Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

When I say 'Spellcasting Action Economy' I mean the rules that state when you cast a spell (Cantrip or otherwise) as a bonus action during your turn, the only other spell you can cast that same turn is a Cantrip that must have a casting time of 1 action.

There are two classes in the campaign I take part in that utilize Meta Magic with Sorcery Points. Quicken Spell does not give any exception to the spellcasting economy rules outlined above, but allows you to turn a spell with a casting time of 1 action into a casting time of 1 bonus action.

Our DM would like to offer some uniqueness to Quicken Spell, and interpret it as an exception to the rule: allowing those with Quicken Spell to cast their altered spell with a bonus action and then cast a 1 action spell that doesn't have to be a cantrip if they so wish. (Or vice versa: 1 Action spell then Quicken Spell Bonus Action.) While I do not disagree with this addition to Quicken Spell on a RP / Class level, I am curious about its balance.

My question is: What are the possibilities for abuse, or general consequences, of house-ruling only Quicken Spell usage to break the spellcasting action economy instead of using it as written?

share|improve this question

Here is a list:

  • At level 3, your Sorcerer can cast chromatic orb, then chromatic orb. He has dealt 6d8 damage, or 27 on average, to one target. That is the equivalent of one fireball for that target. This is also around the HP of most CR1 monsters.
  • At level 3, the same Sorcerer can cast scorching ray, then scorching ray. He has dealt 12d6 damage, averaging 42 damage. Counting that you have 6 chances to crit, this can be far more. You can drop almost any one creature you will face at this level single-handed, if not this round then on the next.
  • At level 5, the same Sorcerer can cast fireball, then fireball. He has dealt 16d6 AoE damage, or 56 damage on average. Your tank and glass cannons feel utterly useless.
  • At level 5, the same Sorcerer can cast lightning bolt, then lightning bolt. He has dealt 16d6 AoE damage in a line. Same issues as above.
  • At level 8, the same Sorcerer can cast blight, then blight. He has dealt 16d8 damage to a single target, averaging 72 damage. Your villain will be really messed up after this one turn.
  • At level 10, the same Sorcerer can cast cone of cold, then cone of cold. He has dealt 16d8 damage in a 60 foot cone.
  • At level 10, the same Sorcerer can do everything above.
  • At level 13, the same Sorcerer can cast disintegrate, then finger of death. He has dealt 136.5 damage (on average) to a single target, assuming they fail both saves.
  • The Sorcerer can do any combination of the above at any level where such a combination is possible (eg., fireball and cone of cold, blight and lightning bolt, etc).

I was about to post a related question to this. My suggestion to balance it out is to somehow allow a mechanic whereby, you can spend a number of sorcery points equal to the level of the spell you want to cast. I'm not exactly sure on the balance there, either.

share|improve this answer
Fortunately our 2 Meta magic users (1 sorcerer and 1 'other' ) are very concerned with Spell Slot conservation so; for now, nothing as horribly damaging as the above examples have happened yet.... but this is precisely the kind of list I was hoping for. Thank you. I'll, of course, wait to see other contributions. – Airatome Mar 26 at 18:18
@markovchain but sorcerers don't have metamagic until level 3 – FREE99 Mar 26 at 18:50
Ah, got carried away. There, updated the L1 to L3. – markovchain Mar 26 at 18:57
@AlexisWilke That's a fair point - I've attempted to address it in my answer, below. – SirTechSpec Mar 26 at 20:20
@AlexisWilke Well, if one caster casting two fireball spells is acceptable, then two casters casting one fireball each is suboptimal. Between the two of them, they should cast four fireball spells. In other words, huge difference -- you're using a single person's resources in the first case, which is more efficient/powerful than using two people's resources to achieve the same effect. – markovchain Mar 26 at 20:22

Two Fireballs is a heckuva way to say hello. A high initiative and/or damage roll could end the fight before it begins. I'd consider that to be fairly unbalancing and not much fun, so I wouldn't do it. The rule you're considering ignoring limits arcane casters:

  • If you do want a two-fireball opener before the fight gets going, you'll need two casters to participate, to be in the right location, and to roll high initiatives, statistically much less likely than one. Also, if you still pull it off, at least two people participated in the fight, not just one.
  • If the DM throws something at you with spell resistance, thinking it'll change the tone of the fight, you can't respond by sticking to the same tactics and just doubling the speed at which you cast spells.
  • More generally, if you want to be able to hurl spells quickly, you'll need 2+ arcane casters in the party both dedicated to being boomsticks, which limits your options and versatility somewhat.

So if you proceed with this plan, you'll have the inverse - one person able to handle most or all of the rapid-destruction needs, letting the others focus on other things (or have 3 or 4 arcane spells per turn, if there are 2 of you). If you're determined, I would (have your DM) take one or more of these steps to adjust the balance:

  1. Make Quickened Spell cost more.
  2. Make it clear that there are going to be multiple encounters per day, so you have to be stingy with your spells except in dire emergencies (when casting 2 spells/turn might be kind of cool, and more dramatic instead of less).
  3. Crank up the usual situational methods of preventing arcane casters from pwning with long-distance spells: ambush, cover, surrounded, ghosts floating through walls, Outsiders appearing suddenly in your midst...

I would be sure to discuss #2 and #3 as a group before implementing them, since those could change the overall feel of the game (though in ways I personally enjoy).

share|improve this answer
Keep in mind I'M not the DM, and can't make such changes or decisions. Just looking for something to present to my DM if we end up seeing it abused. – Airatome Mar 26 at 18:23
Sure, I meant "you" as in "your group" since you seem to be collaborating and talking things over. I'll tweak the wording. – SirTechSpec Mar 26 at 18:31
ahh, just making sure my friend. I appreciate the feedback :) – Airatome Mar 26 at 18:47
"pwning"? (point 3) what is that? – Alexis Wilke Mar 26 at 19:53
@AlexisWilke It's a slang term: pwn. – SevenSidedDie Mar 26 at 19:55

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.