D&D 5E Attacking on an ally's space

[Argyle King]

It's hard to say from your original post, but I think you mean that the fighter is holding the doorway, not literally holding a door.

If he's holding a doorway, he's taking up the square to fight in. He needs that square to be an effective combatant and to block the orcs - the rogue cannot occupy the square and make an attack from it at the same time.

That said... D&D 5' squares are an abstraction, and one that doesn't really make sense for any situation that isn't "waving a greatsword about". The flipside is that a 5' doorway is also an abstraction, and the two things tend to cancel out. I can't honestly imagine effectively fighting past someone standing in a typical doorway even WITH a reach weapon.

I can imagine it with an appropriate weapon. Though, I'm admittedly extrapolating my experience with modern warfare and urban room-clearing techniques to apply to medieval weaponry which have vastly different considerations.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Imagine you're playing on a grid. The party is holding a door against a group of orcs. The fighter in the front rank is within 5' of the orcs and can attack, but the rogue is in the second rank and cannot reach. In order to attack, the rogue wants to move onto the fighter's square, attack an orc, then move back to his original position.

Is this within the rules?

No, it isn't, but I'd allow it as a form of "Squeezing Into a Smaller Space": while the rogue is in the fighter's space, both of them pay double movement cost and make attack rolls at disadvantage (and also I think Dexterity ability checks, possibly Strength too--AFB).

 

[Ovinomancer]

I agree that the RAW is ambiguous, but Crawford returned to the same question in 2016, clearing up any ambiguity:

Can a character move into a space occupied by their ally, make an attack from that space, and then move away?
— Bobby the Barbarian

You can't willingly stop moving in another creature's space. #DnD
— Jeremy Crawford

Is it 'can't stop moving' or 'can't end your turn in a square'?
— Mavalanche

Move, not turn. See the Player's Handbook, p. 191.
— Jeremy Crawford
​

Source: http://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/06/30...their-ally-make-an-attack-and-then-move-away/

So by RAI, you cannot attack while occupying an ally's space, because stopping to attack is considered ending your movement, even if you continue to move after the attack.

Well, that raises the interesting spectre of not being able to attack while jumping up to or past the target. Since you're ending your movement to attack, you must have completed that jump prior to attacking. So you can jump to and attack and then jump away, but you can't just past because you have to stop your movement to attack.

Also, makes the monk's water and wall running a bit less cool. That rule says 'you gain the ability to move along vertical surfaces and across liquids on your turn without falling during the move'. Well, you stop moving to attack, so, nope, time to finish out that attack swimming. Running up a wall to attack raises some other interesting issues, such as, when you stop moving to attack, you automatically fall. Do you get to attack before you fall? I dunno.

Crawford, in his wont to answer very narrowly, seems to introduce these knock on issues quite frequently.

 

[Caliban]

Well, that raises the interesting spectre of not being able to attack while jumping up to or past the target. Since you're ending your movement to attack, you must have completed that jump prior to attacking. So you can jump to and attack and then jump away, but you can't just past because you have to stop your movement to attack.

Also, makes the monk's water and wall running a bit less cool. That rule says 'you gain the ability to move along vertical surfaces and across liquids on your turn without falling during the move'. Well, you stop moving to attack, so, nope, time to finish out that attack swimming. Running up a wall to attack raises some other interesting issues, such as, when you stop moving to attack, you automatically fall. Do you get to attack before you fall? I dunno.

Crawford, in his wont to answer very narrowly, seems to introduce these knock on issues quite frequently.

You (and probably Jaelis) seem to be confusing narrative movement with game mechanic movement.

Narratively, you don't stop moving (unless you decide too). Game mechanics-wise, your movement is "ended" or "paused" while you make your attacks - even if if you are flying, leaping, or falling - then it continues afterward as if you'd never stopped. Schrodinger's Movement - you are moving for some purposes, not moving for others. Because it's a game and rules don't model reality very well.

So ending your move is not the same as ending your movement - it's just a frame freeze while resolving your attacks. Wouldn't be an issue except for the rule that prevents you from ending your move in an ally's square.

RAW, this would probably also prevent a monk from running up a wall, attacking, and then moving again. But it's more debatable than trying to end your move in an allies square, which is specifically prohibited.

And like all things, if the DM determines that the narrative makes more sense than the game mechanics, they can have the narrative trump mechanics. They are there to make judgements and rulings after all.

 

[jaelis]

I agree that the RAW is ambiguous, but Crawford returned to the same question in 2016, clearing up any ambiguity:

Can a character move into a space occupied by their ally, make an attack from that space, and then move away?
— Bobby the Barbarian

You can't willingly stop moving in another creature's space. #DnD
— Jeremy Crawford

Is it 'can't stop moving' or 'can't end your turn in a square'?
— Mavalanche

Move, not turn. See the Player's Handbook, p. 191.
— Jeremy Crawford
​

Source: http://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/06/30...their-ally-make-an-attack-and-then-move-away/

So by RAI, you cannot attack while occupying an ally's space, because stopping to attack is considered ending your movement, even if you continue to move after the attack.

To which, in devil's advocate mode, I can happily reply that I agree with JC entirely but it is irrelevant because I'm not ending my move in the space. I will make my attack and continue moving

The book and JC consistently say you can't end your move in a creatures space. Until one of them tells us what ending your move actually means, it is ambiguous.

 

[Ovinomancer]

You (and probably Jaelis) seem to be confusing narrative movement with game mechanic movement.

Narratively, you don't stop moving (unless you decide too). Game mechanics-wise, your movement is "ended" or "paused" while you make your attacks - even if if you are flying, leaping, or falling - then it continues afterward as if you'd never stopped. Schrodinger's Movement - you are moving for some purposes, not moving for others. Because it's a game and rules don't model reality very well.

So ending your move is not the same as ending all movement - it's just a frame freeze while resolving your attacks. Wouldn't be an issue except for the rule that prevents you from ending your move in an ally's square.

RAW, this would probably also prevent a monk from running up a wall, attacking, and then continuing the move. But it's more debatable than trying to end your move in an allies square, which is specifically prohibited.

And like all things, if the DM determines that the narrative makes more sense than the game mechanics, they can have the narrative trump mechanics. They are there to make judgements and rulings after all.

No, not confusing it at all. Also not terribly interested in special pleading.

 

[Caliban]

No, not confusing it at all. Also not terribly interested in special pleading.

Yeah, pretty sure you are. But whatever floats your boat.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Yeah, pretty sure you are. But whatever floats your boat.

Saying I'm confused because I don't accept your hot mess of special pleading doesn't actually make me confused.

The ruling is clear: you stop moving when you perform an action. It's on you to explain why you don't really stop moving, because "narration", in those cases that don't involve being in another creature's space. No hurry, take your time, think it through, and don't offer 'but it works this way sometimes, but maybe not others, and it doesn't matter because you can house rule it' as an argument anyone is supposed to take seriously.

 

[Caliban]

Saying I'm confused because I don't accept your hot mess of special pleading doesn't actually make me confused.

The ruling is clear: you stop moving when you perform an action. It's on you to explain why you don't really stop moving, because "narration", in those cases that don't involve being in another creature's space. No hurry, take your time, think it through, and don't offer 'but it works this way sometimes, but maybe not others, and it doesn't matter because you can house rule it' as an argument anyone is supposed to take seriously.

You sound confused to me. Pretty rude as well with all your talk of "special pleading" - what the hell is that supposed to mean anyway?

 

[Ovinomancer]

You sound confused to me. Pretty rude as well with all your talk of "special pleading" - what the hell is that supposed to mean anyway?

Special pleading.