Official D&D Sage Advice Compendium Updated

Ristamar · Feb 16, 2019

FrogReaver said:
Mostly self evident = they aren't in the rules.

They are, they just don't contain whatever magical keyword(s) you're hung up on (I assume it's my use of "instantaneous" and not the action effects).

Being purposefully stubborn or obtuse doesn't change the meaning of the text. Unless there's a revelatory passage or hidden subtext elsewhere in the rules regarding movement "before and after your action" that I'm overlooking. If so, then please enlighten me.

Maxperson · Feb 16, 2019

Lord Twig said:
Actually go back to the beginning. Think, if you had just been introduced to D&D, what would be the most obvious answer? What would a normal person on the street think? How would they run it if it had been explained to them in 5 minutes?

Agreed. What really floors, me though, is that [MENTION=6919838]5ekyu[/MENTION] not only thinks the following is okay by the rules, but is somehow simpler than keeping actions separate.

"You are also arguing that a fighter/wizard can move 10 feet, cast Scorching Ray that has a duration of instantaneous, divide that action up and action surge after the first ray, swing his sword at an enemy, move 20 feet(despite being unable to move in-between spell attacks by RAW, because now we are in an entirely different action and you can move in-between weapon attacks), finish up his scorching ray strikes, and then swing a second time."

A new person to the game would have a much easier time not mixing up actions like that.

FrogReaver · Feb 16, 2019

Ristamar said:
They are, they just don't contain whatever magical keyword(s) you're hung up on (I assume it's my use of "instantaneous" and not the action effects).

Being purposefully stubborn or obtuse doesn't change the meaning of the text. Unless there's a revelatory passage or hidden subtext elsewhere in the rules regarding movement "before and after your action" that I'm overlooking. If so, then please enlighten me.

Right you can move before and after your action. Now please show me where the rules state when any action ends.

You see the point is that if you don't actually know when an action ends then you can't determine if you are still allowed to move on your turn.

I'm not claiming there isn't an end to an action. I'm claiming the rules leave that end undefined.

Maxperson · Feb 16, 2019

5ekyu said:
The most obvious answer is that a bonus action **with no timing specified** (the chose when) can be used in as many or more places than one where the timing is specified.

You don't seem to be understanding the part you keep calling out. Here is an example of a bonus action with no timing specified. "In battle, you fight with primal ferocity. On your turn, you can enter a rage as a bonus action." Here is another example of no timing specified. "Starting at 2nd level, your quick thinking and agility allow you to move and act quickly. You can take a bonus action on each o f your turns in combat." Now, here is an example of a bonus action with the timing specified. "If you take the Attack action on your turn, you can use a bonus action to try to shove a creature within 5 feet of you with your shield." It specifies that you have to actually take the attack action, not just declare that an attack action will be taken.

Maxperson · Feb 16, 2019

5ekyu said:
I mean the PHB would be a lot smaller if it were just supposed to be "just do what is onvious."

That's actually backwards. If you didn't have to "just do what is obvious," the PHB would be much much bigger. I can find rations and waterskins for sale, but no rule for eating, so according to your logic on needing a rule for things, there is no requirement to eat. I can find gas spells, but no rule that PCs have to breathe, so according to your logic on needing a rule for things, PCs don't need to breathe and can just ignore those spells. I can find the age at which a race is an adult, but no rules on aging. Do races not age? At what rate do they age? 1 day per day in game, or 1 day per week in game? Perhaps supposed to "just do what is obvious."

If we weren't supposed to just do what is obvious and needed a rule to spell it all out for us, the PHB would be a collection of books costing hundreds of dollars.

Maxperson · Feb 16, 2019

Markh3rd said:
Ahhhhhh. But wet is not water.

He's also wrong. I used that example once and someone rightly pointed out that water is water. It makes OTHER things wet.

Maxperson · Feb 16, 2019

FrogReaver said:
Right you can move before and after your action. Now please show me where the rules state when any action ends.

Right. The first action you took at first level is still going on. It never ended, because no rules for ending actions!!!

C'mon man. They end when you complete the action. If you take the Attack, it starts when you attempt to target for your first attack and ends when you hit or miss with your final attack, unless a specific rule like Sanctuary changes things. If you take the Cast a Spell action, it begins as soon as the spell starts being cast, and ends as soon as the casting time is over and unless other specific rules change things, the effect takes place.

You see the point is that if you don't actually know when an action ends then you can't determine if you are still allowed to move on your turn.

This is just pendantry. 35+ years of gaming and not once have I ever had anyone confused by not knowing then their action started and ended.

Ristamar · Feb 16, 2019

FrogReaver said:
I'm not claiming there isn't an end to an action. I'm claiming the rules leave that end undefined.

I agree that it isn't hard coded in the text except for very specific cases (casting times beyond "1 action", for example). But given all the rules regarding the use and timing of actions and movement, there is generally a clear context to make a logical inference. Within the fiction, the result of an action may have an ongoing effect (e.g dodging attacks until your next turn), but as a piece of the game economy, it's typically over the instant you use it unless otherwise specified.

FrogReaver · Feb 16, 2019

Maxperson said:
You don't seem to be understanding the part you keep calling out. Here is an example of a bonus action with no timing specified. "In battle, you fight with primal ferocity. On your turn, you can enter a rage as a bonus action." Here is another example of no timing specified. "Starting at 2nd level, your quick thinking and agility allow you to move and act quickly. You can take a bonus action on each o f your turns in combat." Now, here is an example of a bonus action with the timing specified. "If you take the Attack action on your turn, you can use a bonus action to try to shove a creature within 5 feet of you with your shield." It specifies that you have to actually take the attack action, not just declare that an attack action will be taken.

The conditional phrase "if you take the attack action then.." doesn't set forth a a timing IMO. It simply sets a condition such that without that condition being met you don't have a bonus action you are able to take.

Now we as humans have logic and reasoning. We know that if a condition must be met in order to do something that I can define a specific moment in time called X such that before X you didn't have a bonus action you were able to take and such that after X you have a bonus action you are able to take.

I think you refer to this idea of having the times you are able to do something restricted as timing because there's a time period before moment X you can't do something and a time period after moment X that you can do something. I don't think that's the best definition of timing.

I think timing is best defined as having to do something at a specific moment X. You don't do it before or after, you do it at exactly the moment X. Shield Master doesn't require timing like this. However, just because it doesn't require you perform the bonus action shove at a specific time, that doesn't mean it doesn't restrict the available times you are able to take it.

If you want to use a term like implicit timing to reference this concept above then I'm not going to stop you but given that people have a rather concrete concept of timing requiring something to be done at a specific moment X then using "implicit timing" to refer to the concept above may actually make things less clear and cause more contention. Again, I won't stop you from doing this, but just know its a path riddled with proverbial landmines.

FrogReaver · Feb 16, 2019

Ristamar said:
I agree that it isn't hard coded in the text except for very specific cases (casting times beyond "1 action", for example). But given all the rules regarding the use and timing of actions and movement, there is generally a clear context to make a logical inference. Within the fiction, the result of an action may have an ongoing effect (e.g dodging attacks until your next turn), but as a piece of the game economy, it's typically over the instant you use it unless otherwise specified.

I tend to agree. Though take a close look at the dodge action. Does it's text lead to a clear logical inference about when the action ends?

When you take the Dodge action, you focus entirely on avoiding attacks. Until the start of your next turn...

Official D&D Sage Advice Compendium Updated

Ristamar

Adventurer

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus

Ristamar

Adventurer

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog

Similar Threads

Related Articles