Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arial Black" data-source="post: 7279192" data-attributes="member: 6799649">It could be argued that way, but not convincingly. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />Rules already exist for the same effect stacking/not stacking. The new duration replaces the old. This is why we can't claim to be immune to incoming long duration debuffs if we are on the last round of a current debuff.The effect of using your bonus action to Rage while you are already Raging is that it lasts longer at the cost of another use of the Rage ability, and you don't get many. It makes sense (so, I'm Raging longer! What of it? I paid the price!), and can hardly be seen as an immoral act or a cheezy meta-game exploit.The rules let you do what they say they let you do. It would take a line forbidding you to use a bonus action to Rage while already Raging to prevent it. It already has permission simply by saying what you can do and how you do it.Sure, a DM could houserule a nerf, but why? He's not getting anything for free. He's probably losing out on some rounds of duration over the whole day. Let him do as the rules say; it makes sense in-world, he's paying the cost, nothing has gone wrong here that needs the nerfbat.</blockquote>