Okay, so what happens if you have two spellcasting opponents (A and B) who go in a surprise round, and ignore others party members / enemies that don’t. Both spellcasters ready an action with the clause “If the other spellcaster does anything other than stand there, I cast magic missile at them”?
The spellcaster character A has higher initiative, and on the first round of combat continues his ready action (taking a standard to do so), but then goes to move to get closer to spellcaster character B.
Character B has a readied action, and now goes to attack and cast his magic missile spell, but Character A also has a readied action for the same thing (against character B). Now, who goes first? Is it simultaneous?
YIDM
The answer is don't let your players abuse the ready action system and make them define their conditions better.
If the enemy moves...
If the enemy casts a spell...
Not, if the enemy does anything
Besides which, in order to interupt the other spell caster while casting you need to use the "if she starts casting a spell" clause specifically. Otherwise, you would shoot the magic missile at them before they start casting, they take the damage, don't need to make a concentration check and cast normally.
You can't do anything after you ready an action anyway, so you couldn't ready an action and then continue to move. You could move and then ready an action, but then you don't have the confusion of multiple readied actions.
Claxon is correct in that ready action is pretty undeveloped as a system and takes finesse as a GM and player to handle the concept appropriately. Keep it simple and explicit.
|
Not true Dave. You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. He certainly can move and still ready that standard action, or ready a standard then move. The rules make no distinction on order of precedence.
He could even use a move, swift, and free action and still have that readied action available to him.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not true Dave. You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. He certainly can move and still ready that standard action, or ready a standard then move. The rules make no distinction on order of precedence.
He could even use a move, swift, and free action and still have that readied action available to him.
Actually, no you can't.
...Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition.
Emphasis mine. If you take another action you lose your readied (personally I'd allow immediate or free actions used to not abort your readied action).
So the above scenario cannot ever happen.
A readies an action to respond to B.
B readies an action to respond to A.
A's next turn comes up, his readied action never triggered, it is now lost. He can act normally (triggering B) or he can ready an action again.
|
|
Not true Dave. You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. He certainly can move and still ready that standard action, or ready a standard then move. The rules make no distinction on order of precedence.
He could even use a move, swift, and free action and still have that readied action available to him.
Actually, no you can't.
...Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition.
Emphasis mine. If you take another action you lose your readied (personally I'd allow immediate or free actions used to not abort your readied action).
So the above scenario cannot ever happen.
A readies an action to respond to B.
B readies an action to respond to A.
A's next turn comes up, his readied action never triggered, it is now lost. He can act normally (triggering B) or he can ready an action again.
Actually, actually, yes he can.
He re-readied the action on his turn, and the condition was met for the readied standard action. Why would you say this is not legal?
I might be OK with ruling that B would go first, if pressed, but I wouldn't rule that A loses that readied action either as it is legal for him to set that via his standard action.
Actually Dave's point is extra important and he's right.
A readies.
A moves, technically not legal. He would need to move first and then ready, this trivially changes things.
B readies an action.
B then tries to cast a spell. Again, not possible and unlike the previous example not trivial. Casting a spell is a standard action, readying is a standard action. You cannot do both in the same round. And casting the spell would negate the readied action anyway.
|
|
Actually Dave's point is extra important and he's right.
A readies.
A moves, technically not legal. He would need to move first and then ready, this trivially changes things.
B readies an action.
B then tries to cast a spell. Again, not possible and unlike the previous example not trivial. Casting a spell is a standard action, readying is a standard action. You cannot do both in the same round. And casting the spell would negate the readied action anyway.
A 5' step is legal as part of readying an action. A distinction that hasn't been made or not, but valid as well. (but part of my argument :)
edit: I would agree that if he used more than a 5' step, he would trigger B's action without having yet taken his standard action, therefore losing that readied action.
I suppose that would be moot however, as the gun has been drawn at that point right? And he would simply be free to act anyway he wants with no readied action restrictions, and eating a magic missile.
|
|
Not true Dave. You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. He certainly can move and still ready that standard action, or ready a standard then move. The rules make no distinction on order of precedence.
He could even use a move, swift, and free action and still have that readied action available to him.
Actually, no you can't.
Emphasis mine. If you take another action you lose your readied (personally I'd allow immediate or free actions used to not abort your readied action).
...Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition.
Actually Winterwalker you are misunderstanding what bbangerter stated. He said:
He could even use a move, swift, and free action and still have that readied action available to him.That means that during a turn, a character can use a move, swift, or free action and THEN still be able to use a standard action to ready an action. The only stipulation bbangerter did not state is that if you use a swift action on your turn, you would not be able to ready a swift action.
You do have a point that the rules can be interpreted that if a character uses a standard action to ready and action AND THEN proceeds to take a move, swift, or free action, the readied action would essentially be nullified. However, I do not think that was the intention of the readied action. When they state anytime before your next action, I believe they are referring to the action that takes place on your next turn.
For instance, let's say that I use a standard action to ready an action to attack an enemy if he tries to attack me; and then I use a free action to say some slur about my enemies mother as a taunt. Does it make sense that my readied action would be nullified because of the free action? I hope not.
I'm in the camp that if you ready an action then take another action (5' step is usually not considered an action in its own right) you lose your readied action.
That said, there is no way for two characters to act at the same time. If two readied actions trigger simultaneously you resolve it in initiative order.
Caster A readies.
Caster B readies.
Nothing happens so it rolls back around to caster A's turn.
Caster A takes his action. If it is anything other than another ready he triggers caster B's action as caster B's 2nd turn has not started yet.
If they both continue to ready they both continue to stare ineffectually at each other.
The answer is don't let your players abuse the ready action system and make them define their conditions better.
If the enemy moves...
If the enemy casts a spell...
Not, if the enemy does anythingBesides which, in order to interupt the other spell caster while casting you need to use the "if she starts casting a spell" clause specifically. Otherwise, you would shoot the magic missile at them before they start casting, they take the damage, don't need to make a concentration check and cast normally.
"If he moves a muscle" seems like a valid trigger to me.
I know real world examples are not always apt for a game setting, but you seem to be saying that if you are pointing a gun at someone and tell him to freeze and then wait to see if he complies (ready) that you have declare whether his reaching for a gun will trigger your action or rushing at you will trigger it. I know damn well that I can pull the trigger in either case; that I do not have to guess which action I can respond to.
Game system wise it does not matter if it is a gun, bow, hatchet, or spell as all are standard actions to use. Since it is obviously physically possible for us mere mortals to do so and there is no rule contradicting reality, why can heroic figures like characters not do it?