Is it possible to interrupt spellcasting?

Question

As this blog post suggests, there seems to be a hole in the D&D Basic rules. Maybe. The rules for readying an action state:

When the trigger occurs, you can either take your reaction right after the trigger finishes or ignore the trigger.

This seems to imply that it is impossible to interrupt a spell in 5e. If you set your trigger to be "I attack the Wizard when he casts a spell", then you make the attack after the spell has been cast. Does this mean that spells can no longer be interrupted in combat like they could be in previous editions?

Answer 1

The Basic rules call out two situations where a Concentration check is required to cast a spell: the caster takes damage and...

• The spell is Readied but not yet cast (p.72)
• The spell has a cast time longer than one action (p.79)

There is no specific rule that I have seen for interrupting spells which can be cast in a single Action, and this seems to be deliberate.

I would be extremely wary of adding such a rule, unless you're actively looking to nerf combat casting and it's something your players can live with.

Answer 2

Actually, the post does miss something: it is possible to interrupt spell-casting.

Specifically, there is the 3rd level spell Counterspell on page 228 of the PHB. Furthermore, this spell is only included on the Sorcerer, Warlock and Wizard spell lists.

Clearly this option is not intended to be generally available. It also seems that there has been a deliberate effort to reduce spell interruption options.

Nothing in the Concentration or Casting Time sections of the PHB states that concentration is required for spells with casting time of "1 action". On the contrary: concentration is specifically associated with (a) maintaining a spell and (b) casting a spell with a long casting time. So the implication is that it's deliberately not possible to interrupt 1-action spell via damage.

If we go a step further and take a look at the Mage Slayer feat, it states:

• When a creature within 5 feet of you casts a spell, you can use you reaction to make a melee weapon attack against that creature.
• When you damage a creature that is concentrating on a spell, ...

Again there's a (seemingly) deliberate distinction between casting and concentrating.

---

Note: Maintaining concentration after taking damage requires a CON save at minimum DC 10. Since CON saves don't scale with level for most casters, it's not an easy task. This would probably make the ability "to ready an attack to interrupt a caster starting to cast a spell" far too OP.

Answer 3

RAW, it says that Concentration may be broken when you take damage. This will interrupt sustained Concentration spells or readied spells. Concentration is also required to cast spells with longer casting time than a single action.

While concentration may not be needed for quicker spells, "mental focus" is.

Casting in Armor
Because of the mental focus and precise gestures required for spellcasting, you must be proficient with the armor you are wearing to cast a spell. You are otherwise too distracted and physically hampered by your armor for spellcasting.

I think it's reasonable to say that getting injured would be more distracting than wearing unfamiliar armor!

While not explicitly stated by RAW, a trigger of "I attack the Wizard when he starts casting a spell" should work.
You attack "right after" the Wizard starts casting.

The example triggers are split-second things that interrupt movement.

Examples include “If the cultist steps on the trapdoor, I’ll pull the lever that opens it,” and “If the goblin steps next to me, I move away.

"If the cultist steps on the trapdoor..." - you're not waiting for him to step there & stand around for the rest of his round, if he tries to walk over the trapdoor, you're pulling that lever the moment he steps on it, interrupting his move action.

Same should apply for spellcasting, unless maybe they have a "reaction" casting time (taking a fraction of a second, too fast to interrupt).

This tweet from Jeremy Crawford supports my interpretation:

Can silence interrupt a spell caster? I.e. cleric readies silence, trigger is enemy begins spell casting.

As DM, I'd allow a readied silence spell to interrupt the casting of a spell with a verbal component.

Answer 4

You can get an attack off before the spell is cast, but it might not affect the spell.

Although I allow a person with a readied action to state "I wait until he starts to cast a spell" at my table (Many believe this to be within the rules, though some may rule otherwise), the spell still goes off after the readied action unless something specifically stops it. Examples could be a stunning monk strike, a grapple which prevents somatic gestures, an entangling effect, being knocked unconscious, etc.

The mere act of taking damage should not interrupt a spell—though it can interrupt concentration, which is another matter entirely—unless something in the spell description states it specifically. I am not aware of any spell which states this, however.

Answer 5

Using a trigger like 'when a caster starts to cast a spell' makes the wrong assumption that the start of casting a 1 action spell can be distinguished from the rest of the casting. An action is a discrete thing (in game) and cannot be subdivided any old way you want.

All of these parsings and semantics seem to be oblivious to the obvious:

This game has turn based combat with the discrete unit of time being 1 action.

Yes, bonus actions may be a little faster and reactions most often occur during someone else's turn, but they are also discrete things. In reality, everything would happen all at once with the discrete quantity of time being measured in Planck units. Reality is a mess that doesn't lend itself to game-play. In D&D, time is atomic, otherwise you don't have a game.

A couple of things to keep in mind.

1. A caster can be holding their concentration on one spell and, on their next turn, cast a 1 action spell without breaking concentration on the first. Losing concentration on the first because of casting another spell only occurs when casting a spell that requires concentration, something that is tagged in the spell description.

That kind of implies that single action spells don't require concentration. This is buoyed by their lack of a concentration tags — to a one.

Firing a witch bolt in one turn and then casting a fireball in the next does not interrupt concentration on the witch bolt. The witch bolt can do it's second round of damage in the same turn as the fireball does it's only damage. The very next turn, the witch bolt deals out damage again without having to recast it (provided that nothing else interrupts concentration on the witch bolt between turns).

2. Claiming that a 1 action spell without the concentration tag requires concentration seems to be pulled out of thin air and not any rule. It also contradicts the RAW for concentration. [PHB pg. 203]

A single action must be considered indivisible, without distinction between starting to take the action and taking the action.

The game risks being wrecked with single action spells being interruptible with ready actions. Allowing the ready action to have a chance of interrupting spells with casting times of one action completely castrates spellcasters in the game. A single Animate Objects spell could deliver 10 readied melee attacks per round with +8 to hit — each hit inducing a constitution save with DC of 10. A caster would never get another spell off (besides shield and counter-spell). A ninth level wizard that had his A. Objects ready and got lucky on initiative could beat a 20th level Wizard without losing a single hit point. Even 15 rats have better-than-even chance. So much for heroic play!

Answer 6

Yes, if the spell requires concentration

Other answers to this question cover spell interruption for concentration spells that (a) are readied but not yet cast, or (b) are in the process of a cast of longer than one action.

However, they do not mention 1-action spells requiring concentration that are in the process of being cast.

As stated in Sage Advice Compendium 2.5 (as well as presaged in XGtE (p.5) and repeated in TCoE (p. 5), but all well-after the other answers to this question)

"If you’re concentrating on a spell, your concentration on it ends immediately when you start casting another spell that requires concentration."

Since you cannot maintain concentration on two spells at once, the clear implication is that your concentration on your current spell ends when you begin a new concentration spell because concentration begins when you start casting, not when you complete casting or when your casting lasts longer than one action. As soon as you start casting a spell with a concentration component, you are concentrating.

Thus, damage you take while you are in the process of casting even a 1-action spell will provoke a save to maintain concentration on the spell.

Of course, interrupting a concentrating caster on their own turn is difficult. Ongoing damage that happens at the start of their turn can just be taken before they start the spell. A readied action that does damage, triggered "when they start casting," would be sufficient, as other answers have explained. However, if the spell the caster was casting does not require concentration, you won't interrupt it. And you don't get to know what they are casting before you attempt to interrupt it. Both attacking them at the trigger of their starting to cast, and identifying the spell they are casting, require your Reaction, and you have only one.