D&D 5E Reactions

[Blue]

I'm with people who say you can use Uncanny Dodge. 5e has established in several places that your attack roll/getting hit and what modifies it (including reactions from feat like Defensive Duelist, spells like Absorb Energy, and class features like Cutting Words) happens before any effects are applied.

A earlier shocking grasp landing would have stopped uncanny dodge on a second shocking grasp because the effects would already be in place for the hit from the attack roll of the second one. But the feature is used and complete before we move onto effects.

Another way of looking at it is that you couldn't use Defensive Duelist if the attack would drop you, since if the effects were applied first and then retroactively applied back to the attack roll, you can't take a reaction when unconscious. That's not the case, showing that attack roll (including "on hit") resolve completely before moving moving onto the damage and other effects of the attack.

 

[ProphetSword]

A very similar debate broke out last year on another forum, except in that case it was Shocking Grasp vs the Mage Slayer feat. The debate went around and around for almost 40 pages until things got really stupid and people started pulling out word acrobatics and stretched the rules to the point of absurdity to make their point. A lot of feelings were hurt along the way. So, having lived through that traumatizing debacle, I offer the following advice to everyone in this thread:

The rules in 5th Edition D&D are kept intentionally vague so that the DM can interpret each rule so that the feel is right for their group. Because of that, you are going to have a hard time finding solid rules to back up your position that can't be countered by other rules and opposite interpretations of the rules you present. Language is very fluid and multiple meanings can be taken from certain words. This leads to confusion. This also leads to arguments, and very rarely does it lead you to the actual answer you want.

The ultimate answer to this question (and others like it) is: Whatever your DM says. If you are the DM, go with whatever feels right for your group. Make the ruling and stick with it.

 

[Oofta]

There's a big difference between Shield and Uncanny Dodge. The former can negate an attack, the latter reduces the damage taken from an attack.

If I Shield an attack, it never really hits. If I use Uncanny Dodge, I'm still hit but I manage to dodge in such a way that a deep cut becomes a minor nick. Uncanny Dodge says nothing about cancelling out all effects of the hit - it just reduces the damage.

Anyway, that's how I roll. Or rule. Whatever.

 

[Bad Fox]

The ultimate answer to this question (and others like it) is: Whatever your DM says. If you are the DM, go with whatever feels right for your group. Make the ruling and stick with it.

Excellent all-round advice that I'm sure everyone here can agree with. Rules decisions for any individual game start and stop with the DM!

However, for any that have a nigh uncontrollable urge for an "official" ruling, here it is, courtesy of Jeremy Crawford:

"The hit of shocking grasp occurs before Uncanny Dodge, so yes, that spell prevents a use of Uncanny Dodge."

Link to the quoted tweet is below.

https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/717119902469885952

 

[aco175]

"ZzzGGrrZzzAARRrrggZZZzzgggZZzZz."

I just wanted to quote this, I'm still laughing when I try to pronounce it.

I think I will still rule that Uncanny Dodge will work on the attack, but not the next round. People can pile on and the mage can cast Shocking Grasp repeatedly with no mercy.

 

[seebs]

So the implication would be that if damage would knock you out, you can't use uncanny dodge on it, since you can't take reactions when unconscious.

 

[steeldragons]

So the implication would be that if damage would knock you out, you can't use uncanny dodge on it, since you can't take reactions when unconscious.

No. There is no implication being made. The ruling, as it applies to the shocking grasp spell and how it interacts with the ability to take reaction, does not actually have anything to do with, influence on, or "implication would be" on anything else doing anything with reactions.

If you want to infer some arbitrary/imaginary "across the board rule" out of this ruling, that is [mistakenly, imho] on you...not the spell, not the DM, not the system.

 

[seebs]

I would say that there's an implicit implication that, if this effect which denies reactions prevents you from using uncanny dodge, then all other effects which deny reactions and don't explicitly say otherwise also prevent you from using uncanny dodge. I mean, yes, it's an inference, but so's every other assumption that, for instance, all things which cause hit point damage can knock you unconscious unless they say otherwise. As opposed to speculating that maybe some of them can never reduce you below one hit point, and just didn't happen to mention this limitation.

 

[steeldragons]

Or, you can say, "this one [MAAAGIIIIC] thing does this." and leave the rest of the game alone.

But it seems, as far as this thread is concerned anyway, that's just me.

 

[seebs]

Or, you can say, "this one [MAAAGIIIIC] thing does this." and leave the rest of the game alone.

If you don't have a consistent model for why rulings go a given way, you can't make consistent rulings in future cases, of which there are always plenty.