Can a multiclassing fighter/wizard uses his action surge ability to cast another spell in one turn？
I checked my book, but there is nothing to keep me from doing this. However it's really strange, because if I cast a spell with casting time of 1 bonus action, I cannot cast another spell but a cantrip in the same turn.
So……it really confuse me. 
you can
Action Surge: Starting at second level, you can push 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. So, yes, you can either atack with a weapon as your action and cast a spell using Action Surge, or you can cast a spell with your action, then cast another spell using Action Surge. On top of all that, you can also cast a spell with a bonus action casting time.
I agree. I cannot find anything that limits the number of spells you can cast in a round. The only limit seems to be the number of actions that you have.
For example, an Eldrich Knight at 7th level could:
(Standard Action) Cast a cantrip, make an attack (Bonus)
(Action surge) Cast a Cantrip, Make an attack (Bonus)
(Bonus action) Cast Blinding Smite
Or something like that. Don't quote me. This if off the top of my head.
Page 69 Basic rules
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.
Plus page 79
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 regardless of how many bonus actions you may "earn" you can only use 1 plus if you cast a spell as a bonus action you can only cast a cantrip to go with it.
Funny enough I cant find anything limiting spells per round or turn with extra Actions so as written I would think you can do 2 spells with a action surge. I would personaly house rule it as a no though because if you cant cast a bonus action spell and a regular spell in a round then why could you cast 2 regular action spells in a turn.
I may be wrong but I have not read anywhere in the book that you can't cast two spells in a single round, cantrip or otherwise. Additionaly, Using Action Surge In this way may sound like it is too powerful but we must bear in mind that after you use Action Surge you need to have at least a short rest before you can use it again, making this ability, literally, an "encounter " power ( meaning you can only use it once per encounter, as you need to rest before you can use it again.)
Keen_Man - not sure how all what you wrote about Bonus Actions is relevant - Action Surge is not a Bonus Action.
EDIT: I realise now you're replying to Catpnq. In which case you are right.
With Action Surge you get the following;
2 Actions, 1 Move, 1 Bonus Action, 1 Interact with Objects - in any order.
(Hey, I'm in Calgary too!)
Jorsanled wrote:
Yep action surge is the one way you can do two lightning bolts in one round. Or if yore a sorceror, 2 x lightning bolt + eldrtich blast. It does cost 2 levels of fighter, but... you get a lot out of it, and will enjoy short rests a lot more...
Psikerlord wrote:
So, you're telling me that if I cast a non-Cantrip 1 action spell, then I am unable to cast a bonus action spell that turn? What stops me from doing so?
shivafang wrote:
shivafang wrote:
Undrhil wrote:
Undrhil wrote:
So the summary here is that you can cast a 1 Action spell, then Action Surge and cast another 1 Action spell, BUT if you cast a Bonus Action spell you're limited to a 1 Action spell for that entire turn?
E-Tallitnics wrote:
Here's your options for a normal turn assuming you're casting a spell as an Action or Bonus Action.
1. Action: non-cantrip, Bonus Action: any available besides bonus action spell.
2. Action: cantrip, Bonus Action: any available including bonus action spell.
3. Action: any available besides non-cantrip spell, Bonus Action: bonus action spell.
Here's your option with Action Surge.
1. Option 1 above + Action: any available including cantrip and non-cantrip.
2. Option 2 above + Action: any available besides non-cantrip.
3: Option 3 above + Action: any available besides non-cantrip.
Once you cast a bonus action spell, if you cast another spell that turn it must be a cantrip (Action Surge gives you another action, if you cast another spell that turn it must be a cantrip). Once you cast a non-cantrip spell, you can not cast a bonus action spell that turn. It doesn't matter what order you cast them in, one locks out the other.
Except you're wrong. Let's look at bonus action spells again:
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.
Yunru has a point, as written you can't cast another non-cantrip CT1 spell, but nothing prevent you from having already cast one, otherwise it would have specifically said you that cannot use the bonus action to do so.
zghzgh1779 wrote:
HAH i hope someone from wizards is reading the forums there seems to be a few confusions around rules :P
Ok, maybe I'm missing something, cause I'm not seeing the problem. Treat them as seperate actions, but you still can only have 1 bonus action per turn.
So....
1st action-any spell. Done.
Action Surge-Any spell
or-Cantrip and Bonus action with a spell with the bonus action descriptor.(or vice versa)
I don't see how any other combinations satisfy all the qualifications. To use the bonus action you have to use a spell with the bonus descriptor, and even then the only other spell you can cast in that round is a cantrip.
I personally don't think the loss of two levels of wizard, and loss of proficiencies (two save proficiencies and some skill proficiencies alike arcana) is worth it to get those two fighter levels. But if you do, or if it's your character concept, then cool.
Yunru wrote:
Danny_Montanny wrote:
Except that restriction only applies once you've cast a bonus action spell, and nothing in the restriction says (or implies) it is retroactively applied.
Yunru wrote:
Can't cast is present/future tense, not past. Thus it does.
Yunru wrote:
Let's break it down (ingoring moving):
You cast a spell:
At this point the conditional on a bonus action spell is irrelevant because you haven't used one yet.
You cast a spell (action surge):
See above.
You cast a bonus action spell:
You now can't cast another spell this turn that isn't a 1 action-cast cantrip. There's no restrictions on casting the bonus action spell, so you can.
Your turn ends:
You haven't cast a spell that wasn't a 1 action-cast cantrip since using a bonus action spell. You've violated zero rules this turn.
Sure DMs may rule otherwise but, and here's the key point considering we're in the rules questions forum, that'd be a houserule.
Except that you've cast a spell that wasn't a 1 round action cantrip in the same turn as the bonus action. Thus, the rule has been violated. It can't be done because it can't be done.
Yes, it creates weirdness when the non-cantrip was cast before the bonus action, but the rule says you can't do it during the same turn, not that you can't cast it after. It's vague, to be sure.
'Expect table variation' doesn't mean houserule - it means different DMs will have different interpretations of the rule because it is vague and open to multiple interpetations. No amount of belabouring the issue is going to convince people (from either interpetation) of the other interpretation.
Except you can cast non-cantrips until you can't. Which is to say until you cast the bonus action spell. Then, no matter how many actions left in the round, you can't. So you don't, you just end your turn.
people who argue till they are blue in the face to get an advantage at the gaming table end up uninvited to many games :P
Yunru wrote:
Yunru wrote:
I think the bonus action spell rules were put in for something like the sorcerers quick metamagic otherwise allowing you to cast 2 fireballs in one turn. Once you've added a second action (through action surge or haste or what have you) I would allow you to cast two 1 action spells, which makes eldritch knights fairly powerful
Chaosmancer wrote:
Keen_Man wrote:
I don´t agree that it is badly phrased:
You will always find some loopholes in a written text. And it always leaves room for interpretation, no matter how formal you try to be. (Look any juridical text.) The more you formalize, the less readable it becomes and thus it again becomes harder to understand.
The intention of the rule is very very clear... every other interpretation is rules lawyering. And you should try hard not to do that.
When I die, I can't take any actions that lifetime.
Same set up as a bonus action spell, does that mean if I take any actions during my lifetime (say, posting this) that I can't die? Of course not, that's rediculous.
The conditional only applies once you used/done the thing that applies the conditional. Thus, Non-cantrip spell, bonus action spell is fine.
I don't have the book with me at this time, but if you look at the multiclassing section in the PHB, under the special conditions, It says that a multiclass fighter cannot use action surge to cast a spell.
Edit: Went back and looked, apparently I just made that up in my head... I will hang my head in shame for this error. moving along
flamepheonix182 wrote:
Yunru wrote:
Except, regardless of how wrong/write my argument by assosiation is, there's still nothing that says you can't cast a bonus action spell after casting a normal spell. There's a condition that applies once you cast a bonus action spell, but then that only applies once you cast a bonus action spell.
Again I'll restate:
Does it say "You can't have[...]"? No, it doesn't. It says "You can't[...]"
Therefore, working on *basic english tenses* once you've cast a bonus action spell, the limit applies. But not before. RAW.
Yunru wrote:
There is an exceptional conflict here where a Fighter/1st year Mage Apprentice can technically cast spells faster than the most powerful Lich Wizard that ever lived who studied magic exclusively for centuries, or the most powerful Sorcerer Metamagic.
Obviously there is an impulse to thematically just say NO F****** WAY to this kind of idea.
However - there is precedent in the rules to acheive the same end.
A Bonus Action spell is faster than a Single Action Spell yet still restricts any other Single Action spellcasting to a Cantrip at best.
It is therefore entirely logical to fill WotC's omission here with the following logical deduction.
If a fast Bonus Action Spell prohibits any other spellcasting except for a Cantrip in a Turn (regardless of the number of Actions within that Turn), then it is axiomatic that a slower Single Action Spell prohibits any other spellcasting within a Turn at least as much as it's faster cousin.
Yes, this should be clearly stated, but it is clear what RAI is. However, there is still benefit to being the cookie-cutting munchkin Fighter Gish. They can cast 1 Single Action Spell and TWO Cantrips.
Themeatically it's because magic power only flows so fast - no matter how fast you twiddle your adrenalised fingers and babble the spell vocals...
Oi vey. Very well, let us beat this dead horse again.
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.
Yunru wrote:
Yes it damn well does. Let's go to a dictionary.
"used to refer to an additional person or thing of the same type as one already mentioned or known about; one more; a further."
Now let's apply it to the sentence.
"You can’t cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action."
becomes:
You can't cast an addition spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
Ergo, Spell cast before the bonus action spell are fine.
EDIT: And again, it doesn't matter if all the rules apply simultaneously or not because none of them apply to past actions (yes, even past actions on the same turn). Cast. Is. Future Tense.
Yunru wrote:
Future or present tense, it's not past tense. Therefore, it's not a restriction on a bonus action spell being cast. It *is* a restriction on all further spells being cast, however.
And no, your example wouldn't work, but that's irrelevent because it's a different example. In your example A and B occur at the same time. Here, A can occur before B or B can occur before A. Hell, the only time they can't occur *is* at the same time.
Yunru wrote:
Let's see, maybe because the rule logically cannot apply until a bonus action is taken. So when you take a bonus action "You can’t cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action." So you don't. You cast a non ct-1 cantrip *before* you cast a bonus action spell.
Yunru wrote:
No it doesn't. Bonus action limitations are a simple IF, THEN.
IF you cast a bonus action spell THEN you can’t cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.
Note that the second part is not a requirement for the former.
IF, THEN operations are not a two-way street.
If you need something to help explain that, consider this:
If something's a car, it's a method of transport.
That does not imply that all method of transports are cars.
To make your example work, it'd have to be "If you order soup, then you cannot order another side."
In which case, yes, ordering a different side then the soup would work.
Yunru wrote:
Except the IF, THEN case exists because the limitation is a direct result of casting a bonus action spell. If you haven't cast a bonus action spell, the rules don't apply. If you cast a bonus action spell, the rules apply. It's as simple as that.
Yunru wrote:
Yeah, you cannot cast an additional spell (that isn't blah blah blah) that turn.
So you don't. You don't have to because they've already *been* cast.
You don't break the rule, you don't *cast* an additional spell that isn't [...].
My point is the rule doesn't apply, as you say, "if you want to". It applies if you *do*.
The rule doesn't apply until you've cast a bonus action spell, at which point *you've already (legally) cast the bonus action spell*.
Yunru wrote:
Except, again, those rules don't apply until you've cast it, least you get stuck in a logical loop.
Said logical loop being:
I can cast it.
Now I want to cast it, the rules take effect, so I can't cast it.
I can't cast it, therefore I no longer want to cast it.
I can now cast it.
Repeat.
Also, nothing there indicates that such a sentence is commutative.
Yunru wrote:
Except the rules of a bonus action spell clearly state they only apply if you cast a bonus action spell. So yes, they do "flip on and off".
EDIT: They only apply if you cast it because *they're the rules for casting it*. And again, the rules state that you can't cast another [...] spell that turn. So *AFTER* you cast a BAS, you can't cast another spell that [conditions].
You wouldn't apply the rules for a ranged attack if you weren't making a ranged attack now would you?
For the sake of argument let's say it does work the way Y says it does
That means....
I can cast any spell, then cast a bonus action spell.
But
If I cast my bonus action spell first, then I can't cast any other spell but a cantrip.
I know what the rule "says", but when you look at the above example it makes no logical sense. Do bonus action spells suddenly take more time to cast if you cast them first? If not, then why would it only be limiting if you cast it first?
Than you 2Chloro for stepping in here - and @hallows (above me) - yes, that's another reason why I am certain my interpretation of this is the right one, because the scenario you stated said makes no logical sense.
Yunru wrote:
"You can't have your cake and eat it too." Same tense on "can't have" as "can't cast" in the rule being discussed.
The logic on this statement is as such;
- If you have your cake, you can't have eaten it already (a check on something that may or may not have happened in the past.)
- If you have eaten your cake, you can't have it later (a restriction on what is possible in the future.)
Q.E.D. - the restriction "can't" applies throughout the time frame being discussed, even when the verb that follows it is in the present/future tense.
I'm actually going to change my opinion at this point. Do not expect table variation - my interpretation is the correct one. Anything else is a houserule by a DM who doen't really understand the rules.
Yunru wrote:
2Chlorobutanal wrote:
I suppose I should clarify that its really :
Y.time + X.time <> X.time + Y.time.
I assume that since you are so focused on IF/THEN statements and the order of execution that you are a programmer or have at least done some programming. If that's the case than you should be able to clearly see that this is a logical error.
However if instead you look at the wording as ambiguous (which by definition you have to accept it as, as somebody else reads it differently than you) and read it according to the way they see it:
IF ( X.time = 1 action and X.level > 0 and if Y.time = bonus action) THEN
you cannot cast both X and Y in the same turn.
It creates no logical errors. So my personal takeaway from this is when a rule can be read ambiguously but one way clearly causes logical errors and one does not, the RAI is the one that does not cause logical errors. And I know this is the rules forum, so YMMV
this argument reminds me of a few peopel I had to ask not to come to my game table anymore lol 
Rule of thumb for dealing with ambiguous rules: never assume that the DM will rule in favor of giving PCs more power.
Both interpretations are legitimate. Obviously, neither is definitive or there wouldn't be a thread arguing over it. From a DM perspective, either is perfectly fine because if a player can do a thing, then so can an enemy.
However, if a player assumes the more lenient interpretation, that player is setting himself/herself up for disappointment at the table.
Yunru wrote:
Yunru wrote:
As a counterexample, look at the rule for two-weapon fighting:
Two-Weapon Fighting
When you take the Attack action and attack with a light
melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, you can
use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee
weapon that you’re holding in the other hand. You don’t
add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus
attack, unless that modifier is negative.
I still fail to see where it says "You can't cast a [BAS] if you've cast a [non-ct-1 cantrip] this turn." The entire third sentence refers only to *another* spell (Read: Not the BAS), so it can't be there.
The "can't have your cake and eat it too" argument never made sense. You *must* have your cake in order to eat it.
Yunru wrote:
Except standard action spells and bonus action spells *don't* occur at the same time, they're different actions. That's why the cake argument doesn't apply. As for your strawman about "'if', 'then', 'when', 'after', or 'before'" not appearing: That's a simple fact of timing. Something doesn't apply until it applies. The rules for a ranged attack don't apply to your attacks unless you're making a ranged attack. Likewise the rules for a bonus action spell don't apply unless you cast a bonus action spell. And once again: NOTHING, NOTHING, in the wording implies it is anything other than "when you cast a BAS, you can't cast non-ct1 cantrips this turn." Again, "cast", not "have cast". It applies to the duration, yes, which is from when it applies (when you cast the BAS), to when it doesn't (the end of the turn).
For the rest of this discussion, I will be calling the non-cantrip ct1 spell 'ncct1s', for brevity.
Yunru wrote:
Yunru wrote:
FYI Jeremy Crawford answered on twitter that If you've already cast a spell of 1st level or higher on your turn, you can't cast a bonus action spell on that turn;
@Plaguescarred Bonus Action Spell:You can't cast another non-cantrip CT1 spell but nothing prevent you from having already cast one right?
@JeremyECrawford If you've already cast a spell of 1st level or higher on your turn, you can't cast a bonus action spell on that turn.
@Plaguescarred Ok thanks. BA doesn't refers to casting another spell in past tense so many people got confuse about this.
w00t clarification!
Personally that's how I thought it should work.
Yunru wrote:
Yunru wrote:
Because how I think it should work and how I think it does read are different?
Yunru wrote:
So where did we end on the whole question of being able to use action surge to cast more than one spell during a turn? My opinon of how it reads is if the fighter hasn't already cast a spell he could use it to cast a spell but if he has done so then it violates the another spell during a turn rule of magic which would prevent him from using the action surge to cast a spell.
mynock74 wrote:
If Action Surge can curumvent the rule of magic that prevents only 1 action spell being cast during a turn, then why doesn't this feature or feat appear under any other class? fighters may be the best at fighting but how does that afford them special knowledge in how to cast spells better/faster than primary spell casters or other sub fighter classes that also cast spells like rangers or paladins. While the feat War Caster does provide that the character has learned how to cast spells differently in battle the knowledge learned is still limited to certain spells (1action spells that target only one creature). Doesn't that point to the fact that Action Surge if used to cast a spell should also be limited and thus follow the rules of magic? The Bonus Action spell provides that if you cast anything other than a 1 action cantrip then you can't cast another spell during that turn except for a bnus action spell. Just because the Action Surge grants an additional action doesn't necessarily supercede the rule of conservation of magic that is detailed by the bonus action "you can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with casting time of 1 action " and a bonus action spell.. Action Surge at 15 level mimics the bonus action spell misty step so doesn't that point to the idea that Action Surge should be viewed as a bonus action and not an additional action? (I think the designers have already said that it isn't a bonus action but i just wanted to throw that out there).
Action Surge grants them one additional action on their turn. It is up to the Fighter what they wish to do with their two actions, and - despite the fact that this feature will most often be used to grant the fighter two attack actions, they are not compelled to do so. When using Action Surge, a fighter can take any combination of two actions on their turn. These include (but are not limited to):
For a list of the most common actions (most of which are listed below), please see Actions in Combat (p192-193).
- Attack Action
- Cast a Spell
- Dash
- Dodge Action
- Disengage Action
- Shove a Creature
- Grapple
- Ready
- Help
- Search
- Hide
- Use an Item (One free item interaction/turn. Additional item interactions require an action to perform).
This list is not an exhaustive list of the types of "action' which uses the action resource. Other examples include multiattack, or anything listed in a monsters stat block under the Actions heading. The character may have other actions at their disposal based on race, class, subclass, or feat(s), in addition to those on page 192-193.
The rules about what or how many spells a character can cast in a turn is very specific and applies only to bonus action casting time spells. They aren't general rules for the "conservation of magic," but rather a specific rule about bonus action casting times. Otherwise, they would probably appear in a section other than the one about casting times - such as the "Actions in combat" section.
Action Surge must still respect the bonus action casting time rule, as previously mentioned: if you cast a bonus action casting time spell in a turn, any other spells must be cantrips - even if you use Action Surge, you can now cast 2 cantrips in addition to the bonus action spell, instead of 1, but you can't cast 1 bonus action spell, 1 cantrip, and 1 fireball.
However, if you didn't use a bonus action spell, you may cast two fireballs. This is completely consistent to me: A "normal" spellcaster can cast either 1 "any level" spell, or 1 cantrip and 1 bonus action casting time spell. A Fighter spellcaster can use Action Surge to cast 2 "any level" spells, or 2 cantrips and 1 bonus action spell.
War Caster is limited for different reasons that bonus action spells- the target is limited to prevent an OA from turning into an AoE. The casting time must be defined, because normally only a reaction casting time spell can be used on a reaction, but those spells don't need War Caster because they are already reactions. I don't see this as a 'restriction' on the type of spell but rather a loosening of rules: with War Caster, your "1 action" casting time spells (single creature target) can now also be used as "opportunity attack Reaction" casting time spells.
Note that Action Surge is a limited resource, limited to once per rest. Other bonus action spells are not really limited in the same way- some of them, such as magic weapon, could be cast many times before resting. Quicken Spell could be used up to 10 times per day. It'd be rare that a Fighter/spellcaster gets 5 or more rests in a day.
In regards to War Caster specifically - what about spells which can be used either as single or multitarget spells. Examples include Eldritch Blast, Magic Missile, and many ray spells. If you restrict the spell to a single target - it should meet the requirements for War Caster, or the sorcerers Twin Spell for that matter.
Yunru is probably the biggest troll on these forums lol.
The reading of the rule regarding bonus action spells, cant be pedantically read to say Spell cast, Spell cast, Cantrip - the ruling is specifically stating this is not allowed. Before/After doesnt matter.
This is further clear to me, since in the Attack Action/Bonus Action economy the designers have already stated that the 'timing' is interchangable.
E.g. The Shield Mastery Feat says when you make an attack, you can choose to use a bonus action and attempt to shove. Most logical reading would deny Shove then attack, but that is precisely the point of the feat - knock someone prone in melee, then attack with advantage.
The fact the designers clarified the above, makes it clear that the 'timing' of Attack Action/Bonus Actions are moot. You interchange them as you want - meaning, the restriction regarding spell casts has NOTHING to do with timing of your attack/attack/bonus choices.
TLDR: If youre going to be taking a bonus action on your turn to cast ANY spell, the other actions can at best with 1action cantrips.
So with Action Surge
- a FighterWizard can do Cantrip/Cantrip/Fireball (attack/attack/bonus)
- a FighterWizard with Staff+Sword (Gandalf style!), can do Fireball/Fireball/OffhandAttack (attack/attack/bonus)
- a FighterCleric with Shield Mastery, can do Shove/InflictWound/InflictWound (bonus/attack/attack), where both the inflict wounds would be rolled at advantage if you did knock the target prone
FWIW, I agree with Yunri's RAW interpretation. The word "another" is they key which is akin to "additional" and "thereafter"
As we all know, not everyone reads and writes legal text, hence we have many different interpretations -- especially the one that logically makes sense for game balance and consistency (RAI). I don't think Yunri is arguing against what is RAI, just what the words in the text mean.