Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1017345Yeah, but does it make that big a difference? I can't really imagine anything breaking or becoming lopsided by letting a spellcaster use a spell that costs an action, and then one that costs a bonus action.

Yes I think the game would work ok without it.
Concentration is a far bigger preventer of god wizards.

Quote from: Omega;10173181: Um... you are aware that what you just described is the same thing right? Flame bolt does 1d10 per tier, topping out at 4d10. Eldrich bolt does 1d10 per bolt and gets one bolt per tier.

Um...2nd level warlock with AB and RB mean EB gets +1d10 + CHA + 10 knockback per tier. With Hex, that's an additional +1d6 damage per tier. This is the only class where a 2-level dip gets you access to damage that scales this way.

I have made it abundantly clear that I have been talking about taking two levels of Warlock, not one. Are you dumb, or are you just trolling? Fact is, neither option makes you worth talking to about this any further.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1017320Speaking of theorycrafting, one thing I never understood about 5e's spellcasting rules was why you could only cast a cantrip if you cast a spell already in the turn.

It prevents Sorcerers from dual-Fireballing, clerics from stacking Cure Wounds with Healing Word, and so on. There is a great deal of mischief you can get into if you can cast two full spells on a turn. However, the rule as worded (which technically prevents only combining Bonus Action and Action spells) doesn't prevent an Eldritch Knight from casting two spells using Action Surge.

It's probably not as big an issue with Healing Word, but I've heard from people who have house-ruled it that it gets out of control with Sorcerers.

I feel it is a reasonable but unnecessary precaution against a threat that never materialized in the new edition, but could have. 3e certainly had a bunch of action-economy shenanigans where a particularly well-built and well-prepared nova build that got the drop/won initiative could lay down two area-effecting or save-or-suck effects (each of which resisted by two different defenses, with few if any opponents strong in both) which wrecked havoc with the game balance.

As much as I say that 5e isn't D&D 3e, attempt number four, it clearly has some antibodies in its' system to prevent catching the same diseases.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1017370It prevents Sorcerers from dual-Fireballing, clerics from stacking Cure Wounds with Healing Word, and so on. There is a great deal of mischief you can get into if you can cast two full spells on a turn. However, the rule as worded (which technically prevents only combining Bonus Action and Action spells) doesn't prevent an Eldritch Knight from casting two spells using Action Surge.

It's probably not as big an issue with Healing Word, but I've heard from people who have house-ruled it that it gets out of control with Sorcerers.

I thought that was the whole point with Sorcs.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1017380I thought that was the whole point with Sorcs.

Nope. If you use Quickened Spell to turn a Fireball into a bonus action, you can only follow up with a cantrip or non-spell action. For example, if a couple of gnolls move up and start kicking your ass, you can Disengage and then use Quickened Spell to blast them with a Lightning Bolt. If a Hill Giant is bearing down on the party, you could hit him with Ray of Frost...but you miss, so you use Quickened Spell to drop Web on him instead. Or maybe you got hit by a random encounter in the middle of the night, so you use your action to rouse the Fighter, then a Quickened Spell to cast Enlarge on him.

There are certain Concentration spells that allow you to use your Action on subsequent turns (like Sunbeam) to do things; these can be combined with Quickened Spell. For example, you can use your Action to take precise control of the target of Dominate Person. Quickened Spell would allow you to do this and hit somebody in the face with Scorching Ray.

In fact, it seems like the whole point of the bonus action rule is to stop sorcs from one-shotting a crowd of CR 2 monsters, since other than healing spells, the other bonus action spells aren't really that absurd if combined with a full spell on the same turn.

Thank God for that restriction, being able to cast two spells in a round sounds terrible to me. Too easy to abuse.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1017386Nope. If you use Quickened Spell to turn a Fireball into a bonus action, you can only follow up with a cantrip or non-spell action. For example, if a couple of gnolls move up and start kicking your ass, you can Disengage and then use Quickened Spell to blast them with a Lightning Bolt. If a Hill Giant is bearing down on the party, you could hit him with Ray of Frost...but you miss, so you use Quickened Spell to drop Web on him instead. Or maybe you got hit by a random encounter in the middle of the night, so you use your action to rouse the Fighter, then a Quickened Spell to cast Enlarge on him.

There are certain Concentration spells that allow you to use your Action on subsequent turns (like Sunbeam) to do things; these can be combined with Quickened Spell. For example, you can use your Action to take precise control of the target of Dominate Person. Quickened Spell would allow you to do this and hit somebody in the face with Scorching Ray.

In fact, it seems like the whole point of the bonus action rule is to stop sorcs from one-shotting a crowd of CR 2 monsters, since other than healing spells, the other bonus action spells aren't really that absurd if combined with a full spell on the same turn.

Maybe it could be a Sorc only restriction then.

Well, I say that, but then it opens up a lot of untested pairings that I'm sure could cause mischief, like casting Guiding Bolt and Spiritual Weapon on the same turn, goosing healing, etc. Should a Cleric be able to raise two downed warriors using 2 1st-level slots (Healing Word and Cure Wounds) rather than one use of Mass Healing Word at minimum? I think it's something that just doesn't need changing.

I understand that this sort of complex strategizing is a feature for many players, and I wish them all well, but it is a major turn off for me. It has the feel of one of those elaborate, rules-y card games where the point is to figure out the cleverest combination. I'm happy to have a certain amount of complexity in a table top roleplaying game, but I am only willing to wrestle with this sort of thing if it is either intrinsically cool (like the magic and summoning in Lion and Dragon), or leads to some sort of immersive, relatively realistic dueling combat simulation (like TFT or GURPS). Rules that are just about themselves (i.e., figuring out how to make the little tricks and combos work best) are not interesting to me.

I think the general prohibition against two spells is as much about simplifying what a player can do, as anything to do with tactical balance.  For one thing, it cuts out an immense amount of analysis paralysis for certain types of players.  They have a hard enough time prioritizing which single thing is most important right now.  Given them combos to weigh in significance is not doing them any favors.  The rule is easy to remember, as well--unless it's one of the exceptions called out for you, such as cantrips, or Eldritch Knight options, etc.--then you can cast zero or one spells on your turn.

True, I think reducing most turns down to one action/choice contributes to the speedier play as well.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1017320Speaking of theorycrafting, one thing I never understood about 5e's spellcasting rules was why you could only cast a cantrip if you cast a spell already in the turn.

What if you had a spell that was an Action, and then wanted to cast another with a Bonus Action? But you can't. I never got why.

Some spells can be cast as a bonus action.

Overall its to keep mages from outpacing fighters. And also its due to how the spells are structured. cantrips are second nature so you probably can snap one off after casting a spell. And some spells are so quick to cast that you can pop one off as a bonus action or a reaction after casting a spell.

I notated my PHB with which spells are castable as bonus actions.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1017320Speaking of theorycrafting, one thing I never understood about 5e's spellcasting rules was why you could only cast a cantrip if you cast a spell already in the turn.

What if you had a spell that was an Action, and then wanted to cast another with a Bonus Action? But you can't. I never got why.

I dont see why you couldnt allow casting a bonus action spell with a regular action spell. But allmost all the bonus action spells are Paladin smites and Ranger arrow spells, or are non-com spells. So it might be a moot point. Other than that the DM just has to make sure the players arent abusing short rests or are made aware that short rests may not be available at points and so blowing all their spells may leave them with just cantrips for a span. But used sparingly or for emergencies there shouldnt be a problem. Like a Ranger casting Conjure Barrage and Lightning Arrow.

I think the reason for the rule they realized most of the unintentional failures of 3.x design came from unforeseen interactions. The 5e rules are written with lots of safeguards to minimize the way things can interact.