action spell then the other spell has to be a cantrip with a 1 action casting time and you can't cast another spell that turn.

Bonus Action
A spell cast with a bonus action is especially swift. You must use a bonus action on your turn to cast the spell, provided that you haven't already taken a bonus action this turn. You can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.

I don't think that stops you casting two 1 action spells in the same turn though. Seems a little weird to me all in all, but I guess rules is rules.

[Mordaedil]

I think Action Surge should be allowed to kind of break that rule, but in the same vein, I think quicken spell should too.

[Anymage]

Quicken Spell is likely the main reason for that rule. Being able to nova hard by quickening one spell and then twinning another would be very hard to balance.

Action Surging spells is still strong nova potential, but limited by the fact that you can only do it once per combat. Which is a nice trick, but given the opportunity cost isn't OP.

[SVamp]

I'm a fighter/wizard. Can I cast a spell, then action surge and cast a spell?

Yes. But there are hilarious exceptions.

For example if you cast a bonus action spell, then action surge afterwards, you can’t cast anything other than a cantrip.

If you cast your leveled spell first, action surge, second leveled spell, you then cast a bonus action spell them that’s ok according to the rules, lol. (Except your DM might insist on a specific order for bonus action spells I guess)

The simple version , avoid bonus action spells and you can action surge two leveled spells.

[Expected]

Specific > General.

Action Surge states:

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.

Once you use this feature, you must finish a short or long rest before you can use it again. Starting at 17th level, you can use it twice before a rest, but only once on the same turn.

Pg. 74 of the D&D Basic Rules states:
https://media.wizards.com/2018/dnd/downloads/DnD_BasicRules_2018.pdf

When you take your action on your turn, you can take one of the actions presented here, an action you gained from your class or a special feature, or an action that you im- provise. Many monsters have action options of their own in their stat blocks.
When you describe an action not detailed elsewhere in the rules, the DM tells you whether that action is possible and what kind of roll you need to make, if any, to deter- mine success or failure.

So, yes, using Action Surge allows you to cast two spells, of any level of which you have slots for, in one turn.

[sophontteks]

Quicken Spell is likely the main reason for that rule. Being able to nova hard by quickening one spell and then twinning another would be very hard to balance.

Action Surging spells is still strong nova potential, but limited by the fact that you can only do it once per combat. Which is a nice trick, but given the opportunity cost isn't OP.
Action surge is balanced because its limited to once per short rest. Meanwhile Quicken + twinned could only be done 1-2 times per day, and thus needs additional limitations. :smallbiggrin:

Sorcerers can't use multiple metamagics anyway. IMO the writers of 5e went too far trying to limit sorcerers.

[Zhorn]

So answering as I go...

Personal DM stance: The general Action + Bonus Action spell casting limitation is based on the effort taken to cast a spell within a 6 second round. Special rules interactions such as Action Surge and Quickened Spell are pushing your speed above normal limits to allow casting more than one leveled spell in a round.

Now to look up everyone's most despised medium for official rulings... oh hey, they're pretty good on this interaction (less so for Quickened Spell, but that's not the thread topic).


https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/10/18/action-surge-spell-casting/
Action Surge and spell casting. Two spells (not cantrips) in 1 round?
A: You can use Action Surge to cast a second spell, provided that both spells take 1 action to cast.

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/09/23/action-surge-spell-2/
Can the action surge be used to cast another spell during the same turn one has already been cast?
A: Yes, Action Surge can be used to do anything an action can normally do.

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/04/17/action-surge-spell-3/
Can an Action Surge be used to cast an additional spell?
A: Yep! But watch out for bonus action spells (PH, pg. 202).

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2019/08/14/my-friend-got-angry-with-me-saying-i-cant-use-a-spellaction-surgespell-because-you-can-only-cast-one-spell-per-turn/
My friend got angry with me saying I can’t use a “spell+Action Surge+Spell” because you can only cast one spell per turn
A1: Repeat after me: no general rule in D&D prevents you from casting more than one spell on a turn.

A2: If you cast a spell with a casting time of 1 bonus action, that is the only circumstance in which you follow the rule on casting spells as a bonus action.

Even then, you can cast two spells on one turn, but one of them must be a cantrip. (Cantrips are spells.)

A3: To make sure this is super duper clear …

The rule on bonus action spells has nothing to do with Action Surge. You could, for example, use Action Surge and then cast fireball twice.

The rule on bonus action spells applies only if you cast a bonus action spell, period.

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/11/20/wizard-1-action-spell-yet-eldritch-knight-can-action-surge-spells/
Wizard = 1 action spell, yet Eldritch knight can action surge spells?
A: As a fighter, an Eldritch Knight can, indeed, use Action Surge to cast a spell.

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/06/19/can-the-pc-use-the-action-surge-to-cast-another-spell/
Can the PC use the action surge to cast another spell?
A: Action Surge gives an extra action, which can do whatever an action can do, including the Cast a Spell action. Really, any action.

[Anymage]

Action surge is balanced because its limited to once per short rest. Meanwhile Quicken + twinned could only be done 1-2 times per day, and thus needs additional limitations. :smallbiggrin:

Sorcerers can't use multiple metamagics anyway. IMO the writers of 5e went too far trying to limit sorcerers.

Quicken is two SP. That's a lot more than "once or twice per day".

Twinned will eat your SP like candy, granted. My thought was more that three big spells in one round (one twinned spell, one quickened one) is a hell of a lot of nova potential, especially when you don't lose any caster levels in the process. The action surger has to be at least a full spell level behind.

[sophontteks]

Quicken is two SP. That's a lot more than "once or twice per day".

Twinned will eat your SP like candy, granted. My thought was more that three big spells in one round (one twinned spell, one quickened one) is a hell of a lot of nova potential, especially when you don't lose any caster levels in the process. The action surger has to be at least a full spell level behind.
Twinned and quickened would only work 1-2 times a day and sorcerers are already limited by having the least spells known of all classes.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Yes. But there are hilarious exceptions.

For example if you cast a bonus action spell, then action surge afterwards, you can’t cast anything other than a cantrip.

If you cast your leveled spell first, action surge, second leveled spell, you then cast a bonus action spell them that’s ok according to the rules, lol. (Except your DM might insist on a specific order for bonus action spells I guess)

The simple version , avoid bonus action spells and you can action surge two leveled spells.

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.
In the same vein that casting a bonus action spell limits your ability to cast a levelled spell as an action, casting a levelled spell as an action would limit your ability to cast as a bonus action. Doing this in a specific order doesn't circumvent the restriction. Order doesn't matter here.

[diplomancer]

Yes. But there are hilarious exceptions.

For example if you cast a bonus action spell, then action surge afterwards, you can’t cast anything other than a cantrip.

If you cast your leveled spell first, action surge, second leveled spell, you then cast a bonus action spell them that’s ok according to the rules, lol. (Except your DM might insist on a specific order for bonus action spells I guess)

The simple version , avoid bonus action spells and you can action surge two leveled spells.

This is not possible. PHB never states "you cannot cast a leveled spell after you cast a bonus action spell on your turn", it states "you cannot cast a leveled spell on the same turn you cast a bonus action spell"

If you've cast a normal action leveled spell, that means that it's not possible to cast a bonus action spell.

So action "cast a spell" action surge "cast a spell" bonus action "cast a bonus action spell" gets a NOPE from the DM at the time of casting the bonus action spell.

[Frozenstep]

Action surge is balanced because its limited to once per short rest. Meanwhile Quicken + twinned could only be done 1-2 times per day, and thus needs additional limitations. :smallbiggrin:

Sorcerers can't use multiple metamagics anyway. IMO the writers of 5e went too far trying to limit sorcerers.

Somehow I think the restriction wasn't just because of sorcerers. There are a lot of bonus action spells that have a powerful effect, but the bonus action restriction means players have to make choices rather then get 2 leveled spells off in a turn without action surge. A wizard would basically scoff at any melee threat as they teleport away with misty step and use their movement to go further, and then still cast their fireball they wanted that turn. A bard faced with a bunch of enemies surrounding their downed friend wouldn't have an interesting choice between healing word to pick them up or hypnotic pattern to try and disable the enemies. A cleric could easily set things up round 1 with spirit guardians and spiritual weapon, instead of being forced to choose which needs to go up first.

[Tanarii]

The rule actually says that if you cast a bonus action spell then the other spell has to be a cantrip with a 1 action casting time and you can't cast another spell that turn.Not quite. Your rearrangement would limit a person using a Bonus Action and Action Surge to a total of 2 spells: 1 bonus action spell (any level), 1 cantrip with a 1 action casting time, and the other action not being allowed to be a spell at all.

A better rearrangement would be "Any other spells you cast in the same turn must be cantrips with a casting time of 1 action." Then it matches the results of RAW, which is you can cast a bonus action spell (any level), and Action Surge a total of 2 cantrips that are 1 action casting time each.

[Chronos]

Action Surge is also balanced by the fact that, in order to get it, you have to lose at least two levels of spellcasting.

[Safety Sword]

Not quite. Your rearrangement would limit a person using a Bonus Action and Action Surge to a total of 2 spells: 1 bonus action spell (any level), 1 cantrip with a 1 action casting time, and the other action not being allowed to be a spell at all.

A better rearrangement would be "Any other spells you cast in the same turn must be cantrips with a casting time of 1 action." Then it matches the results of RAW, which is you can cast a bonus action spell (any level), and Action Surge a total of 2 cantrips that are 1 action casting time each.

I agree with you except for one thing.

It's not my arrangement. The bonus action spell rules literally says you can only cast a cantrip as an action on your turn if you cast a bonus action spell on that turn.

I don't particularly agree that it's how it should be, personally I think if you commit your action surge you should be able to cast another spell of any level and damned be whatever else you've done that turn, but that's not what the rule says. I was just pointing that out.

Edit: The only thing that might save it is that action surge is a specific breaking of the rules that allows an additional action. Usually I would say that doesn't allow you to break an adjacent non-interacting rule... still a DM call. As the DM I call that you can do any action that you would normally have at the start of your turn with an action surge. Fixed. :smalltongue:

[ad_hoc]

I agree with you except for one thing.

It's not my arrangement. The bonus action spell rules literally says you can only cast a cantrip as an action on your turn if you cast a bonus action spell on that turn.

I don't particularly agree that it's how it should be, personally I think if you commit your action surge you should be able to cast another spell of any level and damned be whatever else you've done that turn, but that's not what the rule says. I was just pointing that out.

Edit: The only thing that might save it is that action surge is a specific breaking of the rules that allows an additional action. Usually I would say that doesn't allow you to break an adjacent non-interacting rule... still a DM call. As the DM I call that you can do any action that you would normally have at the start of your turn with an action surge. Fixed. :smalltongue:

Important to keep in mind that the rules weren't written with multiclassing in mind.

If you're using multiclassing it makes sense to houserule stuff like this to fit into the paradigm.

[Safety Sword]

Important to keep in mind that the rules weren't written with multiclassing in mind.

If you're using multiclassing it makes sense to houserule stuff like this to fit into the paradigm.

I assume the rules weren't written by people that knew eldritch knight was a thing either? :smallamused:

I didn't think we were allowed to do sensible things like you suggest here. :smalltongue:

By the way ad_hoc with all my years on this forum I never mentioned that you are fountain of good ideas and a really nice person to interact with.

So, there. I did it.

[Tanarii]

It's not my arrangement. The bonus action spell rules literally says you can only cast a cantrip as an action on your turn if you cast a bonus action spell on that turn.
It was your arrangement. You changed it so it has a different order, and more importantly says "and", which changes the meaning. Without that, the second clause is still true whenever you cast a cantrip of 1 action, no matter how many times you do it.

[ad_hoc]

I assume the rules weren't written by people that knew eldritch knight was a thing either? :smallamused:

I didn't think we were allowed to do sensible things like you suggest here. :smalltongue:

By the way ad_hoc with all my years on this forum I never mentioned that you are fountain of good ideas and a really nice person to interact with.

So, there. I did it.

Yeah, fair enough.

Might be more accurate to say that the general rules aren't written with exceptions in mind. Then when making exception based rules like Action Surge they probably erred on the side of simple and legible rather than worrying about corner cases.

I think we see it most often with multiclassing and feat interactions but it happens with other features too.

And, thanks. (:

[Safety Sword]

It was your arrangement. You changed it so it has a different order, and more importantly says "and", which changes the meaning. Without that, the second clause is still true whenever you cast a cantrip of 1 action, no matter how many times you do it.


Bonus Action
A spell cast with a bonus action is especially swift. You must use a bonus action on your turn to cast the spell, provided that you haven't already taken a bonus action this turn. You can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.

So,

You use a bonus action to cast a spell.
The only other spell you can cast on that turn is a cantrip with a 1 action casting time.



Again, this is not my arrangement, that's what the bonus action spell rule says. Again, I don't agree that you shouldn't be able to use your extra action to cast a spell. I'm just saying that in fact is what the rule states.

[ProsecutorGodot]

It was your arrangement. You changed it so it has a different order, and more importantly says "and", which changes the meaning. Without that, the second clause is still true whenever you cast a cantrip of 1 action, no matter how many times you do it.

The rule for bonus action casting reads, in my opinion, as singular. Whether that's intended or not is a separate issue but with the way it says "you can't cast another spell during the same turn except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action." leads me to believe that you're only able to cast a single spell as an action on that turn.

Which seems to be what Safety Sword is saying here. There are ways that it could be worded to avoid this sort of ambiguity, we just can't be sure which interpretation is definitive here.

I'd lean more towards it being intended as singular because there are a very limited amount of ways to cast multiple spells as an action, leaving a general rule that implies you're able to could lead to some confusion searching for why such a rule exists in the first place. It's a bit of a restrictive ruling, sure, but I don't think it's going to have a huge impact.

[Tanarii]

Lol thats not how english works.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Lol thats not how english works.

If I say "You can have a dog" that doesn't also read as "you can have as many dogs as you want, as long as all you get are dogs"

EDIT: We can look at it from another angle as well, "If you already have a cat, you can't have another pet, unless it is a small dog." This doesn't automatically mean that you can get several new small dogs, it only gives you explicit permission for a single small dog.

[diplomancer]

Whatever interpretation is true is entirely irrelevant. Who ever heard of wasting an action surge on a cantrip?

[ProsecutorGodot]

Whatever interpretation is true is entirely irrelevant. Who ever heard of wasting an action surge on a cantrip?

Warlocks would probably do it, Eldritch Blast becomes worth the consideration with the right invocations. Definitely not gonna happen all that often though.

[Safety Sword]

Lol thats not how english works.

Yes, it is.

The whole thing is ridiculous of course, because it's not worded to take into account that fact that you could have 2 actions on your turn.

That aside, it still says what it says.


The rule for bonus action casting reads, in my opinion, as singular. Whether that's intended or not is a separate issue but with the way it says "you can't cast another spell during the same turn except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action." leads me to believe that you're only able to cast a single spell as an action on that turn.

Which seems to be what Safety Sword is saying here. There are ways that it could be worded to avoid this sort of ambiguity, we just can't be sure which interpretation is definitive here.

I'd lean more towards it being intended as singular because there are a very limited amount of ways to cast multiple spells as an action, leaving a general rule that implies you're able to could lead to some confusion searching for why such a rule exists in the first place. It's a bit of a restrictive ruling, sure, but I don't think it's going to have a huge impact.

You pretty much seem to be reading it as I am.

And again, I don't know when action surge was designed with relation to when the bonus action spell rules were, so I can't gain any more insight into how it was intended to play.


Whatever interpretation is true is entirely irrelevant. Who ever heard of wasting an action surge on a cantrip?
I disagree that the interpretation is irrelevant. It may be unimportant or very important depending on who is adjudicating whether you can cast which spells when.

[Tanarii]

If I say "You can have a dog" that doesn't also read as "you can have as many dogs as you want, as long as all you get are dogs""You are not allowed in the building, except if you have a dog."

If I show up with two dogs, and you refuse me entrance to the building, we're going to have words.

[ProsecutorGodot]

"You are not allowed in the building, except if you have a dog."

If I show up with two dogs, and you refuse me entrance to the building, we're going to have words.

My point is that both your statement and my statement are valid and not stretching words to reach. It's ambiguous enough that you can argue both sides, I prefer my angle, you prefer yours. Nothing wrong with that.

Although in this example, I would say that there is a condition missing. You're already allowed in the building with a dog (bonus action spell cast) it's getting in the building with a number of additional dogs that is in question.

[Tanarii]

Although in this example, I would say that there is a condition missing. You're already allowed in the building with a dog (bonus action spell cast) it's getting in the building with a number of additional dogs that is in question.There is no question. English just doesn't work like that, and for that matter neither would a symbolic logic version of the same statement. The statement very clearly evaluates as TRUE for one as well as for more than one.

[Krobar]

Yes. But there are hilarious exceptions.

For example if you cast a bonus action spell, then action surge afterwards, you can’t cast anything other than a cantrip.

If you cast your leveled spell first, action surge, second leveled spell, you then cast a bonus action spell them that’s ok according to the rules, lol. (Except your DM might insist on a specific order for bonus action spells I guess)

The simple version , avoid bonus action spells and you can action surge two leveled spells.

Kind of like my fighter with Tavern Brawler. He can punch someone, grapple them, then shove them prone, but he can't grapple them, shove them prone, and then punch them.

Lol.

[Willie the Duck]

Kind of like my fighter with Tavern Brawler. He can punch someone, grapple them, then shove them prone, but he can't grapple them, shove them prone, and then punch them.

Lol.

Heh. They are currently having The Shield Master Pissing Match(tm) over on another site I visit. It is a thing of tragic beauty. :smalltongue:

[ProsecutorGodot]

There is no question. English just doesn't work like that, and for that matter neither would a symbolic logic version of the same statement. The statement very clearly evaluates as TRUE for one as well as for more than one.

I disagree, "another spell" and "a cantrip" are singular statements. Saying that they can be interpreted to allow multiples is not necessarily wrong but saying that they can only be interpreted to allow multiples is definitely incorrect. Strictly speaking, Another is defined as One more and "A" as an indefinite article refers to singular nouns.

If someone tells you that you can't bring "another pet(spell)" unless it's "a small dog(cantrip)" then don't be surprised if they didn't expect for you to bring multiple small dogs. If they definitely intended for you to bring more than one, they would say "additional pets (spells)" for example. I'll write down a modified version of it below that is undeniably allowing of multiple action spells so you can see the difference.:

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 additional spells during the same turn, except for cantrips with a casting time of 1 action.
The only problem with this way of writing it (as I said before) is the potential to cause confusion in whether there is a general ability to cast more than one spell per turn. It's not required for it to be this specific because there is no such general ability, only specific ones that give you additional actions and whether intentional or not, those additional actions (in my opinion) can not be used to cast another cantrip on the same turn as a bonus action spell.

English is complex, everything from word choice down to punctuation can change what a sentence means.

[Safety Sword]

I disagree, "another spell" and "a cantrip" are singular statements. Saying that they can be interpreted to allow multiples is not necessarily wrong but saying that they can only be interpreted to allow multiples is definitely incorrect. Strictly speaking, Another is defined as One more and "A" as an indefinite article refers to singular nouns.

That is basically my point. More articulately stated, but that's it.



If someone tells you that you can't bring "another pet(spell)" unless it's "a small dog(cantrip)" then don't be surprised if they didn't expect for you to bring multiple small dogs. If they definitely intended for you to bring more than one, they would say "additional pets (spells)" for example. I'll write down a modified version of it below that is undeniably allowing of multiple action spells so you can see the difference.:

Good example.



The only problem with this way of writing it (as I said before) is the potential to cause confusion in whether there is a general ability to cast more than one spell per turn. It's not required for it to be this specific because there is no such general ability, only specific ones that give you additional actions and whether intentional or not, those additional actions (in my opinion) can not be used to cast another cantrip on the same turn as a bonus action spell.

English is complex, everything from word choice down to punctuation can change what a sentence means.

Again, that might be because the rules assume you only ever have one action (and bonus action incidentally). They don't want to make any general statements except those that involve only one action per turn.

Anyway, I think we've made the point and people can either choose to see it or die on their hill.

Thanks ProsecutorGodot :smallwink:

[Tanarii]

Look, the way an evaluation statement works in both English and logic, limiting to one is not indicated by 'a' or singular language. It must state 'one' for that to be the case.

I have five dogs:
- Do I have a dog? Yes, clearly I do. I can point at any one of them and this statement is true. I can point at each of them in turn and is statement remains true.
- Do I have one dog? No, I do not. I have five.

I cast a cantrip with a casting time of one action. I action surge and do it again. Evaluating the global situation when I cast the second one:
- Have I cast a cantrip with a casting time of one action? Yes, I can demonstrate this is true for each of them, so it is true.
- Have I cast one cantrip with a casting time of one action? No, I've done it twice.

The rule is a cantrip with a casting time of one action, and it remains true for one or more. The rule is not one cantrip with a casting time of one action.

[ProsecutorGodot]

SNIP
I understand that it can be true to cast more than one, but RAW is ambiguous (another, by the dictionary definition, is both "some more" and "one more") and the RAI is undefined.

"You can't have another piece of pie, unless it is a small piece"

The conclusion I can draw from your take is that, so long as I cut all of the pieces into small ones, I can simply take the whole pie piece by piece. I don't believe they wanted you to do that.

I don't have any other ways to better frame this for you, so I hope we can just agree to disagree on this without you continuing to belittle my understanding of the english language.

Lol thats not how english works.
There is no question. English just doesn't work like that.
I apologize for having been taught by my parents and teachers growing up that when they've given me permission for another thing that they used that word intending for it to mean "one more" of that thing. Shame on them for not thinking of the evaluated truth of their statement, and shame on me for not exploiting that for my own benefit.