Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Official D&D Sage Advice Compendium Updated
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7772042" data-attributes="member: 6919838"><p>"Problem"?</p><p></p><p>I see "examples" but not "problems".</p><p></p><p>You describe move-attack-move-surge-attack as if its done obviously flawed thing. You just left out what the "problem" was.</p><p></p><p>You mention the scorching ray and not bring able to move between spell attacks by RAW and dont say how that is a problem.</p><p></p><p>"(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), "</p><p></p><p>Now, let's deal with that one, ok?</p><p></p><p>You can move between spell attacks in RAW. </p><p>You can.</p><p>Really. </p><p>There is no rule stopping it.</p><p>Not one.</p><p></p><p>Now, what you cannot fo, by RAW, is use the Movement Between Attacks rule to split your normal movement in an action between attacks of a spell because ***that rule** requires weapon attacks specifically.</p><p></p><p>In your example *that rule* is not being used to move between spell attacks, right? The rule being used is the action surge giving you a new action and whatever that gives you. </p><p></p><p>See, that's the key, there is no general rule which forbids movement by any means between spell attacks. So, no rule is broken by action surging between spell attacks.</p><p></p><p>Let's give you an example.</p><p></p><p>We already know with scorching ray we can pick a target, fire, see results, pick target, fire, see results etc. Nothing RAW forces those "instantaneous" spells with multiple attacks to not be done sequentially (as confirmed by Sage whenever asked.) </p><p></p><p>So I move, fire, but if that shot triggers say a reaction like dissonant whispers I may be forced to spend my reaction and move away right then and there - but I still have the ability to choose my target and shoot from that new spot.</p><p></p><p>That did not violate the MBA rule because ts was these other game features that caused the movement, not the MBA.</p><p></p><p>Would you force that Scorching Ray player to forfeit his shots because DW made him react move away? Or would you rule that a reaction triggered by "hit by an attack" would have to wait not thru just one attack in a sequential set but all of them? </p><p></p><p>The reaction movement away did not violate RAW because I did not have to use "moving between attacks" rule to move. Just like if I action surge between scorching ray shots no rule was violated. </p><p></p><p>But the long and short of it is, the rule for MBA does not establish any global prohibition against movement between spell attacks. </p><p></p><p>Matter of fact, IIRC JEC answer to the question of moving between spell attacks was that there is no general rule allowing it... which obviously leaves open the cases where a specific rule can allow it.</p><p></p><p>Movement Between Attacks</p><p></p><p>"If you take an action that includes more than one weapon attack, you can break up your movement even further by moving between those attacks. "</p><p></p><p>So, again, we reach the key point to me in all this.</p><p></p><p>You listed two EXAMPLES that you described as problems that would occur if we did not imagine a phantom discrete indivisible action rule, but hey, guess what, we can actually look at honest to goodness real RAW written down rules to go thru and see "were any rules broken." </p><p></p><p>At no point is any phantom rule needed to resolve this. </p><p></p><p>That's because the rules being used - using bonus actions when you choose, MBA, sequential attacks - are actually printed rules we can read (and in some cases - printed clarifications)</p><p></p><p>But this amazingly finessed phantom indivisible discrete action rule whose text is somehow known to be so precise as to divide between "when you choose" and "any time" and between some bonus actions but not non-actions requires us to based rulings on that phantom rule we cannot see, cannot read and cannot examine the wording of.</p><p></p><p>YMMV.</p><p></p><p>But in my game, when you action surge, you get a new action, right then and there on your turn. No phantom indivisible need apply. In my game, you cannot use MBA to move between Scorching Ray shots cuz they are not weapon attacks, but there is no problem with movement between them as a result of other features, events and effects and if there are questions we check actual rules for guidance, not phantoms.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7772042, member: 6919838"] "Problem"? I see "examples" but not "problems". You describe move-attack-move-surge-attack as if its done obviously flawed thing. You just left out what the "problem" was. You mention the scorching ray and not bring able to move between spell attacks by RAW and dont say how that is a problem. "(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), " Now, let's deal with that one, ok? You can move between spell attacks in RAW. You can. Really. There is no rule stopping it. Not one. Now, what you cannot fo, by RAW, is use the Movement Between Attacks rule to split your normal movement in an action between attacks of a spell because ***that rule** requires weapon attacks specifically. In your example *that rule* is not being used to move between spell attacks, right? The rule being used is the action surge giving you a new action and whatever that gives you. See, that's the key, there is no general rule which forbids movement by any means between spell attacks. So, no rule is broken by action surging between spell attacks. Let's give you an example. We already know with scorching ray we can pick a target, fire, see results, pick target, fire, see results etc. Nothing RAW forces those "instantaneous" spells with multiple attacks to not be done sequentially (as confirmed by Sage whenever asked.) So I move, fire, but if that shot triggers say a reaction like dissonant whispers I may be forced to spend my reaction and move away right then and there - but I still have the ability to choose my target and shoot from that new spot. That did not violate the MBA rule because ts was these other game features that caused the movement, not the MBA. Would you force that Scorching Ray player to forfeit his shots because DW made him react move away? Or would you rule that a reaction triggered by "hit by an attack" would have to wait not thru just one attack in a sequential set but all of them? The reaction movement away did not violate RAW because I did not have to use "moving between attacks" rule to move. Just like if I action surge between scorching ray shots no rule was violated. But the long and short of it is, the rule for MBA does not establish any global prohibition against movement between spell attacks. Matter of fact, IIRC JEC answer to the question of moving between spell attacks was that there is no general rule allowing it... which obviously leaves open the cases where a specific rule can allow it. Movement Between Attacks "If you take an action that includes more than one weapon attack, you can break up your movement even further by moving between those attacks. " So, again, we reach the key point to me in all this. You listed two EXAMPLES that you described as problems that would occur if we did not imagine a phantom discrete indivisible action rule, but hey, guess what, we can actually look at honest to goodness real RAW written down rules to go thru and see "were any rules broken." At no point is any phantom rule needed to resolve this. That's because the rules being used - using bonus actions when you choose, MBA, sequential attacks - are actually printed rules we can read (and in some cases - printed clarifications) But this amazingly finessed phantom indivisible discrete action rule whose text is somehow known to be so precise as to divide between "when you choose" and "any time" and between some bonus actions but not non-actions requires us to based rulings on that phantom rule we cannot see, cannot read and cannot examine the wording of. YMMV. But in my game, when you action surge, you get a new action, right then and there on your turn. No phantom indivisible need apply. In my game, you cannot use MBA to move between Scorching Ray shots cuz they are not weapon attacks, but there is no problem with movement between them as a result of other features, events and effects and if there are questions we check actual rules for guidance, not phantoms. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Official D&D Sage Advice Compendium Updated
Top