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

[Maxperson]

Not at all IMO. Actions are not "discrete" in that sense.

Saying a PC is taking the Attack action means they are attacking on their turn. That's all. With Extra Attack, they can attack twice, instead of only once, during their turn.

Their turn (or an action taken) isn't over just because they start a new action via Action Surge, Haste, or whatever. A PC (or creature) has finished its turn when it has no action resolution left and no movement left. Until those two things happen, it can still "do something" on its turn.

Saying a PC takes the Attack action enables them to make one (or possibly more) attacks. Using Action Surge to take the Attack action again is simply adding to the number of attacks the PC can make during their turn.

There is SO much more about D&D that the rules can't cover then what they can, that by saying "because they don't tell us we can, it must mean we can't" the game would be horribly restricted.

A simple rule: Until an action is resolved completely, new actions cannot be taken. If you do take a different action, any unresolved benefits of your previous action are wasted. (This would be a "general" rule, so specific rulings on features, moving between attacks, reactions, etc. would be fine, of course.)

With such a rule, you would be completely validated. And issues around Shield Master, Two-Weapon Fighting, some spells, etc. would be settled definitively.

However, no such rule exists in 5E... So such things have to be decided by each DM for themselves. To be clear, there's nothing wrong with your interpretation, either, except when you claim it is "RAW", which it blatantly isn't.

The attack action doesn't give you two attacks per turn. It gives two attacks during the attack action. You can't interrupt your attack action with anything other than some bonus actions and movement. At least those are the only two specific exceptions that I can remember. A new action is not something that is specifically called out as being able to interrupt the attack action, so it can't.

 

[jmartkdr2]

A good example - you move and take an OA. Can you take the attack action and kill that enemy before the OA is resolved. If not then it’s proof you cannot use your action anytime on your turn.

I would rule that interruptions - reactions, basically - are not interruptible except by other reactions/interrupts.

I don't claim this is RAW, but reactions override the general flow of actions on a turn. It's what they're for.

 

[ezo]

The attack action doesn't give you two attacks per turn. It gives two attacks during the attack action.

There is no "during the attack action". You're thinking of things like timing, action, and everything during a round of combat as discrete when much of what happens is simultaneous. Combat isn't a stop-motion film, where one thing moves, then another attacks, a different one casts a spell, and such; and during all of this the others simply are "frozen in time."

Taking an action just informs the DM and others of something your PC is doing during your turn. The exact sequence and when each part of every action you're performing gets resolved is up to the player, because it is their turn.

You can't interrupt your attack action with anything other than some bonus actions and movement. At least those are the only two specific exceptions that I can remember. A new action is not something that is specifically called out as being able to interrupt the attack action, so it can't.

They are not "exceptions", they are examples. If they were exceptions (as you claim), there would be a general rule written someplace that one action cannot be interrupted by another action. Then those would be exceptions to such a general rule. And guess what? -- There is no such rule written (which is necessary to make it RAW) anywhere in the books.

Of course, neither is there a rule written that an action can be interrupted by another action... which is why arguing either side is RAW is futile, since neither "rule" is actually written anywhere. So, it is just up for each DM/group to decide whether such action "interruptions" make sense to the narrative, are cool, or by whatever criteria they decide to use.

 

[Maxperson]

There is no "during the attack action". You're thinking of things like timing, action, and everything during a round of combat as discrete when much of what happens is simultaneous. Combat isn't a stop-motion film, where one thing moves, then another attacks, a different one casts a spell, and such; and during all of this the others simply are "frozen in time."

If there was no "during the attack action," then you couldn't move in-between attacks. Movement is not a part of the attack action. The attack action only allows attacks. There must be "during the attack action" in order for you to be able to break up attacks before the action ends.

Taking an action just informs the DM and others of something your PC is doing during your turn. The exact sequence and when each part of every action you're performing gets resolved is up to the player, because it is their turn.

This is not true. The action happens all at once unless specific beats general like the movement rules. A player can't half cast a spell, use a bonus action, and then complete the spell. Absent a reaction of some sort interrupting the action, the spell action happens all at once.

They are not "exceptions", they are examples. If they were exceptions (as you claim), there would be a general rule written someplace that one action cannot be interrupted by another action. Then those would be exceptions to such a general rule. And guess what? -- There is no such rule written (which is necessary to make it RAW) anywhere in the books.

That's also not true. The way the game works there is a general rule. The general rule is what is stated in the attack action. Then there are specific things that can break the rule. Moving in-between attacks for example. ONLY what is written that creates a specific exception is allowed by RAW. If it's not explicitly written, you cannot due it absent a DM house rule. Since there is nothing saying that an action can be interrupted by another action, it cannot by RAW be interrupted. That's how specific beats general works. That's how RAW works. The W=Written. Not written, not RAW.

Had there been no Moving in-between attacks written exception, then you could not by RAW move in-between attacks.

 

[Maxperson]

I would rule that interruptions - reactions, basically - are not interruptible except by other reactions/interrupts.

I don't claim this is RAW, but reactions override the general flow of actions on a turn. It's what they're for.

Yep. Especially since the OA rules explicitly write that the provoker's turn continues after the OA, which means that he can't do an action in response, since the OA is technically not happening during his turn.

 

[ezo]

If there was no "during the attack action," then you couldn't move in-between attacks. Movement is not a part of the attack action. The attack action only allows attacks. There must be "during the attack action" in order for you to be able to break up attacks before the action ends.

It is "during the turn", not "during the action". Moving between attacks is about movement, not attacks. It is about breaking up your movement, not breaking up your attacks. Why do you think it is under the section on Movement and Position?

This is not true. The action happens all at once unless specific beats general like the movement rules. A player can't half cast a spell, use a bonus action, and then complete the spell. Absent a reaction of some sort interrupting the action, the spell action happens all at once.

A player is not "casting half a spell". Until the action is taken, it isn't taken. That is why you cannot Shield Master shove as a bonus action prior to making an attack.

That's also not true. The way the game works there is a general rule. The general rule is what is stated in the attack action. Then there are specific things that can break the rule. Moving in-between attacks for example. ONLY what is written that creates a specific exception is allowed by RAW. If it's not explicitly written, you cannot due it absent a DM house rule. Since there is nothing saying that an action can be interrupted by another action, it cannot by RAW be interrupted. That's how specific beats general works. That's how RAW works. The W=Written. Not written, not RAW.

Had there been no Moving in-between attacks written exception, then you could not by RAW move in-between attacks.

You keep claiming that because something isn't written in the book, it cannot be done.

You say there is a general rule is stated someplace, show me where! Where does it say, anyplace, that an action must be completed before another action can be taken? What is written about moving between attacks is further explaination about breaking up your movement.

So, until you show me where it is explicitly written you cannot take one action when you take another, there IS NO GENERAL RULE. Such a "RAW" does not exist. As I have said, repeatedly, neither rule is explicitly written so cannot be considered RAW and it us up to each group to run it as they choose.

As far as bonus actions:

You choose when to take a bonus action, including during your action.

Consider TWF. A PC is holding a magical shortsword and a light hammer. He is fighting a vampire spawn and a skeleton. He takes the Attack action on his turn. This allows him to make an attack with the magical shortsword against the vampire spawn. He has taken the Attack action, it is what he is doing on his turn. But he misses! The player decides he should take out the skeleton first so they (hopefully) won't be able to flank him. He then uses his bonus action to attack with his light hammer, reserving the final Extra Attack for his magical shortsword. This way, if he gets luck and destroys the skeleton with the light hammer, he can use the more effective magical shortsword against the vampire spawn. But, if he fails to destroy the skeleton with the light hammer, he can use the shortsword against it, hopefully to finish it off before their turns.

 

[S'mon]

In this case, "take an OA" means "be targeted by an OA."

IMO: You only provoke an OA by moving out of reach, so you wouldn't be able to attack the OAer anyway. Ofc actions don't interrupt reactions so the OA would resolve before the PC attacked. But you could take an OA, then move back into reach, then attack the OAer with your extra attack.

 

[Maxperson]

It is "during the turn", not "during the action". Moving between attacks is about movement, not attacks. It is about breaking up your movement, not breaking up your attacks. Why do you think it is under the section on Movement and Position?


A player is not "casting half a spell". Until the action is taken, it isn't taken. That is why you cannot Shield Master shove as a bonus action prior to making an attack.


You keep claiming that because something isn't written in the book, it cannot be done.

You say there is a general rule is stated someplace, show me where! Where does it say, anyplace, that an action must be completed before another action can be taken? What is written about moving between attacks is further explaination about breaking up your movement.

So, until you show me where it is explicitly written you cannot take one action when you take another, there IS NO GENERAL RULE. Such a "RAW" does not exist. As I have said, repeatedly, neither rule is explicitly written so cannot be considered RAW and it us up to each group to run it as they choose.

As far as bonus actions:
View attachment 345472
You choose when to take a bonus action, including during your action.

Consider TWF. A PC is holding a magical shortsword and a light hammer. He is fighting a vampire spawn and a skeleton. He takes the Attack action on his turn. This allows him to make an attack with the magical shortsword against the vampire spawn. He has taken the Attack action, it is what he is doing on his turn. But he misses! The player decides he should take out the skeleton first so they (hopefully) won't be able to flank him. He then uses his bonus action to attack with his light hammer, reserving the final Extra Attack for his magical shortsword. This way, if he gets luck and destroys the skeleton with the light hammer, he can use the more effective magical shortsword against the vampire spawn. But, if he fails to destroy the skeleton with the light hammer, he can use the shortsword against it, hopefully to finish it off before their turns.

None of that gets around 5e's, "If it's not explicitly WRITTEN(W), you can't do it by RAW." If it doesn't say that you can do it in-between attacks like the movement in-between attacks, you can't do it unless the DM makes a rule that you can. It's really that simple.

Show me the rule that is written that says you can take another action(not bonus action) while you are currently taking an action. If you can do that, I will concede that you are correct. If not, you must make a new rule in order to do it, because RAW doesn't allow it.

 

[ECMO3]

You keep doing this. Unless something is explicitly written, it is not RAW.

EXACTLY!

It is NOT explicitly written a nywhere that one action ends when another starts.

You are just making that up.

Therefore it is not RAW to allow action surge to work like you ask in the OP.

What is not RAW that one action ends when another starts.

That is not stated anywhere and as you noted, if it is not explicitly stated it is not RAW.

This is wrong per RAW. Dodge does not last until your next action. It lasts until your next TURN. The both actions are in the same turn if you use action surge.

The attack action does not last until your next attack either. Nothing in the rules explicitly states that the attack action ends after you make your attack (or your second attack with extra attack).

Nothing states explicitly that one action ends when you start another action and at the same time we do know from the rules that certain kinds of actions explicitly don't end when one action ends.

 

[ECMO3]

Show me the rule that is written that says you can take another action(not bonus action) while you are currently taking an action.

Show me the rule that says one action ends when you start another one.

If it does not state this explicitly then it is not RAW.