D&D 5E Reactions

[TheWriterFantastic™]

Must occur prior to the damage? Yes. Must occur prior to additional effects? That's unclear.

The game does not have an established timeline of resolution that gives us discrete steps such as:
1. Roll attack.
2. Determine if attack is a hit by comparing result to AC.
3. Roll damage.
4. Reduce damage if able
5. Apply damage to hit point total.
6. Apply other effects of successful hit.

but specifically not:
2. Determine if attack is a hit by comparing result to AC.
3. Apply any non-damage effects of a successful hit.
4. Roll damage.
5. Reduce damage if able.

and so forth.

That lack of specificity in general process means that any interaction has to be made specific, for example the specification of shield that it applies it's bonus against the attack that created the opportunity for its casting, or it is unclear. Or, to phrase that differently; implicit timing = unclear timing.

See my prior postings of the steps of an attack, as taken from the Basic Rules in #73, and as I quoted ProphetSword quoting the PHB in #81.

In step 3 of Making an Attack, it's laid out as attack roll, on a hit, determine damage and then any additional effects as indicated by the attack. As it's laid out, described in making an attack as additional effects would imply that the effects either occur at the same time as damage, or afterwards -- otherwise, it would be described as apply effects and any additional damage. Granted, again, that's my ruling at my table -- your ruling at yours might be different, as it is your prerogative, but the spirit of the rules seem to indicate that the if the rogue sees the attack coming and know's it is going hit, he can roll with the damage using Uncanny Dodge. Sure, he's still going to take something of a zap from Shocking Grasp, which will leave the rogue fuzzy enough to lose any subsequent reactions until the next turn, but it shouldn't prevent the use of Uncanny Dodge, as the attack triggers off the determination of the hit, which is subsequently followed by damage and effects. Similarly, Shield is cast by a caster knowing the attack is going to hit, whether it be a confirmed attack roll or a Magic Missile, and as the caster sees it coming, as a reaction instantaneously throws up a temporary shield of force in the attack's path, potentially blocking it.

Other reactions that trigger off damage without being indicated as an interrupting reaction would be prevented by Shocking Grasp, but Uncanny Dodge and Shield both trigger off of the determination of a hit, prior to resolution of damage. But again, your table, your ruling.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

See my prior postings of the steps of an attack

See my post to which this was a response.

Allow me, also, to rephrase here.

What we have in 5th edition is:

3. Resolve the attack.

All things - attack roll, damage roll, effects in addition to or instead of damage, and all the relevant possible reactions to those events happening in a single step - with no order in which to resolve them specified beyond that the attack roll hitting or not hitting is required to happen before the effects of a hit, whether damage or otherwise, can resolve.

What we do not have in 5th edition is:

3. Resolve if the attack hits.
4. Resolve damage.
5. Resolve effects of the attack in addition to, or instead of, damage.

or

3. Resolve if the attack hits
4. Resolve effects of the attack in addition to, or instead of, damage.
5. Resolve damage.

The former of which would create a clear timing for Uncanny Dodge and allow it to work against shocking grasp, the latter of which would create a clear timing for Uncanny Dodge and show that it doesn't work against shocking grasp.

Other reactions that trigger off damage without being indicated as an interrupting reaction would be prevented by Shocking Grasp, but Uncanny Dodge and Shield both trigger off of the determination of a hit, prior to resolution of damage. But again, your table, your ruling.

Prior to the resolution of damage? Yes. Prior to the resolution to other effects of being hit? That is unclear - and since the rules say that unclear timing in a situation like this means after, it's definitely not prior.

And yes, my table, my ruling - just as the same is true of your table and your ruling. But in a discussion of what the rule book actually says on the matter, which is what I thought we were discussing in this thread, the lack of clarity in the rules making all parts of resolving an attack the same singular step makes it clear that Uncanny Dodge happens at such a time that it cannot be used against shocking grasp.

 

[TheWriterFantastic™]

What we do not have in 5th edition is:

3. Resolve if the attack hits.
4. Resolve damage.
5. Resolve effects of the attack in addition to, or instead of, damage.

or

3. Resolve if the attack hits
4. Resolve effects of the attack in addition to, or instead of, damage.
5. Resolve damage.

Actually, we it kind of does...

3. Resolve the attack. You make the attack roll. On a hit, you roll damage, unless the particular attack has rules that specify otherwise. Some attacks cause special effects in addition to or instead of damage.

Though the rules are rife with numbered bullet points, those bullet points aren't the only thing that determine order -- another is the assumed reader's inherent familiarity with the grammar and syntax of the English language. Otherwise, one might interpret that the effects occur independent of the hit, or before the hit, or the damage occurs prior to the hit, and so on.

As such, the sentences' steps can be broken down further:
3. Resolve the attack
(A.) You make the attack roll. (At this point, it's assumed that the players and DM determine whether or not the attack is a hit, as it is not explicitly stated as a step, but implied by the next sentence.)
(B.) On a hit, you roll damage, unless the particular attack has rules that specify otherwise.
(i.) Some attacks cause special effects in addition to or instead of damage. (Indicated in this posting as a sub-section of step B of Step 3 in MAKING AN ATTACK)

Unfortunately, while 5e is is a great roleplaying system, it's not a perfect one, and as such has needed errata and rules clarification from time to time, through such avenues as Sage Advice.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Indicated as a sub-section of step B of Step 3 in MAKING AN ATTACK)

That is false.

You can parse it that way, yes.
You can also parse it differently.

 

[TheWriterFantastic™]

That is false.

You can parse it that way, yes.
You can also parse it differently.

No, not false, just unclear -- I've updated it for clarity -- it was intended as "Indicated in this posting". My apologies for causing any confusion.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

No, not false, just unclear -- I've updated it for clarity -- it was intended as "Indicated in this posting". My apologies for causing any confusion.

It doesn't matter whether it is clear in your posting - your posting isn't what is actually written in the book.

That means the book remains unclear as to the timing because your parsing isn't the only possible parsing.

 

[TheWriterFantastic™]

It doesn't matter whether it is clear in your posting - your posting isn't what is actually written in the book.

That means the book remains unclear as to the timing because your parsing isn't the only possible parsing.

The punctuation and order of the original text is what was parsing the quote, I was just highlighting it and parenthetically commenting on the parsing.

 

[Cognomen's Cassowary]

It is true that it is clear that damage is being reduced before being subtracted from the hit point total, rather than the damage being subtracted from hit points and then half the damage value being added to hit points afterward.

However, that does not specifically address the timing of when this reduction happens relative to the non-damage effects of having been hit by an attack.

The damage and the effect are applied within the same sentence of the spell's description. There is no rules-based reason to believe that they are applied at different times.

And since the DMG says:

"...If a reaction has no timing specified, or the timing is unclear, the reaction occurs after its trigger finishes..."

And uncanny dodge has a specified timing, "when you are hit by an attack" (to paraphrase).

We can use the debate in this thread and the text of Uncanny Dodge not specifically calling out how it interacts with non-damage effects of hits as evidence that the timing is unclear. . . .

You could have done the same with shield, until ProphetSword posted the passage from the DMG explicitly stating that the shield spell is "clear" about being able to interrupt the triggering attack, that trigger being "when you are hit by an attack." The same passage tells us that shield is only an example for a "rule of thumb" for how to handle reaction timing. It sounds like you are saying that you will not apply that rule of thumb until it is made obsolete by an official adjudication of each reaction's interaction with its possible triggers.


Hriston, whether a reaction interrupts or not has nothing to do with its effect. Let me say that a fourth time: whether a reaction interrupts or not has nothing to do with its effect. It is a matter of the timing. An opportunity attack interrupts the enemy's movement because it is triggered by the enemy moving out of range, not because the effect of an opportunity attack is to interrupt movement. Shield interrupts an attack not because of the effect of the shield spell but because its timing allows it to be used "when you are hit". The interruption is not the "countering" effect of shield; the interruption is the stop in the normal flow of events caused by the timing of the reaction. Uncanny dodge is triggered in the same way as shield and therefore interrupts in the same way as shield, even if it does not "counter" in the same way that shield does.


Anyway, I find the rule of thumb offered by the DMG definitive enough. I don't really think that there's an interesting rules question here anymore, so I'm probably going to let this be my last post on the subject. Thanks for a good conversation, everyone, stay in school, eat your vegetables, and obey your DM.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

The damage and the effect are applied within the same sentence of the spell's description. There is no rules-based reason to believe that they are applied at different times.

There is as much rules-based reason to believe they are applied at different times as there are to believe they are applied at the same time despite being phrased as separate (i.e. you take damage and can't take reactions rather than you take damage that prevents you from taking reactions).

And uncanny dodge has a specified timing, "when you are hit by an attack" (to paraphrase).

Specific, yes... but not in relation to how it interacts with non-damaging effects of an attack, since there is no established order in the rules that tells us whether the target of shocking grasp is unable to take reactions as soon as hit, or as soon as damage is resolved, so it is unclear that reducing damage can happen at the same time - and thus falls to the DMG statement that when in doubt, the reaction happens last.

 

[Hriston]

Hriston, whether a reaction interrupts or not has nothing to do with its effect.

Of course it does. If an opportunity attack didn't interrupt a creature's movement out of your reach then you wouldn't be able to attack it. Because it does interrupt the creature's movement, if you incapacitate the creature with an opportunity attack the creature's movement is left incomplete.

Shield works the same way. Its trigger is the hit. If it didn't interrupt the hit, then the spell would have no power to protect you from it. Since it does interrupt the hit, if the resulting AC is high enough, the hit is left incomplete and you take no damage.

In both cases, the reaction's effect depends on it interrupting its trigger. Compare this with Uncanny Dodge. It triggers off a hit. Whether you use the reaction or not, the hit is complete and uninterrupted. The effect, as far as the trigger is concerned, is that you are still hit.

Let me say that a fourth time: whether a reaction interrupts or not has nothing to do with its effect. It is a matter of the timing. An opportunity attack interrupts the enemy's movement because it is triggered by the enemy moving out of range, not because the effect of an opportunity attack is to interrupt movement.

But an opportunity attack could not have the effect it does if it didn't interrupt movement, if the creature's movement was allowed to complete as with the usual timing of a reaction.

Shield interrupts an attack not because of the effect of the shield spell but because its timing allows it to be used "when you are hit".

No, if "when you are hit" were the only indication of timing, as it is with Uncanny Dodge, then the hit would be allowed to complete before you could take the reaction. If you were hit with shocking grasp, for instance, you would no longer be able to cast shield.

The interruption is not the "countering" effect of shield; the interruption is the stop in the normal flow of events caused by the timing of the reaction.

The interruption only exists to ensure that shield can be used to counter its trigger.

Uncanny dodge is triggered in the same way as shield and therefore interrupts in the same way as shield, even if it does not "counter" in the same way that shield does.

No, reactions don't normally interrupt.