Search results

That's also true, which I've tried to explain multiple times now. Which is why I think until we get a response from the tweet Seebs sent out, the discussion won't move forward.

But we can say that based on the fact that those reactions specifically have to call out their timing, that the general rule for reactions is that they don't interrupt and negate their own triggers by default. There's rules text which was quoted before that also explains this.

*high five* couldn't have said it better myself :)

I agree with you on paragraph 1, 2, 4 and feel that the 3rd is possible. So yay for agreements :) And you're expressing yourself very well so don't worry :)

Very nice, I'll be giving it a closer look when I get home. Bookmarked!

But you're also implying that the word immediately allows you interrupt actions in between attacks and other things. You're not just restricting yourself to what the definition of the word is in the dictionary. Which is why I pointed out that the context your using immediately in might not be...

Well agree to disagree I guess. Which words have I invented exactly? What reasoning have I invented? I've submitted a few forms of evidence and there's even a quote from Sage Advice. Though from Mearls as I pointed out earlier, it's still Sage Advice. A readied action is inherently...

See my previous posts, I've already explained that immediately after the trigger might not mean what you claim here. The rules all refer to the "trigger", even though the trigger can be an action / movement / speaking / etc.. They can't use action instead of trigger, not because it represents...

yes it is. It allows for much more freedom as to when you can roll to hide.

They also clearly list OA's and the spell Shield as being "clear about the fact that they can interrupt their triggers." Then explains that if it's unclear, it occurs after the trigger finishes, like the ready action. If you go to the ready action, it doesn't explain what they mean by "after...

Yes it does follow the Making an Attack section because as the section explains: If there’s ever any question whether something you’re doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you’re making an attack roll, you’re making an attack. So the rules very clearly explain that anything which...

Small correction from previous errata is that you can now hide as long as you are "unclearly seen", so simply being seen is no longer enough to stop you from hiding.

You're right that the biggest assumption is that there's a time lapse between the attacks. They've used this invented claim to justify a bunch of other things during the discussion. "Because there's time between attacks, I can cast dispel on an instantaneous spell" is just one example...

pointing out the problems with your arguments is an effective tactic when I'm faced with brick walls. At least others reading the thread can see your posts for what they are in a simple way. I also don't find them insulting, though perhaps I'm not as emotionally invested in the conversation or...

Um. The text works fine if you just read it as it is written and not imagine intent being that the cultist was going to continue past the trap or the goblin was going to continue moving past and just happened to step next to the character with the ready action. These are things you're adding...

Yay, progress :)