• 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!

D&D 5E Reactions

Uller

Adventurer
Okay fine...a brgthrra monster....horrible horrible beast with tentacles and slobbering...ugh...I shoots blinding rays that do damage and blind the traget on a hit. Can the rogue use UD? Even if the blindness effect allows a save by your logic the rogue cant use UD because he can't see the brggthra beast...

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
 

log in or register to remove this ad

steeldragons

Steeliest of the dragons
Epic
WTF is so difficult for people. It is about the spell, shocking grasp. It is IN the spell description. It applies BECAUSE the spell, the magic, this specific instance, an "exception" if you will, says so.

It does NOT mean or say or imply or even hint at the idea that "this is how you are meant to and must do so in all instances or the D&D Gestapo is coming to take you AWAAAY, ho ho hee hee..." this is how Uncanny Dodge is "supposed to be ruled"...

It happens this way [UD is cancelled/overcome/preempted], with this spell...What is WRONG with all of those trying to make this assert there is ONE RULE[ING] to apply to ALL situations if UD?! Practically NONE of D&D rules are hard/fast/apply all of the time everywhere...never has been...and ya know why, mostly/predominantly...because MAGIC doesn't follow the normal rules of the in-game universe. It's MAGIC! There is a spell or magical effect or magic-based feature/ability that will cancel out just about anything you can call a "rule." It happens. You have to figure out some way to counter or avoid it. So, you can't use your UD in this particular instance/for this one case...HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH IT?! That's playing the game.

..and no, whining to your DM how you SHOULD be allowed to [do whatever you want] because intransigent rules-reading/word-semantic gymnastics/rules-lawyering is NOT a valid way to deal with it. That's not a comment on anyone's preferred "playstyle", that's a comment on people's capacity for reasoning and problem-solving.
 

Uller

Adventurer
There's no reason to believe that. Uncanny Dodge has no power against the reaction denial effect.

No...there's just no reason you're willing to accept. If there was no reason this thread would have ended on page one. No one is saying UD has any power against SG's reaction denial effect. It also doesn't prevent ghoul paralysis or any other effect (or even death). It affects damage and must do so before the hit lands and if the hit hasn't landed yet it's other effects can't apply yet either.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
 

Ovinomancer

No flips for you!
No...there's just no reason you're willing to accept. If there was no reason this thread would have ended on page one. No one is saying UD has any power against SG's reaction denial effect. It also doesn't prevent ghoul paralysis or any other effect (or even death). It affects damage and must do so before the hit lands and if the hit hasn't landed yet it's other effects can't apply yet either.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
If it must do so before the hit lands, I'm confused as to why its trigger is "when hit" vs "when an attack is made." Can you elucidate?
 

It is about the spell, shocking grasp. It is IN the spell description. It applies BECAUSE the spell, the magic, this specific instance, an "exception" if you will, says so.

But, on a similar note, Uncanny Dodge and Shield are also exceptions to the general rules of the game, which as you say is core to the assumptions of the exceptions-based design of 5e.

Yes, in most instances, on a hit, the results of the Shocking Grasp would dictate that the target "takes 1d8 lightning damage, and it can't take reactions until the start of its next turn."

However, both Uncanny Dodge and Shield trigger on the hit event, not the damage event -- other reactions specifically key off of damage events. One might argue, "well, that's just to factor in spells and effects that require a save instead of an attack roll," in which case, another can argue that the language about a damage trigger should have instead indicated a saving throw failure event, if it's all one event happening simultaneously -- but it's not. A hit causes damage and effect (damage and effect being simultaneous or not).

The reaction triggering on the hit event is like a filter slipped in the middle of the chain of effect -- in the case of the Shield spell, it might block the hit, but in the case of the Uncanny Dodge, it just halves the damage and does not prevent the effect.

The reaction happens between the hit and damage and effect events, not after the entire sequence. And especially in this instance, the Uncanny Dodge is preventing minimal damage, which will keep it fun (considering RAF) for the players, while still preventing subsequent (and potentially more effective) reactions by the target, such as an opportunity attack or a Counterspell, which is what makes Shocking Grasp still effective.
 
Last edited:


Ovinomancer

No flips for you!
Because blowing multiple reactions on attack rolls that miss isn't fun -- the same reason the paladin's smite only triggers on a hit.

But, by the rules, reactions occur after their trigger, yet you're insisting that UD occurs before it's trigger. I'm not following your argument. Is there something I'm missing?
 

Dausuul

Legend
But, by the rules, reactions occur after their trigger...
Citation please. There is no such rule that I can find. Readied actions occur after their trigger. Opportunity attacks, on the other hand, explicitly occur before the trigger. It does not appear that there is any blanket rule on the subject.
 
Last edited:

Ovinomancer

No flips for you!
Citation please. There is no such rule that I can find. Readied actions occur after their trigger. Opportunity attacks, on the other hand, explicitly occur before the trigger. It does not appear that there is any blanket rule on the subject.

No, they don't. They interrupt their trigger. The trigger is 'leaving my threatened area'. If they occurred before their trigger, I suppose you can take them at any time? Instead, the trigger must occur -- an enemy must leave your threatened area. The OA then interrupts the trigger before the trigger is complete and executes. It does not occur before it's trigger. No reaction in the game occurs before it's trigger. Except maybe shield, but it's wonky with time like that.
 

Dausuul

Legend
No, they don't. They interrupt their trigger. The trigger is 'leaving my threatened area'. If they occurred before their trigger, I suppose you can take them at any time? Instead, the trigger must occur -- an enemy must leave your threatened area. The OA then interrupts the trigger before the trigger is complete and executes. It does not occur before it's trigger. No reaction in the game occurs before it's trigger. Except maybe shield, but it's wonky with time like that.

From the combat rules: "You can make an opportunity attack when a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach. To make the opportunity attack, you use your reaction to make one melee attack against the provoking creature. The attack occurs right before the creature leaves your reach."

You can call this "before the trigger" or "interrupting the trigger," whichever. The difference is purely semantic, but "before the trigger" is how it's phrased in the rules. "Before the trigger takes effect" might be a more precise way of phrasing it.

This is why M:tG invented the stack. It might be going a little far to explicitly write the stack into the D&D rules, but IMO a stack-like approach is the right way to think about these things. First the trigger goes on the stack; then your reaction goes on the stack; then your reaction resolves; then the trigger resolves.
 

Remove ads

Top