Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Malbet" data-source="post: 6538570" data-attributes="member: 6791053">Hi everybody, first post for me too <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/glasses.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt="B-)" title="Glasses    B-)" data-shortname="B-)" />I was the one contesting Zedda on the matter, my point being that the rule states:- you can aid a friendly creature...- ...in attacking a creature within 5 feet of you" Maybe I'm missing something but it seems to me that the attack must be made on a creature 5 feet from you (helping); it is not a hit and run action, but it's positional and persistent.I don't even think i'm interpreting it, that's the RAW wording.For me it means that yes, a creature can move out of my reach and prevent my Help action, getting an opportunity attack with my reaction.Otherwise the creature can disengage and move away from me by using his action to counter mine. So, I can't snap an arrow with advantage on a target running from the combat because someone has "helped" me previously.At last, if you are dead or unconscious, your friend can't benefit from help.This is, in my opinion, one of many time-dependant actions, that stick to the turn-based essence of the game. Obviously this is a wider discussion, but even if I agree you must not force the initiative rule, you must still consider that events are separated. In this case, you action exteds to the same timeframe as the attack.This is also true for the standard Help action... using it like an "one-shot" leads to other weird situations: - First in order of intiative: I move 15ft, Help a friend climb a tree and move 15ft away, to use Action Surge on my enemy- Three more characters and monsters... I die- Last in order: my friend moves 15ft, uses my Help (from beyond...) and climbs the tree with advantage.Writing about it I'm starting to think that it mostly depends on the way you look at Initiative. Goes without saying that the DM rules supreme on any issue, but it seems to me that this is ambiguous at best and that needs to be addressed.</blockquote>

Verification