D&D 5E Disengage

[Pickles JG]

I would not say that is the general rule. If a particular bonus action says that you can only do it when you use the attack action, then sure. But the general rule is you can use a bonus action any time you are not deprived of your ability to take actions.

Yeah I used a poor turn of phrase. You can only use a bonus action to do what it says it does & when it allows you to & the ones allowing attacks I have seen specify when you take an attack action.

Actually, no, though it's an easy mistake to make.

It doesn't say "When you take the attack action," which is a specific phrasing the book uses when it's calling something you can only do under those circumstances. It just says "making an attack"--which includes things like opportunity attacks.

The "when you attack" phrasing is meant to prevent a strict rules-lawyer reading that would allow people to argue (however nonsensically) that you have reach with any attack (such as a touch attack spell) while wielding a pole-arm.

As an interesting side point, with the pole arm master feat you can attack with the butt end. By the rules this attack seems to have reach, which seems suspect to me. I guess it would also be magical if the pole-arm was magical. It will not matter most of the time- distances are too imprecise with the TOTM but it came up in the starter set when the

Spoiler

players were slaughtering chained wolves.

What do you think. I also ruled that you could not carry a polearm other than in your hand or on a horse or wagon which caused some grumbling.

 

[Thaumaturge]

Actually, no, though it's an easy mistake to make.

It doesn't say "When you take the attack action," which is a specific phrasing the book uses when it's calling something you can only do under those circumstances. It just says "making an attack"--which includes things like opportunity attacks.

The "when you attack" phrasing is meant to prevent a strict rules-lawyer reading that would allow people to argue (however nonsensically) that you have reach with any attack (such as a touch attack spell) while wielding a pole-arm.

This is how I see it.

As an interesting side point, with the pole arm master feat you can attack with the butt end. By the rules this attack seems to have reach, which seems suspect to me. I guess it would also be magical if the pole-arm was magical.

What do you think. I also ruled that you could not carry a polearm other than in your hand or on a horse or wagon which caused some grumbling.

I'm not Mouseferatu, but I think the butt end is magical if the whole thing is. I can easily imagine a master of the polearm making big arcing swings and reversing it to hit things, at reach, with the butt end. I can also see that being considered ridiculous and only allowing those attacks at normal mêlée distance.

Your restrictions on carrying the polearm seem reasonable. A cursory search didn't reveal any realistic alternative ways of carrying a polearm. (Cue someone coming in with serious SCA rep and a perfectly functional pike sheath).

Hire a henchman to carry your polearm if you want your hands free.

Thaumaturge.

 

[Paraxis]

The way I read the polearm master feat is as follows.

• The extra attack is d4+str mod damage
• The extra attack has reach
• You only have reach when you are attacking, so when someone is moving near you and you are not currently attacking your reach is 5'

Disengage is clearly to all possible attacks during the characters turn, so yes a rogue with cunning action can just double move through a crowd of enemies without any attacks of opportunity against him and attack someone on the other side.

 

[Uchawi]

In my opinion, disengage should only apply for opponents that are currently adjacent, and it should not allow you to bypass an AO for any enemy you may run pass. The breaks verisimilitude for myself. That is similar to concepts like tripping oozes. Sometimes the rules are so abstract or simple that they defy logic.

 

[Bumamgar]

In my opinion, disengage should only apply for opponents that are currently adjacent, and it should not allow you to bypass an AO for any enemy you may run pass. The breaks verisimilitude for myself. That is similar to concepts like tripping oozes. Sometimes the rules are so abstract or simple that they defy logic.

Bah, you are getting all hung up on the name of the ability and reading into it far more than is intended. It's an action. Actions in 5e imply a LOT of activity. You can fetch a potion from your pack AND administer it as an action. You can stow a weapon while moving, then draw another weapon AND attack with it, as an action.

The 'disengage' action doesn't have anything to do with current opponents. It specifically states: "If you take the Disengage action, your movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks for the rest of the turn." This means you are using your whole action to AVOID opponents attacks. It is the same level of activity as casting a spell, making an attack, or dodging (which gives all attackers disadvantage and gives you advantage on dex saves.)

To say disengage only applies to the opponent you are adjacent to at the beginning of your movement is a huge nerf to disengage.

 

[the Jester]

Bah, you are getting all hung up on the name of the ability and reading into it far more than is intended. It's an action. Actions in 5e imply a LOT of activity. You can fetch a potion from your pack AND administer it as an action. You can stow a weapon while moving, then draw another weapon AND attack with it, as an action.

I have to quibble here- no, you can't do that last one. You get ONE free "interact with the environment" in your action (sheathing a weapon), not two (sheathe and then draw).

Otherwise, I agree with your argument.

 

[Bumamgar]

I have to quibble here- no, you can't do that last one. You get ONE free "interact with the environment" in your action (sheathing a weapon), not two (sheathe and then draw).

Otherwise, I agree with your argument.

I guess it depends on how you read the sidebar on p190 "Interacting with Objects Around You"

It states: "Here are a few examples of the sorts of thing you can do in tandem with your movement and action".

I read that as "things you can do in conjunction with movement" (an explicit thing you do during your turn that is separate from your action), and "things you can do in conjunction with an action". Thus, I believed that someone could do any of the items on the list as part of their movement, or as part of their action, or, both (ie: to do two things on the list, one during movement, another during action).

I guess the bit under "Other Activity on Your Turn" where it says "You can also interact with one object or feature of the environment for free, during either your move or your action" is the clarifying bit here, and the sidebar just iterates some examples of that...

OK, I'm convinced, you are correct, Jester

 

[JCS]

The Sentinel Feat nullifies Disengage, so that's an available option for bodyguards facing pesky Rogues and Monks...

 

[Chocolategravy]

Bah, you are getting all hung up on the name of the ability and reading into it far more than is intended.

He's reading into it how the "disengage" action works in pretty much every game I can think of that has a "disengage" action, and how the 5 foot step works in previous editions. It's an inappropriate name for what the action does.