Search results

Please show the relevant sections in the PHB to back up this "evidence". You are reading things that simply aren't in the text of the rules, as far as I can tell. My evidence is simple: the words in the PHB say that the Attack action is making your attack(s). There is no mention of the...

Sure, and if this was the intent, then the feat would make no reference to the Attack action. It would simply say "you can take a bonus action to shove someone with your shield" or words to that effect. That would be a bonus action with no timing requirement/restriction, and thus you'd be free...

Sure, and if this was the intent, then the feat would make no reference to the Attack action. It would simply say "you can take a bonus action to shove someone with your shield" or words to that effect. That would be a bonus action with no timing requirement/restriction, and thus you'd be free...

Please cite the text in the PHB that explains how the attacks are separate from the Attack action. I don't see any language that supports the action and the attacks being separate: There is no mention of duration or expiration of the effect, like there is with the Disengage ("... for the rest...

Please cite the text in the PHB that explains how the attacks are separate from the Attack action. I don't see any language that supports the action and the attacks being separate: There is no mention of duration or expiration of the effect, like there is with the Disengage ("... for the rest...

I saw a really interesting tweet in the thread discussing the stat block change from Ed Greenwood: https://twitter.com/TheEdVerse/status/1099179445997527040 "And we did that purely to save wordcount! We got somewhere between a quarter to a third more lore into the same pages by doing that...

I saw a really interesting tweet in the thread discussing the stat block change from Ed Greenwood: https://twitter.com/TheEdVerse/status/1099179445997527040 "And we did that purely to save wordcount! We got somewhere between a quarter to a third more lore into the same pages by doing that...

Fair enough, I wasn't the one trying to advocate that the RAW means you can shove any time you like because that's what makes sense in all narratives. You could also explain this as the momentum from making your attack(s) is harnessed by an expert shield bearer into the shove, or something...

Fair enough, I wasn't the one trying to advocate that the RAW means you can shove any time you like because that's what makes sense in all narratives. You could also explain this as the momentum from making your attack(s) is harnessed by an expert shield bearer into the shove, or something...

To be super pedantic, the thing that grants you the bonus action is the Shield Master feat, based on the condition that you take the Attack action first. Are you going to claim the feat itself isn't a "special ability, spell, or other feature of the game" as well? This feels like the weakest...

To be super pedantic, the thing that grants you the bonus action is the Shield Master feat, based on the condition that you take the Attack action first. Are you going to claim the feat itself isn't a "special ability, spell, or other feature of the game" as well? This feels like the weakest...

This is a brilliant point. If you want to shove a target who is in a defensive stance ready for your attack, then it takes part or all of your full Attack action because it's harder to do. Once you've made your attack(s), the target could be off-balance enough that the extra juice from the...

This is a brilliant point. If you want to shove a target who is in a defensive stance ready for your attack, then it takes part or all of your full Attack action because it's harder to do. Once you've made your attack(s), the target could be off-balance enough that the extra juice from the...

Your interpretation is wrong, because the action is not separate from the attacks. The PHB says "With this action, you make one melee or ranged attack." If you disagree with this, please quote the PHB text that says the Attack action is separate from the attacks. No it doesn't, per the PHB...

Your interpretation is wrong, because the action is not separate from the attacks. The PHB says "With this action, you make one melee or ranged attack." If you disagree with this, please quote the PHB text that says the Attack action is separate from the attacks. No it doesn't, per the PHB...

Or, perhaps the rules of the game are designed to be simple and straight forward, and not require a ton of reasoning and interpretation. As Ovinomancer so eloquently put it, just do what it says on the tin. Occam's razor: the Attack action means making attacks. Sanctuary means the attack...

Or, perhaps the rules of the game are designed to be simple and straight forward, and not require a ton of reasoning and interpretation. As Ovinomancer so eloquently put it, just do what it says on the tin. Occam's razor: the Attack action means making attacks. Sanctuary means the attack...

What's the point? Ovinomancer and I have been responding to this using the words in the PHB. There is no text that says "due to the way Sanctuary works, the Attack action is separate from the actual attacks". There is no text that talks about the duration of an action. You can perform the...

What's the point? Ovinomancer and I have been responding to this using the words in the PHB. There is no text that says "due to the way Sanctuary works, the Attack action is separate from the actual attacks". There is no text that talks about the duration of an action. You can perform the...

Sanctuary is a specific exception that applies to that spell only, not a general rule that applies to the entire game. It also doesn't say in the spell's text that the attacker gets their action back and can do something else instead of their failed attack, much like Counterspell doesn't say...