Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Official D&D Sage Advice Compendium Updated
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hriston" data-source="post: 7773178" data-attributes="member: 6787503"><p>Actually, both verb forms you’ve written are in the present tense. <em>Taking</em> is the present participle, while <em>take</em> is the simple present. Present tense is often used to refer to future events, however, especially when used in a condition clause such as, “If you take the Attack action”. Past tense would be, “If you <strong>took</strong> the Attack action,” although I’m not sure what significance you think that grammatical construction would have. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I’ll take this as a “no” to the question I asked you, and I agree; taking the Attack action is synonymous with making your attack(s). There is no condition that needs to be met before you can make your attack(s), and when you do, you’re taking the Attack action. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It’s weird how you quote me saying one thing and then try to use that to claim I’m saying something else. Look at your own quote. I didn’t say you “get” the Attack action. I said you “take” the Attack action. This agrees with your statement that taking the Attack action “means making your attacks.” You’re seeing disagreement where none exists, and it seems you’ve gone back to saying you get attacks by taking the Attack action. This contradicts your statement that taking the Attack action means making your attack(s). If you put those two statements together, it means you get attacks by making attacks, which is kind of circular and paradoxical, don’t you think?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hriston, post: 7773178, member: 6787503"] Actually, both verb forms you’ve written are in the present tense. [I]Taking[/I] is the present participle, while [I]take[/I] is the simple present. Present tense is often used to refer to future events, however, especially when used in a condition clause such as, “If you take the Attack action”. Past tense would be, “If you [B]took[/B] the Attack action,” although I’m not sure what significance you think that grammatical construction would have. I’ll take this as a “no” to the question I asked you, and I agree; taking the Attack action is synonymous with making your attack(s). There is no condition that needs to be met before you can make your attack(s), and when you do, you’re taking the Attack action. It’s weird how you quote me saying one thing and then try to use that to claim I’m saying something else. Look at your own quote. I didn’t say you “get” the Attack action. I said you “take” the Attack action. This agrees with your statement that taking the Attack action “means making your attacks.” You’re seeing disagreement where none exists, and it seems you’ve gone back to saying you get attacks by taking the Attack action. This contradicts your statement that taking the Attack action means making your attack(s). If you put those two statements together, it means you get attacks by making attacks, which is kind of circular and paradoxical, don’t you think? 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Official D&D Sage Advice Compendium Updated
Top