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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
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="Arial Black" data-source="post: 7564893" data-attributes="member: 6799649"><p>I've been away for a few days, and I've just spent the time to go through 200 posts or so. One thing jumped out at me...</p><p></p><p>One thing about how players seem to think 5e works just astonishes me, and I believe stems from 5e's lack of wording; something that players of 3e would not do...</p><p></p><p>...and that is: not realising the consequences of the 'instantaneous' duration!</p><p></p><p>If something has a duration of 'instantaneous', then there is a 'before' that instantaneous event, there is an 'after', but there is no 'during', because 'instantaneous' denotes an infinitely small (but non-zero) period of time. If a duration <em>can</em> be subdivided, then it cannot by definition be 'instantaneous'.</p><p></p><p>So spells with an 'instantaneous' duration but with multiple beams/attacks, it <strong>cannot</strong> be that you could resolve the first beam, <em>have your character wait to see if this kills the target</em>, and then use the information to either attack the same creature with the second beam if it is still alive, or switch targets to attack a different creature with the second beam if the first is dead.</p><p></p><p>This is because the observation of the results of the first beam <strong>must</strong> occur <em>after</em> the beam's instantaneous existence, and by that point in time the whole spell and ALL its beams has come and gone.</p><p></p><p>From these forums it appears that many 5e players play it as if the spell had a duration of '1 round' during which you have several beams to use. This astonishes me.</p><p></p><p>However, multiple weapon attacks are not assumed to all happen simultaneously. In most cases it would be impossible for them to occur in the same instant, but you could say that you could make two <em>weapons</em> hit at the same time, and I suppose you could fluff that two attacks with a spear was one spear thrust going through two enemy bodies...</p><p></p><p>On the larger topic, when it comes to the actual rules of the game, they are permissive: you can only do something rules-wise if the rules say you <strong>can</strong>. You cannot say, "Ah, but nowhere in the rules does it say that a 1st level barbarian <em>can't</em> cast 9th level spells, so I can!"</p><p></p><p>(BTW, this is in contrast to non-rules things, like breathing or shaving or eating. You don't need a rule to give you permission to do <em>non</em>-rules things)</p><p></p><p>Does this solve the dispute between, "It doesn't say that actions are divisible" versus "It doesn't say that actions are <strong>in</strong>divisible"?</p><p></p><p>Yes.</p><p></p><p>If we restrict our rules actions (like 'attack', 'move', 'cast a spell', etc.) to only those which the rules specifically <em>allow</em>, then:-</p><p></p><p>* I can attack, move, and attack again later (I have Extra Attack and I rule which says I <strong>can</strong> do this</p><p></p><p>* I can cast <em>misty step</em> (and I can cast it whenever I want during my turn because I have a rule that says I <strong>can</strong></p><p></p><p>* I can do them both in the same round, because the rules say I can take an action, take a bonus action, <em>and</em> move, in my turn</p><p></p><p>* therefore, I <strong>can</strong> attack, move, cast <em>misty step</em>, move, and attack again, because I have restricted all my game rule elements only to those things the rules say that I <strong>can</strong> do</p><p></p><p>* given that I am only doing those things that the rules say I <strong>can</strong> do, and since that sequence of events is not absurd in the fiction of the game world, the only thing that could disallow this is...a rule that says so!</p><p></p><p>* since there is NO rule which prevents me from doing those things in that order, and there ARE rules which allow everything I've done in this round, then I <strong>can</strong>.</p><p></p><p>QED</p><p></p><p>IF there were a rule which prevented this, then it would....prevent this. But there is no such rule.</p><p></p><p>If there is, cite it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Arial Black, post: 7564893, member: 6799649"] I've been away for a few days, and I've just spent the time to go through 200 posts or so. One thing jumped out at me... One thing about how players seem to think 5e works just astonishes me, and I believe stems from 5e's lack of wording; something that players of 3e would not do... ...and that is: not realising the consequences of the 'instantaneous' duration! If something has a duration of 'instantaneous', then there is a 'before' that instantaneous event, there is an 'after', but there is no 'during', because 'instantaneous' denotes an infinitely small (but non-zero) period of time. If a duration [i]can[/i] be subdivided, then it cannot by definition be 'instantaneous'. So spells with an 'instantaneous' duration but with multiple beams/attacks, it [b]cannot[/b] be that you could resolve the first beam, [i]have your character wait to see if this kills the target[/i], and then use the information to either attack the same creature with the second beam if it is still alive, or switch targets to attack a different creature with the second beam if the first is dead. This is because the observation of the results of the first beam [b]must[/b] occur [i]after[/i] the beam's instantaneous existence, and by that point in time the whole spell and ALL its beams has come and gone. From these forums it appears that many 5e players play it as if the spell had a duration of '1 round' during which you have several beams to use. This astonishes me. However, multiple weapon attacks are not assumed to all happen simultaneously. In most cases it would be impossible for them to occur in the same instant, but you could say that you could make two [i]weapons[/i] hit at the same time, and I suppose you could fluff that two attacks with a spear was one spear thrust going through two enemy bodies... On the larger topic, when it comes to the actual rules of the game, they are permissive: you can only do something rules-wise if the rules say you [b]can[/b]. You cannot say, "Ah, but nowhere in the rules does it say that a 1st level barbarian [i]can't[/i] cast 9th level spells, so I can!" (BTW, this is in contrast to non-rules things, like breathing or shaving or eating. You don't need a rule to give you permission to do [i]non[/i]-rules things) Does this solve the dispute between, "It doesn't say that actions are divisible" versus "It doesn't say that actions are [b]in[/b]divisible"? Yes. If we restrict our rules actions (like 'attack', 'move', 'cast a spell', etc.) to only those which the rules specifically [i]allow[/i], then:- * I can attack, move, and attack again later (I have Extra Attack and I rule which says I [b]can[/b] do this * I can cast [i]misty step[/i] (and I can cast it whenever I want during my turn because I have a rule that says I [b]can[/b] * I can do them both in the same round, because the rules say I can take an action, take a bonus action, [i]and[/i] move, in my turn * therefore, I [b]can[/b] attack, move, cast [i]misty step[/i], move, and attack again, because I have restricted all my game rule elements only to those things the rules say that I [b]can[/b] do * given that I am only doing those things that the rules say I [b]can[/b] do, and since that sequence of events is not absurd in the fiction of the game world, the only thing that could disallow this is...a rule that says so! * since there is NO rule which prevents me from doing those things in that order, and there ARE rules which allow everything I've done in this round, then I [b]can[/b]. QED IF there were a rule which prevented this, then it would....prevent this. But there is no such rule. If there is, cite it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Sage Advice Compendium Update 1/30/2019
Top