Official D&D Sage Advice Compendium Updated

HomegrownHydra · Feb 25, 2019

Hriston said:
No, there’s no switching involved. What I’m saying is this: If a player declares they shove a creature, I resolve that by the rules, with a contest. Then, when they declare another attack, if they have the Shield Master feat, I see that they’re taking the Attack action on their turn, which qualifies them to have used their bonus action for the shove, meaning they still have their action to use. I haven’t changed the RAW more than anyone else who interprets the rules in order to play the game. I have nothing against house-rules and am not ashamed of the ones I use, but this isn’t a case of making any changes to the rules. There is more than one interpretation, and your interpretation isn’t any better than mine.

Hriston, this is how I would adjudicate it. The "If...on your turn" tells me to check at the end of the turn to see if the trigger has been met. That statement says to me that timing does not matter, only that the Attack action occurred at some point. If it said "After" instead of "If" then timing would matter.

Arial Black · Feb 25, 2019

Maxperson said:
Choosing when to take the bonus action seems to me to be in context, an ordering of events. You can do bonus action, move, action, move. Or move, action, bonus action, move. Or action, bonus action, move. Or whatever combination you like. It's not something that allows simultaneous events. In the above context, you are indeed choosing when on your turn to engage a bonus action that doesn't include built in timing.

We agree about ordering of events. Where we seem to differ is that you seem to take the view that:-

* game rules 'Action' = in world 'event'

...which it can be (cast a spell with a casting time of an action, bonus action, or reaction), make a single attack with a weapon, and so on, but is certainly not limited in that way!

The Dodge action either represents a single 'event' which lasts as long as the in-game Action lasts (zig-zagging/tumbling around) or represents a sequence of individual 'events' (dodging each incoming attack individually).

The Disengage action either represents a single 'event' which lasts until the end of your turn (or until you use up your move), or it represents multiple 'events' where potential AoOs are avoided.

The Dash action either represents a single 'event' (I decide to focus on moving) or it represents a series of 'events' depending on how you split up your move.

You rule that RAW says that you CAN divide these actions (because you rule that the RAW says that you can still take your Action despite a bonus action Dodge/Disengage is still ongoing), OR you rule that they are a single instantaneous event with continuing effects. Since you've previously ruled out the latter, you must rule the former.

Meanwhile, we know for a fact that the game rules 'Action', where you have Extra Attack, is not a single in-world 'event' but a sequence of individual 'events' (in this case, individual attacks) taking place anytime you want during your turn.

Given your ruling that you CAN divide Dodge/Disengage/Dash when you interpret them as single 'events', how can you rule that Attack/Extra Attack CANNOT be divided even though they ARE distinct 'events'?

Asgorath · Feb 25, 2019

Arial Black said:
First, because his own understanding of the rules has been in constant flux this whole time, it is easy to understand that his current understand is not what The Book says. And that when asked on different occasions years apart, when his own thinking about the rules has changed over time, it's easy to understand how he comes to different conclusions. Not because he is stupid or drunk or bored or distracted, but simply that his thoughts on the rules, in constant evolving flux, has changed.

But that's not what happened here. It would be one thing if JEC said in 2017 or 2018 "hey everyone, turns out that my old ruling in 2015 meant the Shield Master feat was massively overpowered, so I'm going to nerf it into the ground by enforcing a new timing requirement. The next errata will change the wording of the feat so that you only get to shove if 3 members of your party dance in a circle for 10 rounds." or something like that. That would indicate a change in his position on the rule.

In 2017, he clarified the "if X then Y" means X has to happen before Y for bonus actions. This is an important foundational rule that applies to many things, as indicated by the Sage Advice compendium:

This sort of if-then setup appears in many of the game’s rules. The “if” must be satisfied before the “then” comes into play.

Given the fact he still didn't remember he even tweeted about Shield Master in 2015, Shield Master slipped through the cracks and he had to tweet about it in 2018 (I believe in response to someone from these forums asking about his 2017 ruling in relation to the feat). Once he realized he had made an incorrect tweet, he corrected it. Since that point, he's been very vocal about the fact that he made a mistake, and that his 2015 tweet was flat-out incorrect and should be ignored. The Sage Advice compendium has now been updated with a clarification to avoid any confusion on the matter. I'd like to believe that JEC and WOTC have the intellectual honesty to be up front about cases where they are changing rules. I really see no sign that this is what happened in relation to Shield Master, though.

For those that are still playing the Shield Master shove as coming before the Attack action, do you use the Sage Advice compendium for anything else? And if so, what is special about this particular ruling that makes you believe it's incompatible with the words in the PHB?

Asgorath · Feb 25, 2019

HomegrownHydra said:
Hriston, this is how I would adjudicate it. The "If...on your turn" tells me to check at the end of the turn to see if the trigger has been met. That statement says to me that timing does not matter, only that the Attack action occurred at some point. If it said "After" instead of "If" then timing would matter.

Can you point me at the rule for adjudicating what happens when the end of the turn is reached and the Attack action hasn't been taken? I've read through the PHB several times and haven't seen any language that allows you to go back in time and change a bonus action to an action, for example.

Arial Black · Feb 25, 2019

Asgorath said:
But that's not what happened here. It would be one thing if JEC said in 2017 or 2018 "hey everyone, turns out that my old ruling in 2015 meant the Shield Master feat was massively overpowered, so I'm going to nerf it into the ground by enforcing a new timing requirement. The next errata will change the wording of the feat so that you only get to shove if 3 members of your party dance in a circle for 10 rounds." or something like that. That would indicate a change in his position on the rule.

In 2017, he clarified the "if X then Y" means X has to happen before Y for bonus actions. This is an important foundational rule that applies to many things, as indicated by the Sage Advice compendium.

But Shield Master does not say, "If...Then". There is no 'then'; no timing beyond that turn. It's written like, "If...You may also"

Given the fact he still didn't remember he even tweeted about Shield Master in 2015, Shield Master slipped through the cracks and he had to tweet about it in 2018 (I believe in response to someone from these forums asking about his 2017 ruling in relation to the feat). Once he realized he had made an incorrect tweet, he corrected it. Since that point, he's been very vocal about the fact that he made a mistake, and that his 2015 tweet was flat-out incorrect and should be ignored. The Sage Advice compendium has now been updated with a clarification to avoid any confusion on the matter. I'd like to believe that JEC and WOTC have the intellectual honesty to be up front about cases where they are changing rules. I really see no sign that this is what happened in relation to Shield Master, though.

For those that are still playing the Shield Master shove as coming before the Attack action, do you use the Sage Advice compendium for anything else? And if so, what is special about this particular ruling that makes you believe it's incompatible with the words in the PHB?

That is one possibility.

Another possibility is that his memory has let him down. We know this is credible because he said that he doesn't remember he even tweeted about it!

We each come to our own judgement about which version we find most credible.

But here's the point: his later musings are irrelevant! Only what is written in The Book is RAW, by definition. Only the RAW can be used when discussing the RAW. And the RAW for Shield Master is that the only timing is that both Attack action and bonus action are on the same turn.

And JC appealing to a non-existent 'actions are indivisible' rule to justify the change (yes, change!) is just insulting!

Hriston · Feb 25, 2019

Greenstone.Walker said:
I think the tense needs to be changed in that last sentence.
…then the condition has been met if you have taken the Attack action on your turn.

Why would you need to change the tense? I quoted the condition verbatim from the book.

Hriston · Feb 25, 2019

Maxperson said:
JC has said(and it's obvious from reading the rules) that there is no such thing as declaring an action, so the check cannot happen until the action is taken. If you check before it is taken, you are into declaring an action which is not something in the rules.

You can also check once you know the action is not taken, which is when another action is taken instead or the turn ends without it being taken. Before that, you won’t know whether the action will be taken or not, but it’s still alright to shove a creature at that time. You just won’t know whether the shove used the Attack action or a bonus action until after you’ve checked.

Edit: Actually, what Crawford said is that there’s no action-declaration phase in 5E combat. You still have to declare actions to play the game because actually attacking the people you’re playing with is not okay.

Maxperson said:
iThe issue is that some of your interpretations are not interpretations. For instance, the idea that of you take a Bonus Action that is dependent on the Attack action for the trigger ahead of the Attack action and are prevented from taking said action, that somehow the Bonus Action becomes the Attack action. There's no rule that can even remotely be interpreted as allowing that to happen.

You don’t have that quite right. The idea is that if you shove a creature and are prevented from making any more attacks after that, even if you’re a shield master, you still only took the Attack action and didn’t use a bonus action. The rules that allow this are the Attack action, the rules for making attacks, and the rules for shoving a creature.

Maxperson said:
I mean hell, if I could do that within the rules, the next time the wizard is going to cast Magic Weapon on my sword and I go before him, I'll just swing with my enchanted sword. After all, I can trigger the effect before the action happens so long as it happens at some point on the turn. And if the wizard should be knocked out before he can cast the spell, well then he must have cast it at the moment I swung the sword. Man! "Interpreting" the rules like this is fun!

I’m trying to take your post seriously, but I have a hard time believing you don’t honestly see the many glaring differences between declaring that you shove a creature without first attacking it (which is something you can do) and declaring your nonmagical weapon is magic without a spell first being cast on it (which is something you can’t do). Have a nice day.

5ekyu · Feb 25, 2019

Arial Black said:
"IF you take the Law course at Harvard, you may take a room in the Law dormitory".

Does anyone understand that as meaning you must finish the course before you are allowed to take a room in that dormitory? Or is it conditional in the sense that you can only take the room if you also take the Law course?

You would even be expected to move into the dormitory before term even starts! All that is required is that you are only allowed to take that room if you are also taking the Law course that term/semester.

The way that Shield Master bullet point is written allows this arrangement; that you may only take the bonus action shield bash if you also take the Attack action this ~~semester~~ turn.

False analogy.

You are using "take a course" as "sign up for a course" which is a separate step from actually say attending a class.

in 5e, taking the attack action and making an attack as that action are not separate steps - they are one and the same. there are certainly other ways to get an attack without it but taking the attack action is done by making an attack.

i can sign up for classes, get the dorm room and never once attend a class - until they figure out whats up and come to evict me.

"With this action, you make one melee or ranged attack." No room there for "signing up to make an attack later."

I have no disagreement that you do not have to finish all the attacks, but you do need to take one... or you haven't "taken the action."

Sadras · Feb 25, 2019

I'm starting to suspect there's a strong possibility Winds of Winter will be released before this issue is resolved.

Maxperson · Feb 25, 2019

Hriston said:
You can also check once you know the action is not taken, which is when another action is taken instead or the turn ends without it being taken.

Show me that rule.

Before that, you won’t know whether the action will be taken or not, but it’s still alright to shove a creature at that time.

Show me that rule, too.

You just won’t know whether the shove used the Attack action or a bonus action until after you’ve checked.

And this is just blatantly false. You know the moment you use something whether it's an action or a bonus action. The ability you use tells you straight out. Despite your claims, there is no Shrodinger's action in 5e.

Edit: Actually, what Crawford said is that there’s no action-declaration phase in 5E combat. You still have to declare actions to play the game because actually attacking the people you’re playing with is not okay.

This is just sophistry. You don't declare that you are going to use an action in the game at some point during the turn. I'll go Yoda on you. Use or use not, there is no declare.

You don’t have that quite right. The idea is that if you shove a creature and are prevented from making any more attacks after that, even if you’re a shield master, you still only took the Attack action and didn’t use a bonus action. The rules that allow this are the Attack action, the rules for making attacks, and the rules for shoving a creature.

This is not possible by RAW. The Rules as Written tell you what type of action you are taking in the instant you take it. The moment the PC takes a shove, it is either the action or the bonus action. Either you take it as a Bonus Action, in which case the trigger already has to have happened, or you take it as part of your Attack action, in which case you must say that as soon as you take it. There is no limbo state that the shove waits in to see what it will become.

Edit: I left out Reactions since they are not a part of this discussion. I added it in, because many people here have problems with context and/or will seize on the omission as an evasion.

I’m trying to take your post seriously, but I have a hard time believing you don’t honestly see the many glaring differences between declaring that you shove a creature without first attacking it (which is something you can do) and declaring your nonmagical weapon is magic without a spell first being cast on it (which is something you can’t do). Have a nice day.

1. Magic Weapon: Is this contingent on something occurring later in the round? Yes.
1. Shove: Is this contingent on something occurring later in the round? Yes.

2. Magic weapon: Am I using the ability before the trigger happens? Yes.
2. Shove. Are you using the ability before the trigger happens? Yes.

3. Is my wizard being knocked out before the trigger occurs? Yes.
3. Is your fighter being knocked out before the trigger occurs? Yes.

4. Am I then re-writing reality so that the trigger never needed to happen and an action was taken to provide the effect? Yes.
4. Are you then re-writing reality so that the trigger never needed to happen and an action was taken to provide the effect? Yes.

I'm not seeing any difference in the steps taken between the two. The reasoning for both examples is the same. That one is an action and the other a bonus action is not relevant. Both can be taken at any point during the turn. If you are having problems with my wizard example, you really should take a closer look at what you are claiming.

Official D&D Sage Advice Compendium Updated

HomegrownHydra

Adventurer

Arial Black

Adventurer

Asgorath

Explorer

Asgorath

Explorer

Arial Black

Adventurer

Hriston

Dungeon Master of Middle-earth (he/him)

Hriston

Dungeon Master of Middle-earth (he/him)

5ekyu

Hero

Sadras

Legend

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus

Similar Threads

Related Articles