Search results

Yeah, that wouldn't happen to me. I wouldn't let a fighter make an arcana check to interrupt a spell, only to recognise that a spell was being cast. I'd let anyone, any time, make that check.

Mage Slayer can't interrupt a spell being cast, although if it is a concentration spell like Spirit Guardians you can wreck it before it has a chance to damage anyone.

If your DM really likes magical traps...

I agree with Taran here. Even if you have a character built to maximise this strategy, there are still risks, counters, and uncertainty. Plus, quite frankly, it is no different than having a character built to maximise any particular strategy in an RPG--if you build a character for one...

Thanks!

Reading through this thread, it seems I disagree with most of you. No surprise there, I suppose. So, supposing you want to play according to the rules, how should you handle the question posed in the OP? First, your player has told you that he wants to wait for some sign of casting, then...

TWF and dueling are mutually exclusive, but there's no reason I'm aware of to think you can't use a shield as a defense and as an improvised weapon at the same time. It is a thing that was done, historically speaking.

TWF and dueling are mutually exclusive, but there's no reason I'm aware of to think you can't use a shield as a defense and as an improvised weapon at the same time. It is a thing that was done, historically speaking.

I don't disagree with you, but I think "how best to interpret them," in the case of an ambiguous rule, is in the way that most closely resembles what the player actually wants, provided it isn't overpowered.

I don't disagree with you, but I think "how best to interpret them," in the case of an ambiguous rule, is in the way that most closely resembles what the player actually wants, provided it isn't overpowered.

That's true as long as you reject Jeremy Crawford's guidance.

That's true as long as you reject Jeremy Crawford's guidance.

Because it was brought up that JEC doesn't intend for the feat to give near-permanent advantage to characters with high athletics. My response was an overly verbose version of "who cares?"

Because it was brought up that JEC doesn't intend for the feat to give near-permanent advantage to characters with high athletics. My response was an overly verbose version of "who cares?"

The thing about the bonus actions from Shield Master and TWF is that they're just attacks. You can make a shove, or a weapon attack without your stat bonus to damage, as part of the Attack Action. (I think most of us would let a player nerf his own attack if he wanted to.) That means that it...

The thing about the bonus actions from Shield Master and TWF is that they're just attacks. You can make a shove, or a weapon attack without your stat bonus to damage, as part of the Attack Action. (I think most of us would let a player nerf his own attack if he wanted to.) That means that it...

I do not see how "If Action + attack" can be true after 1 attack, while "If Action" requires all extra attacks as well. Two weapon fighting just adds an additional requirement. Anyone who thinks that TWF gives a bonus action attack after the first attack with a light weapon, and that bonus...

I do not see how "If Action + attack" can be true after 1 attack, while "If Action" requires all extra attacks as well. Two weapon fighting just adds an additional requirement. Anyone who thinks that TWF gives a bonus action attack after the first attack with a light weapon, and that bonus...

No. If "take the Attack Action plus this other thing" doesn't require you to "finish" the Attack Action by making all your Extra Attacks, then "take the attack action" doesn't either. That "and" between "action" and "attack" in your quoted text cannot be read as an "or."

No. If "take the Attack Action plus this other thing" doesn't require you to "finish" the Attack Action by making all your Extra Attacks, then "take the attack action" doesn't either. That "and" between "action" and "attack" in your quoted text cannot be read as an "or."