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

[Caliban]

Special pleading.

Nice. Consider yourself reported.

 

[cmad1977]

In typical fashion the usual suspects shame themselves with their behavior in this thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Darkness]

So you are trying to pick a fight ... I'm not really interested in debating a member of the Flat Earth society.

... your hot mess of special pleading ... 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.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=What+is+special+pleading%3F

... Consider yourself reported.

Folks, please keep it civil. There's no need for fighting - this is just an internet forum about pretending to be an elf, so let's take it easy and try to have some fun.

 

[darjr]

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.

You can break up your movement, but your only moving between these points. And in order to attack you need to break up your movement, or end it. Hence you are stopped.

Though I think the rules are robust enough to allow what you want to do. In fact it might get harder for the players given particular types of enemies.

https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/basic-rules/combat#BreakingUpYourMove

 

[Darkness]

In typical fashion the usual suspects shame themselves with their behavior in this thread.

It's not helpful to post attacks. Instead, please report problematic posts and let us moderators handle it.

 

[cmad1977]

It's not helpful to post attacks. Instead, please report problematic posts and let us moderators handle it.

There are so many. Anyone who feels attacked is probably guilty of poor behavior.

But yeah your right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jaelis]

You can break up your movement, but your only moving between these points. And in order to attack you need to break up your movement, or end it. Hence you are stopped.

So the argument is that breaking up your movement implies that your movement has stopped?

I like to break up my day sometimes by going for a walk. Does that suggest my day has stopped?

And if you forgive a mathy example, I can break up a function f(x) into regions where it is positive and regions where it is negative, without implying any kind of discontinuity to the function.

So I'll still claim it is ambiguous.

It didn't have to be. Rather than:
"You can break up your movement on your turn, using some of your speed before and after your action,"
they could have said (and JC could anytime say) something like:
"You can stop moving at any point to take your action, and then resume moving afterwards."

Personally I think they didn't do that because they don't want a hard rule; sometimes it probably does make sense to let a character take an action while in motion. The example of attacking mid-jump is a good one.

 

[Caliban]

So the argument is that breaking up your movement implies that your movement has stopped?

No, that is not the argument. At least not the argument I have made, at any point.

You can break your movement up into moves (in order to take an action or bonus action), and you cannot end your move in someone space.

That doesn't mean you stop actually moving, just that you can't interrupt your movement to use your Action while in someones space.

The game mechanics treat you as if you stopped moving, because they handle everything sequentially - almost nothing happens simultaneously in the turn sequence, although narratively everyone's turns and actions are occurring simultaneously.

 

[darjr]

So the argument is that breaking up your movement implies that your movement has stopped?

I like to break up my day sometimes by going for a walk. Does that suggest my day has stopped?

And if you forgive a mathy example, I can break up a function f(x) into regions where it is positive and regions where it is negative, without implying any kind of discontinuity to the function.

So I'll still claim it is ambiguous.

It didn't have to be. Rather than:
"You can break up your movement on your turn, using some of your speed before and after your action,"
they could have said (and JC could anytime say) something like:
"You can stop moving at any point to take your action, and then resume moving afterwards."

Personally I think they didn't do that because they don't want a hard rule; sometimes it probably does make sense to let a character take an action while in motion. The example of attacking mid-jump is a good one.

No. It's a fact. You can play it differently if you'd like. Here is the important bit.

You can break up your movement on your turn, using some of your speed before and after your action. For example, if you have a speed of 30 feet, you can move 10 feet, take your action, and then move 20 feet.

That moving 10 feet and moving 20 feet in the example is the only time your moving. In between you are not moving. If you are not moving, you are stopped.

Play how you like.

 

[jaelis]

Indeed we can all play how we like, but we can also talk about what the rules say and what they don't. If something in that quote says to you that your movement stops while performing your action, that makes it easy for you. But myself, I just don't see the word "stop" in there

Heh: what if your action is to dash?