I have a player who multiclassed wizard and barbarian (for...reasons). The incident came about that he cast a spell and at the end of his turn used a bonus action to rage. My rules lawyer made the argument, stating the PHB, that : " (Rage) ends early if you are knocked unconscious or if your turn ends and you haven’t attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then." The argument is that since he raged at the end of his turn and did not attack (or take damage) that at the beginning of his next turn, rage would end. What are your guys thoughts?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
‘A’OHE PU’U KI’EKI’E KE HO’A’O ‘IA E PI’I – (No cliff is so tall it cannot be climbed.)
No, that's fully inaccurate. If your friend rages at the end of his current turn, he has until the END of his next turn to either attack or take damage to maintain his Rage.
No, that's fully inaccurate. If your friend rages at the end of his current turn, he has until the END of his next turn to either attack or take damage to maintain his Rage.
This was my thinking at first as well, but rules RAW does state, "since your last turn" not at the end of your next turn.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
‘A’OHE PU’U KI’EKI’E KE HO’A’O ‘IA E PI’I – (No cliff is so tall it cannot be climbed.)
Technically your rules-lawyer is correct, but only if the Barbarian didn't get any reaction attacks or suffer damage since their last turn.
It sounds like what's probably going on here is that the Barbarian/Wizard is trying to cast a non-concentration buff or debuff spell and then Rage in the first turn, because they want to benefit from both effects from turn one and have their bonus action free in the second turn, but they're probably trying for too much. In RAW they can only get the full benefit of Rage if they meet its conditions; if they don't, then they should Rage at the start of their second turn instead, or cast an attack spell.
On the other hand, they could also technically just ask an ally with low Strength to punch them before their turn (if they go before the Barbarian); as it only takes one point of damage to meet the "taken damage" condition, it doesn't matter who caused it (you can even do it yourself if you have a means to do-so), and you don't actually have to be Raging when you take the damage, it just has to be "since your last turn" (or the start of combat, as there are always technically turns even if you don't track them precisely out of combat).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The player is right Rage ends if your turn ends and you haven't attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage. That's why Barbarians don't use Rage at the end of their turn but the begining of it, making sure they attack in order to keep Raging.
The PC could also Rage and then cast as spell that creates a damaging area of effect and include himself in it to possibly take damage and keep Raging. ☺
The PC could also Rage and then cast as spell that creates a damaging area of effect and include himself in it to possibly take damage and keep Raging. ☺
I think you mean the other way around (since you can't cast spells while Raging)? This would work because you don't actually need to take the damage while Raging, it just needs to be since your last turn (or start of combat as there are technically still turns out of combat even if you don't track them).
However I expect the player isn't trying to cast a damaging spell, they're probably going for a long running buff/debuff spell that doesn't require concentration, like False Life or Mirror Image or such?
But if they are casting a damage spell though then as long as it's an attack, or they can catch themselves in the area of effect then yeah, it should count for maintaining Rage.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
To be honest I feel a debuff spell should count as a attack for maintaining Rage. My basic reasoning is if you cast a spell at a neutral creature would they turn hostile? If they do, then spell should count as an attack.
To be honest I feel a debuff spell should count as a attack for maintaining Rage. My basic reasoning is if you cast a spell at a neutral creature would they turn hostile? If they do, then spell should count as an attack.
I mean, a DM is free to rule it that way, it would certainly count for a bunch of similar things like various charm effects or breaking Sanctuary and so-on, as it's considered by such things as a "hostile" act.
However RAW Rage specifically requires an attack, which means anything that uses an attack roll, or special attacks like grapple and shove. So technically even something like Burning Hands won't work in RAW (not an attack roll) and you can't hurt yourself with it, but something that lets you place a sphere could do it (just put it slightly onto yourself so you take some damage).
It's tough to say what rules as intended might be, as Rage specifically disallows casting, so it being incompatible with magic is to be expected.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I'm sure this will get some eye rolls, but of you *really* want to go RAW:
"...or if your turn ends and you haven’t attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then."
Nowhere is it written that you already need to be in Rage when you attacked a creature or took damage since your last turn. Implied, yes, but not written.
If I get hit with an arrow for damage, and then it is my turn and I cast a spell and then Rage, I have indeed taken damage since my last turn. I wasn't Raging when the damage occurred but that isn't written as a requirement.
For role-playing, it makes sense, too. If I get hit with an arrow and then cast a (perhaps failed) spell, those could be what send me into a Rage.
To be honest I feel a debuff spell should count as a attack for maintaining Rage. My basic reasoning is if you cast a spell at a neutral creature would they turn hostile? If they do, then spell should count as an attack.
I mean, a DM is free to rule it that way, it would certainly count for a bunch of similar things like various charm effects or breaking Sanctuary and so-on, as it's considered by such things as a "hostile" act.
However RAW Rage specifically requires an attack, which means anything that uses an attack roll, or special attacks like grapple and shove. So technically even something like Burning Hands won't work in RAW (not an attack roll) and you can't hurt yourself with it, but something that lets you place a sphere could do it (just put it slightly onto yourself so you take some damage).
It's tough to say what rules as intended might be, as Rage specifically disallows casting, so it being incompatible with magic is to be expected.
The only problem with the friend punching you is that they would have had to do it before your Turn ends on the first round, not the next one begins. Since Rage ending is an end of turn effect. Not a beginning of turn effect.
So on the first turn you'd actually need a friend to go before you. punch you with their fist, Then take your turn and cast your spell and Rage using your bonus action because As soon as your first turn ends that is when the Check for that round is made. And then everything from the End of that round through to the end of the Second Round would count for the check to see if rage ends at the end of the second round.
Using it first round Rage would end before the ally or an enemy can attack you to keep it going.
The only problem with the friend punching you is that they would have had to do it before your Turn ends on the first round, not the next one begins. Since Rage ending is an end of turn effect. Not a beginning of turn effect.
That's what I meant in my first post (not the one you quoted?); as long as you take at least one point of damage before your first turn (and during the first round) you should be fine, as while you weren't Raging at that point, it still counts for the check at the end of your first turn, as it doesn't care when your Rage began (it's just "since your last turn" and there are always technically turns before combat even if you use less structure to ordering events). I'll add a bit to clarify my first post.
But yeah, if you go before everyone else (and nothing else like an enemy or trap damaged you) then you need to either make an attack of some kind or hurt yourself during the turn.
One fun thing I forgot to mention, but if a Barbarian fights with a polearm and takes the Polearm Master feat, you can increase your chances of maintaining Rage since enemies can trigger an attack of opportunity just by entering your reach. Of course this still only helps for the first turn Rage question if the combat began with an enemy moving into your reach or such, but it's good to have an extra way to attack since you making an attack (even if it misses) satisfies Rage, whereas enemies have to actually hit and damage you to do it.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The only problem with the friend punching you is that they would have had to do it before your Turn ends on the first round, not the next one begins. Since Rage ending is an end of turn effect. Not a beginning of turn effect.
That's what I meant in my first post (not the one you quoted?); as long as you take at least one point of damage before your first turn (and during the first round) you should be fine, as while you weren't Raging at that point, it still counts for the check at the end of your first turn, as it doesn't care when your Rage began (it's just "since your last turn" and there are always technically turns before combat even if you use less structure to ordering events). I'll add a bit to clarify my first post.
But yeah, if you go before everyone else (and nothing else like an enemy or trap damaged you) then you need to either make an attack of some kind or hurt yourself during the turn.
One fun thing I forgot to mention, but if a Barbarian fights with a polearm and takes the Polearm Master feat, you can increase your chances of maintaining Rage since enemies can trigger an attack of opportunity just by entering your reach. Of course this still only helps for the first turn Rage question if the combat began with an enemy moving into your reach or such, but it's good to have an extra way to attack since you making an attack (even if it misses) satisfies Rage, whereas enemies have to actually hit and damage you to do it.
Sorry about quoting the wrong post. I didn't realize it and this is my first time back on. I thought I'd grabbed the right wrong and clearly missed the mark. I apologize for that. i'm glad you understood which one I meant.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I have a player who multiclassed wizard and barbarian (for...reasons). The incident came about that he cast a spell and at the end of his turn used a bonus action to rage. My rules lawyer made the argument, stating the PHB, that : " (Rage) ends early if you are knocked unconscious or if your turn ends and you haven’t attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then." The argument is that since he raged at the end of his turn and did not attack (or take damage) that at the beginning of his next turn, rage would end. What are your guys thoughts?
‘A’OHE PU’U KI’EKI’E KE HO’A’O ‘IA E PI’I – (No cliff is so tall it cannot be climbed.)
No, that's fully inaccurate. If your friend rages at the end of his current turn, he has until the END of his next turn to either attack or take damage to maintain his Rage.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
The rules lawyer is arguably correct but there's no good reason to cut their Rage short before a round has passed.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
This was my thinking at first as well, but rules RAW does state, "since your last turn" not at the end of your next turn.
‘A’OHE PU’U KI’EKI’E KE HO’A’O ‘IA E PI’I – (No cliff is so tall it cannot be climbed.)
Technically your rules-lawyer is correct, but only if the Barbarian didn't get any reaction attacks or suffer damage since their last turn.
It sounds like what's probably going on here is that the Barbarian/Wizard is trying to cast a non-concentration buff or debuff spell and then Rage in the first turn, because they want to benefit from both effects from turn one and have their bonus action free in the second turn, but they're probably trying for too much. In RAW they can only get the full benefit of Rage if they meet its conditions; if they don't, then they should Rage at the start of their second turn instead, or cast an attack spell.
On the other hand, they could also technically just ask an ally with low Strength to punch them before their turn (if they go before the Barbarian); as it only takes one point of damage to meet the "taken damage" condition, it doesn't matter who caused it (you can even do it yourself if you have a means to do-so), and you don't actually have to be Raging when you take the damage, it just has to be "since your last turn" (or the start of combat, as there are always technically turns even if you don't track them precisely out of combat).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The player is right Rage ends if your turn ends and you haven't attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage. That's why Barbarians don't use Rage at the end of their turn but the begining of it, making sure they attack in order to keep Raging.
The PC could also Rage and then cast as spell that creates a damaging area of effect and include himself in it to possibly take damage and keep Raging. ☺I think you mean the other way around (since you can't cast spells while Raging)? This would work because you don't actually need to take the damage while Raging, it just needs to be since your last turn (or start of combat as there are technically still turns out of combat even if you don't track them).
However I expect the player isn't trying to cast a damaging spell, they're probably going for a long running buff/debuff spell that doesn't require concentration, like False Life or Mirror Image or such?
But if they are casting a damage spell though then as long as it's an attack, or they can catch themselves in the area of effect then yeah, it should count for maintaining Rage.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
To be honest I feel a debuff spell should count as a attack for maintaining Rage. My basic reasoning is if you cast a spell at a neutral creature would they turn hostile? If they do, then spell should count as an attack.
I mean, a DM is free to rule it that way, it would certainly count for a bunch of similar things like various charm effects or breaking Sanctuary and so-on, as it's considered by such things as a "hostile" act.
However RAW Rage specifically requires an attack, which means anything that uses an attack roll, or special attacks like grapple and shove. So technically even something like Burning Hands won't work in RAW (not an attack roll) and you can't hurt yourself with it, but something that lets you place a sphere could do it (just put it slightly onto yourself so you take some damage).
It's tough to say what rules as intended might be, as Rage specifically disallows casting, so it being incompatible with magic is to be expected.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I'm sure this will get some eye rolls, but of you *really* want to go RAW:
"...or if your turn ends and you haven’t attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then."
Nowhere is it written that you already need to be in Rage when you attacked a creature or took damage since your last turn. Implied, yes, but not written.
If I get hit with an arrow for damage, and then it is my turn and I cast a spell and then Rage, I have indeed taken damage since my last turn. I wasn't Raging when the damage occurred but that isn't written as a requirement.
For role-playing, it makes sense, too. If I get hit with an arrow and then cast a (perhaps failed) spell, those could be what send me into a Rage.
Have fun!
The only problem with the friend punching you is that they would have had to do it before your Turn ends on the first round, not the next one begins. Since Rage ending is an end of turn effect. Not a beginning of turn effect.
So on the first turn you'd actually need a friend to go before you. punch you with their fist, Then take your turn and cast your spell and Rage using your bonus action because As soon as your first turn ends that is when the Check for that round is made. And then everything from the End of that round through to the end of the Second Round would count for the check to see if rage ends at the end of the second round.
Using it first round Rage would end before the ally or an enemy can attack you to keep it going.
Otherwise Haravikk is completely correct.
Rage ends on the 1st turn, if you don't make an attack. I didn't realize this, either. I assumed you had until the end of the 2nd turn.
"At the end of a barbarian's 1st turn, Rage ends if the barb. hasn't attacked a foe or taken damage this round." - Jeremy Crawford
Would a barbarian's rage end if on the first round of combat he does not make an attack? · D&D Sage Advice
That's what I meant in my first post (not the one you quoted?); as long as you take at least one point of damage before your first turn (and during the first round) you should be fine, as while you weren't Raging at that point, it still counts for the check at the end of your first turn, as it doesn't care when your Rage began (it's just "since your last turn" and there are always technically turns before combat even if you use less structure to ordering events). I'll add a bit to clarify my first post.
But yeah, if you go before everyone else (and nothing else like an enemy or trap damaged you) then you need to either make an attack of some kind or hurt yourself during the turn.
One fun thing I forgot to mention, but if a Barbarian fights with a polearm and takes the Polearm Master feat, you can increase your chances of maintaining Rage since enemies can trigger an attack of opportunity just by entering your reach. Of course this still only helps for the first turn Rage question if the combat began with an enemy moving into your reach or such, but it's good to have an extra way to attack since you making an attack (even if it misses) satisfies Rage, whereas enemies have to actually hit and damage you to do it.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Sorry about quoting the wrong post. I didn't realize it and this is my first time back on. I thought I'd grabbed the right wrong and clearly missed the mark. I apologize for that. i'm glad you understood which one I meant.