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="Arial Black" data-source="post: 7775392" data-attributes="member: 6799649"><p>I'm not suggesting that the ability to execute those attacks is totally divorced from the Attack action which granted them, I'm suggesting that there is a <em>difference</em> between 'taking an action' and 'executing the stuff granted by that action', countering the claim that 'taking an Action' IS THE SAME THING as 'the effect of that Action'. </p><p></p><p>The rules for Extra Attack and the rules for Moving Between Attacks make it clear that you certainly can use your first attack to stab the goblin in the kitchen, then move into the dining room, then slash at the orc.</p><p></p><p>This means that, even though we don't know how many seconds go by between attacks, we <em>do</em> know that these attacks <strong>cannot</strong> have been simultaneous <em>with each other</em>.</p><p></p><p>IF we accept that 'taking an action' is <em>the same thing</em> as the stuff allowed by taking that action, that means that both of those attacks ARE the Attack action. Since those attacks were certainly not occurring simultaneously with each other, this means that the Attack action, with Extra Attack, is not necessarily a single, instantaneous event.</p><p></p><p>So, <em>after</em> the first attack on the goblin but <em>before</em> the attack on the orc, there is a gap in time into which one can 'take a bonus action', because there <strong>is</strong> a written rule which says you can take your bonus action when you like on your turn, and <strong>no</strong> written rule saying anything to the effect of, "...except during another action". </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The goblin and the orc say otherwise!</p><p></p><p><em>After</em> you attack the goblin but <em>before</em> you attack the orc, have you met the condition, 'take the Attack action on your turn'? It's binary; it's either 'yes' or 'no'.</p><p></p><p>If it's, "yes you have met the condition", then you have met that condition <em>before</em> the second attack took place. This also means that the second attack cannot have been 'take the Attack action' itself, because if it was then you could not have satisfied the condition!</p><p></p><p>If it's, "no, you have not met the condition", then you did <strong>not</strong> 'take the Attack action', and are free to take whatever Action you want because you have an unspent action!</p><p></p><p>Which is it?</p><p></p><p>If you are tempted to wriggle on the hook by claiming that executing that first attack commits you to taking the Attack action, then by the same logic, taking the bonus action shield shove first also commits you to taking the Attack action! If you have no problem with the former, you can have no problem with the latter! </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Either 'Actions are indivisible', or they are divisible! This applies to ALL Actions In Combat. It is the fallacy of Special Pleading to assert that all the OTHER Actions are "effects with a duration", but <strong>not</strong> the Attack action! There is no rules justification to treat them differently!</p><p></p><p>Either ALL Actions are 'effects with a duration' (so the Attack action allows you to execute your allowed attacks until you either run out of attacks or your turn ends, whichever comes first), i.e. 'actions are instantaneous declarations at the gaming table, with lasting effects', <strong>or</strong> ALL actions ARE their effects, and in that case if 'Actions are indivisible', then ALL actions are indivisible, rendering Dash, Dodge and Disengage all but unusable.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Arial Black, post: 7775392, member: 6799649"] I'm not suggesting that the ability to execute those attacks is totally divorced from the Attack action which granted them, I'm suggesting that there is a [i]difference[/i] between 'taking an action' and 'executing the stuff granted by that action', countering the claim that 'taking an Action' IS THE SAME THING as 'the effect of that Action'. The rules for Extra Attack and the rules for Moving Between Attacks make it clear that you certainly can use your first attack to stab the goblin in the kitchen, then move into the dining room, then slash at the orc. This means that, even though we don't know how many seconds go by between attacks, we [i]do[/i] know that these attacks [b]cannot[/b] have been simultaneous [i]with each other[/i]. IF we accept that 'taking an action' is [i]the same thing[/i] as the stuff allowed by taking that action, that means that both of those attacks ARE the Attack action. Since those attacks were certainly not occurring simultaneously with each other, this means that the Attack action, with Extra Attack, is not necessarily a single, instantaneous event. So, [i]after[/i] the first attack on the goblin but [i]before[/i] the attack on the orc, there is a gap in time into which one can 'take a bonus action', because there [b]is[/b] a written rule which says you can take your bonus action when you like on your turn, and [b]no[/b] written rule saying anything to the effect of, "...except during another action". The goblin and the orc say otherwise! [i]After[/i] you attack the goblin but [i]before[/i] you attack the orc, have you met the condition, 'take the Attack action on your turn'? It's binary; it's either 'yes' or 'no'. If it's, "yes you have met the condition", then you have met that condition [i]before[/i] the second attack took place. This also means that the second attack cannot have been 'take the Attack action' itself, because if it was then you could not have satisfied the condition! If it's, "no, you have not met the condition", then you did [b]not[/b] 'take the Attack action', and are free to take whatever Action you want because you have an unspent action! Which is it? If you are tempted to wriggle on the hook by claiming that executing that first attack commits you to taking the Attack action, then by the same logic, taking the bonus action shield shove first also commits you to taking the Attack action! If you have no problem with the former, you can have no problem with the latter! Either 'Actions are indivisible', or they are divisible! This applies to ALL Actions In Combat. It is the fallacy of Special Pleading to assert that all the OTHER Actions are "effects with a duration", but [b]not[/b] the Attack action! There is no rules justification to treat them differently! Either ALL Actions are 'effects with a duration' (so the Attack action allows you to execute your allowed attacks until you either run out of attacks or your turn ends, whichever comes first), i.e. 'actions are instantaneous declarations at the gaming table, with lasting effects', [b]or[/b] ALL actions ARE their effects, and in that case if 'Actions are indivisible', then ALL actions are indivisible, rendering Dash, Dodge and Disengage all but unusable. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Official D&D Sage Advice Compendium Updated
Top