D&D 5E Can I use action surge in the middle of another action (between attacks when attacking with extra attack)?

[Guest 7037866]

Just how simultaneous is it? If your first attack slays a target, can you direct the second elsewhere, or must you choose each shot's target before making any rolls?

Actually, it isn't "simultaneous", it is instantaneous, which in mechanical terms simply means it can't be dispelled.

I don't think there is a first and a second, you decide where they are going when you cast it, just like Magic Missile. So if you direct them at the same enemy and the first one slays it then the second is irrelevant.

JC has said the intent is you resolve the attack/damage consecutively. Since 5E does not deal with declared actions/attacks, this follows that spirit IMO.

RAW there is no direct rule or interpretation that I am aware of. The DM can run it either way and be perfectly justified.

 

[Stalker0]

I actually just reread the section on bonus actions and it notes tbst the timing of them is up to the user, so I see no reason you could not use it between attacks as well

 

[p_johnston]

Out of curiousity, what reference in the book make you think this way?

So the first question to ask is "Can a person take another action in the middle of the first action?" and I would say "no, unless otherwise stated to be able to."
(I will admit it is not explicitly stated to be so but seems the most reasonable interpretation of the rules to me. it is a given that some things need to be accepted without being explicitly written. As you stated yourself the rules are not able to cover every possible scenario.)
Multi-attack gives you more attacks but they are all part of the same singular action. Therefore you can't do anything during that action that you aren't explicitly stated to be allowed to do.
As I said I wouldn't run it that way personally and see no problem with players doing something between attacks if they so desire but gun to my head asked what the most technically correct ruling is I'd say it's not allowed.

 

[Stormonu]

Eh, if the character had access to Counterspell, this would be a no-brainer. Having to use Action Surge & Dispel Magic instead just seems like the hard way to do essentially the same thing. I think I'd allow it to fly.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I echo the sentiment: nothing in the rules that allows it. Nothing against it.
In this case I see no possible abuse. So rule of cool says it is totally ok.

 

[Guest 7037866]

So the first question to ask is "Can a person take another action in the middle of the first action?" and I would say "no, unless otherwise stated to be able to."
(I will admit it is not explicitly stated to be so but seems the most reasonable interpretation of the rules to me. it is a given that some things need to be accepted without being explicitly written. As you stated yourself the rules are not able to cover every possible scenario.)

That's my point: it isn't explicitly stated, so by default it is allowed and up to the DM to rule otherwise. Which, is an entirely valid ruling as well, and if it "seems reasonable" to you, would be fine of course.

If the 5E designers wanted it to be intended, they would have easily added: "Once an action is begun, it must be completed before any other action can be taken." This would prevent bonus actions during actions, etc. The obvious exceptions (specific over general) would be attacking and taking reactions.

So, my question was what reference made you think this way? And the answer is "None." Again, perfectly valid, and going with your gut is what most of 5E is about.

 

[aco175]

Will all of this be moot once the new PHB comes out? I was under the impression that action surge only allows extra attacks in the new rules.

 

[marimbaguy715]

Will all of this be moot once the new PHB comes out? I was under the impression that action surge only allows extra attacks in the new rules.

We don't know for sure what will be printed in the 2024 PHB, but the latest playtest version of Action Surge let you do any action except Magic actions (like casting a spell). However, if you believe you can break up your Attack action to use your Action Surge to cast a spell in the current rules, I see no reason why you wouldn't be able to immediately Action Surge, attack with your extra action from Action Surge, and then possibly cast a spell after your first attack using your normal action.

 

[FrogReaver]

View attachment 345242

Firstly, this is about breaking up movement, not your action. It has nothing to do with action, other than you can move incrementally before or after, and in the cast of Attacks, inbetween. This is done solely to illustrate that when attacking, you are permitted to move inbetween attacks by default. Nothing stated even implies prohibiting other actions during the Attack action. It is entirely up to the DM.

There is also no rule stating that’s humans don’t get resistance to fire. Guess that’s entirely up to the DM as well…

I don’t like how your principles lead to absurd interpretations.

 

[FrogReaver]

So, my question was what reference made you think this way? And the answer is "None." Again, perfectly valid, and going with your gut is what most of 5E is about.

The principles of exception based rule design coupled with the rules as a whole all taken together.

There is no single line, but there doesn’t need to be (see the example of humans and fire resistance above). If this was allowed the rules would say so somewhere - even if it’s just an indirect, you can take an action anytime on your turn.