D&D 5E Action Econ 101

[Sadrik]

Looking through the actions, I am trying to wrap my head around when extra attacks, bonus actions, reactions all work and work together.

So a bonus action can be used to attack with a second weapon (with no bonus damage).
Haste spell grants an "extra attack"
Extra attack class feature grants as part of the attack
Monk gets a Martial Arts attack as a bonus attack
Find familiar does not use an action to deliver touch spells with it (it must use its reaction).
Conjure "creature" do not take actions
Dominate beast/person/monster do not take actions
Guardian of Faith no action
Ranger companion appears much more limited in how you command it
Fighter's surge: not a extra bonus action
Rogue's cunning action bonus action for dash disengage or hide

So questions, what am I missing? Is there an action economy here? Just from my reading I felt like attaking with two weapons should be an "extra attack" not a bonus action. To me it seems like haste should be the one that provides the bonus attack?

Is the ranger companion good? Would it be better to just buy a dog and train it with animal handling skill? Then it would not eat your actions? What about a mount? Anyway lots of stuff to chew on here.

 

[transtemporal]

In terms of a 101 paper, I think its much simpler than that.

• You get one action per round (unless you have an ability that grants you an extra action);
• You get one reaction per round;
• You get one bonus action per turn.

For the last 2, you can only use those if you have an ability or a situation arises during the round that lets you use one of those action types (like two weapon fighting or taking an attack of opportunity).

The ways in which those various situations you listed interact with the action economy can be summarised by those rules.

 

[transtemporal]

So a bonus action can be used to attack with a second weapon (with no bonus damage).

Correct, but a bonus action can be used for other things remember so if you use it for TWF, you can't use it for something else.

Haste spell grants an "extra attack"

Haste actually grants an additional action which you can use to make a single attack or anything else you could usually use an action for (dash, hide, disengage etc)

Extra attack class feature grants as part of the attack

Correct, so when you use the attack action you attack twice rather than once.

Monk gets a Martial Arts attack as a bonus attack

Correct, and you get your bonus to dmg with this strike...

Find familiar does not use an action to deliver touch spells with it (it must use its reaction).

Correct

Conjure "creature" do not take actions

More complicated than that. Conjured creatures like elementals roll their own initiative and take their own actions. You can issue verbal commands (which can be issued as part of your turn) while you maintain concentration.

Dominate beast/person/monster do not take actions

More complicated than that. Dominated creatures roll their own initiative and take their own actions. You can issue mental commands (which is not an action on your part) while you remain conscious. You can also take over them as an action if you like.

Guardian of Faith no action

Correct

Ranger companion appears much more limited in how you command it

Yep, companions are way too complicated. They share your initiative. You can issue verbal commands to move (which can be issued as part of your turn) but if you want them to do anything else, you have to use your action to direct them e.g. attack, dash, disaengage etc.

Fighter's surge: not a extra bonus action

Incorrect. Action surge gives you an extra action AND an extra bonus action.

Rogue's cunning action bonus action for dash disengage or hide

Correct, essentially this gives rogues more options with their bonus action.

So questions, what am I missing? Is there an action economy here?

Oh, theres definitely an action economy in 5e, its just not as prominent as it was in 4e.

Just from my reading I felt like attaking with two weapons should be an "extra attack" not a bonus action.

I'm assuming its to control the crazy multi-class exploits. In the playtest, you could build nightmare rogue/bbn dex abominations that could run in, hit the monster with raged-up TWF, then use cunning action to disengage safely out of range.

Is the ranger companion good? Would it be better to just buy a dog and train it with animal handling skill? Then it would not eat your actions? What about a mount? Anyway lots of stuff to chew on here.

I think companions in general are pretty crap. Its a vanity pet now.

 

[ForumFerret]

Action surge gives you an extra action AND an extra bonus action.

Citation? I agree it gives an extra action, but I didn't see anything about getting an additional bonus action.

 

[transtemporal]

Citation? I agree it gives an extra action, but I didn't see anything about getting an additional bonus action.

PHB72 "Action Surge... On your turn you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action."

If you didn't get an extra bonus action from using Action Surge it could've said "On your turn you can take one additional action on top of your regular action" and leave it at that. Instead "..and a possible bonus action" is added at the end.

 

[Sir Brennen]

PHB72 "Action Surge... On your turn you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action."

If you didn't get an extra bonus action from using Action Surge it could've said "On your turn you can take one additional action on top of your regular action" and leave it at that. Instead "..and a possible bonus action" is added at the end.

Umm, no. On a regular turn, you get an action, and a possible bonus action. Action Surge gives you an extra action on top of that

 

[Mouseferatu]

Umm, no. On a regular turn, you get an action, and a possible bonus action. Action Surge gives you an extra action on top of that

Yep, this. The clause is part of the "on top of the normal" part of the sentence, not part of the "you get" clause. It's basically there to clarify that the extra action you get doesn't take your bonus action, but is on top of that, as well as the normal action.

 

[transtemporal]

Yep, this. The clause is part of the "on top of the normal" part of the sentence, not part of the "you get" clause. It's basically there to clarify that the extra action you get doesn't take your bonus action, but is on top of that, as well as the normal action.

Oh, I see. Good point. They're kind of clarifying something that doesn't need to be clarified. Why would I assume an additional action would consume my bonus action unless it said "As a bonus action, you can..."?

 

[SuperZero]

Bonus actions are basically 3E's Swift actions or 4E's Minor actions.
Why does the same thing need a different name in each edition? I dunno.

 

[Chocolategravy]

Yep, this. The clause is part of the "on top of the normal" part of the sentence, not part of the "you get" clause. It's basically there to clarify that the extra action you get doesn't take your bonus action, but is on top of that, as well as the normal action.

It is completely unnecessary to add the bonus action portion unless it is granting an extra bonus action. Whether it is badly written by adding something that is unnecessary and confusing, or it is badly written because it put the extra bonus action in the wrong portion of the sentence, we can agree it is badly written.

As adding something completely irrelevant to a sentence is a much less frequent mistake than putting it in the wrong place in a sentence I'm inclined to think the intent is you get an additional bonus action.

Either way, I'm sick of hearing 4E marketing catchphrases like action economy. Something that was just unspoken common sense previous to them breaking it with things like infinite turns from White Raven Tactics or a Factotum's ability to take several turns in a row in their disguised 4E playtest. It really was just a way to make people feel good about rolling 1 big attack/round in 4E rather than several smaller ones like 3E. Nothing at all to do with actual action economy, but a lot to do with time saving.