If casting a cantrip (even specifically booming blade) isn't usually taking the attack action (i.e. you normally can't replace an attack with a cantrip when you have extra attack, for example) then why is it in the haste case when no text indicates that change within haste?
Also, if the attack you make using booming blade requires you to use your action, you couldn't actually take that attack since you've already spent your action casting the spell in the first place.
How about you point out to me any rule which says that casting a cantrip cannot be an attack? That'd be helpful.
Casting a cantrip can be an attack when you make an attack roll. But that's not the issue. When it comes to rules interactions in D&D, specific beats general. Always.
The spell haste specifically only allows for taking one additional, "Attack (one weapon attack only)." So, if you're going to argue that the bladesinger's Extra Attack is more specific, then we'd like to see your reasoning.
How about you point out to me any rule which says that casting a cantrip cannot be an attack? That'd be helpful.
Casting a cantrip can be an attack when you make an attack roll. But that's not the issue. When it comes to rules interactions in D&D, specific beats general. Always.
The spell haste specifically only allows for taking one additional, "Attack (one weapon attack only)." So, if you're going to argue that the bladesinger's Extra Attack is more specific, then we'd like to see your reasoning.
Yes, specific trumps general. The rules for Haste are general compared to the rules for Booming Blade (which belongs to the rare number of cantrips whose casting is a weapon attach with a single weapon).
How about you point out to me any rule which says that casting a cantrip cannot be an attack? That'd be helpful.
Casting a cantrip can be an attack when you make an attack roll. But that's not the issue. When it comes to rules interactions in D&D, specific beats general. Always.
The spell haste specifically only allows for taking one additional, "Attack (one weapon attack only)." So, if you're going to argue that the bladesinger's Extra Attack is more specific, then we'd like to see your reasoning.
Yes, specific trumps general. The rules for Haste are general compared to the rules for Booming Blade (which belongs to the rare number of cantrips whose casting is a weapon attach with a single weapon).
Except for that haste only allows for a weapon attack via the Attack action, not using the [Tooltip Not Found] action to attack with a weapon because that just happens to be the somatic component.
To put it another way, the Extra Attack feature cannot apply to this additional attack. So the substitution isn't possible.
EDIT: When you cast booming blade or green-flame blade, you aren't only making a weapon attack. You're doing more than that. The spell haste doesn't allow for that. It is a very specific addition to the normal limit on performable actions.
Against my better judgement, I'm going to go in-depth on this. First, the bladesinger's revised Extra Attack.
EXTRA ATTACK 6th-level Bladesinging feature You can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn. Moreover, you can cast one of your cantrips in place of one of those attacks.
The ability to cast a cantrip is incredibly powerful, and limiting this discussion to just one or two spells is a disservice.
If I want to cast green-flame blade, and potentially hit three targets in one turn, I can. If I want to cast lightning lure to reel in a target just outside my melee reach so I can hit them with my sword, I can. If I want to cast fire bolt to tag someone 100 feet away, I can. If I want to cast blade ward so I have resistance to Bludgeoning, Piercing, and Slashing damage for one round, I can.
The bladesinger's Extra Attack feature allows for any substitution. But the haste spell does not allow for any substitution. It only grants permission for, "one weapon attack only." You cannot combine the weapon attack with anything else; not even a spell which includes a weapon attack. Because then it's not only a weapon attack; it's something more.
No one here has said that, when you attack with booming blade or green-flame blade, you aren't also making a weapon attack. You are, and therein lies the problem. You cannot have an also.
The most common action to take in combat is the Attack action, whether you are swinging a sword, firing an arrow from a bow, or brawling with your fists.
With this action, you make one melee or ranged attack. See the "Making an Attack" section for the rules that govern attacks.
Certain features, such as the Extra Attack feature of the fighter, allow you to make more than one attack with this action.
Haste has a capitalized Attack, so it's referring to the action and not any old attack. Just because a spell might have an attack roll, that doesn't mean you are using the Attack action. The [Tooltip Not Found] action is the very next one in the chapter.
Cast a Spell
Spellcasters such as wizards and clerics, as well as many monsters, have access to spells and can use them to great effect in combat. Each spell has a casting time, which specifies whether the caster must use an action, a reaction, minutes, or even hours to cast the spell. Casting a spell is, therefore, not necessarily an action. Most spells do have a casting time of 1 action, so a spellcaster often uses his or her action in combat to cast such a spell.
If you'll notice, the game draws a distinction between weapon attacks (a paladin's Divine Smite) and spell attacks (scorching ray). You can even see it in creature stat blocks, like the ankheg and the banshee. And the wizard, after all, does have a spell attack modifier included in its Spellcasting feature.
Spell attack modifier = your proficiency bonus + your Intelligence modifier
I’m still waiting for any of you to quote a rule which says that casting a spell can’t be part of an attack action. Give book, page, and quite.
By the way you're choosing to look at Booming blade, it seems like you're saying that you can use Booming Blade with any weapon attack. So a Fighter could use Booming Blade with each of their extra attack features, basically letting them to do 16d8+(Modifier x4) worth of damage every turn if they were wielding a longsword. This seems silly that you would believe this to be the case. However, it seems more like willful obstinance at this point because you don't want to admit to being wrong twice, but here you go with links and such.
The first line of this section reads "When you take your action on your turn, you can take ONE of the actions presented here, an action you gained from your class or a special feature, or an action that you improvise." As you read further on the "Attack" action is a separate Action from the "Cast a Spell" action.
With the spell (Yes it is in fact a spell. If you want to argue that go look up what a cantrip is first) Booming Blade, "you brandish the weapon used in the spell’s casting and make a melee attack". This means that you've cast the spell first then you attack with a weapon, not make a weapon attack and then used booming blade with it such as you would with the Paladin's Smite.
As Haste does not allow you to use it's special action to "Cast a Spell", you are unable to use Booming Blade.
Below, I'm going to repeat my position regarding Extra Attack and Bladesiger. I thought I'd been specific about it earlier. I guess not.
Extra Attack
Starting at 6th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn. Moreover, you can cast one of your cantrips in place of one of those attacks
This is a quote from the Bladesinger rules. Note that it says that you are able to replace one of "those attacks" with a cantrip. That implies that you can't replace any attack with a cantrip, only one of "those attacks."
My postion is that a Bladesinger cannot, in general, spend ANY attack he has from ANY source with ANY cantrip,
Okay, now let me clear up another point?
Scroll back through my comments. Do you see me ever argue that an attack can, in general, be replaced with Firebolt or Chill Touch or Acid Spray?
No. I am specifically discussing Booming Blade.
I do not believe that there is a general rule game-wide that any cantrip can be done with any attack gained by any means. My position is very specific. It is that Booming Blade can be done as the weapon attack granted by Haste.
I do believe that this discussion would benefit if we all do two things.
1.) Understand what the other person is actually arguing
I’m still waiting for any of you to quote a rule which says that casting a spell can’t be part of an attack action. Give book, page, and quite.
[REDACTED] Direct Quotes under Actions in Combat.
Attack
The most common action to take in combat is the Attack action, whether you are swinging a sword, firing an arrow from a bow, or brawling with your fists.
With this action, you make one melee or ranged attack. See the "Making an Attack" section for the rules that govern attacks.
Certain features, such as the Extra Attack feature of the fighter, allow you to make more than one attack with this action.
Cast a Spell
Spellcasters such as wizards and clerics, as well as many monsters, have access to spells and can use them to great effect in combat. Each spell has a casting time, which specifies whether the caster must use an action, a reaction, minutes, or even hours to cast the spell. Casting a spell is, therefore, not necessarily an action. Most spells do have a casting time of 1 action, so a spellcaster often uses his or her action in combat to cast such a spell. See chapter 10 for the rules on spellcasting.
Notice how these are two different actions? That's how they are not the same thing. These are Two specifically different Actions under that section. Casting a Spell is not part of an Attack Action. It is it's own separate action.
When a character casts any spell, the same basic rules are followed, regardless of the character's class or the spell's effects.
Each spell description in Chapter 11 begins with a block of information, including the spell's name, level, school of magic, casting time, range, components, and duration. The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect.
This is a direct Copy from Chapter 10 on Casting a spell. When you combine the Bolded Section with the fact that Cast a Spell above is a completely different action from the Attack Action. Then there is only one result from this. Any attacks, Including Weapon Attacks, Are merely a function of a spell and not their own action. They Exist Entirely within the Cast a Spell Action unless spell specifies otherwise.
So this means something else on top of that. Not only does Haste's Specificity block the use of the cantrip on the haste action. But Booming Blade also blocks it because of it's generality. Which your willfully ignoring.
And just so I don't have to hear you say yet again "Give me a page number or your lying" in effect. I'm going to do you one better.
This is the Direct DDB link to the Chapter 9 Entry of Actions in Combat. But then I'm sure you'll give me "I don't have access to that!"
So you'll be interested to know that actions in Combat is Page 192, Half way down the left Hand column. With the Attack Action and Cast a Spell being the first two entries under that section.
And just as further proof beyond that. Let's look at Making an Attack on page 194.
Whether you're striking with a melee weapon, firing a weapon at range, or making an attack roll as part of a spell, an attack has a simple structure.
Let's note the Bolded Part here in it's first paragraph. Notice that it says Making an Attack Roll as part of a spell. This is important. Because this means that just because something is an attack and makes an attack roll that does not mean that it is necessarily part of the Attack Action. Because it specifically says as part of a Spell which is covered by Casting a Spell as seen above in the Actions in Combat Section.
The Reason Booming Blade Does Not work. Under any conditions. Even when that's what you specifically want to focus on. Is because it has nothing in it's specifics that allows it to work. It is bound by these general rules above. It does nothing special that breaks these rules to make it compatible with Haste. Not even the Blade Singer's Extra Attack Feature changes this. It is just a spell. The attack is just part of it's effect. Just like every other spell. The fact that the attack is made with a weapon is irrelevant. It's not even the only one to do this. What it does it not new. It does not have special interactions. It is just a spell. and it uses the Cast a Spell Action. Which the Haste spell does not allow. The Haste spell specifies the actions that can be taken with it. And limits on some of those actions. Booming Blade is never any of those actions. Nothing about it ever makes it one of those actions. In Primary function it is no different than a touch spell, except that it allows for "touching" with something other than your hand that just happens to be able to deal damage as well. That is all.
The bladesinger ability does indeed allow you to cast a spell using a attack action.
However haste overrides this by stating that the attack action can only be used to make a weapon attack, not a spell.
You may argue that bladesinger overrides this by stating it replaces a weapon attack; however I would say that it's the other way around, normally bladesinger allows you to cast a spell but haste overrides bladesinger's ability to do this, because you must make a weapon attack that cannot be replaced with a spell (otherwise it wouldn't be a weapon attack).
I say this because haste is a spell, which are naturally more specific than constantly on abilities, and that if haste overrides the other part of Bladesinger's extra attack (the you can attack twice bit), then it should override all of the bladesinger's extra attack (the replacing a attack with a spell)
However I, again, concede that it doesn't say which is more specific, I just believe this version makes far more sense than the alternative due to the reasons above.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
Huh. So, Wren, you are still trying to argue that a feature that modifies the attack action to allow you to cast a spell as part of your extra attacks turns all spells no matter what into attack actions? That is novel.
Notice how these are two different actions? That's how they are not the same thing. These are Two specifically different Actions under that section. Casting a Spell is not part of an Attack Action. It is it's own separate action.
I notice that the rules don't actually say that any action involving casting a spell does not count as an attack.. The rules actually say the opposite. So, while these are two different things, they are not mutually exclusive categories.
You are arguing against Something I never said. I never said that all spell casting counts as an attack.
I've pointed that out repeatedly and you keep willfully ignoring it.
When you combine the Bolded Section with the fact that Cast a Spell above is a completely different action from the Attack Action. Then there is only one result from this. Any attacks, Including Weapon Attacks, Are merely a function of a spell and not their own action. They Exist Entirely within the Cast a Spell Action unless spell specifies otherwise.
That makes no sense. But, thanks for acknowledging that your argument is based on your own interpretation of the rules and not actually RAW.
Huh. So, Wren, you are still trying to argue that a feature that modifies the attack action to allow you to cast a spell as part of your extra attacks turns all spells no matter what into attack actions? That is novel.
I explicitly said the opposite. [REDACTED]
Notes: Please keep posts respectful and constructive.
The bladesinger ability does indeed allow you to cast a spell using a attack action.
However haste overrides this by stating that the attack action can only be used to make a weapon attack, not a spell.
You may argue that bladesinger overrides this by stating it replaces a weapon attack; however I would say that it's the other way around, normally bladesinger allows you to cast a spell but haste overrides bladesinger's ability to do this, because you must make a weapon attack that cannot be replaced with a spell (otherwise it wouldn't be a weapon attack).
I say this because haste is a spell, which are naturally more specific than constantly on abilities, and that if haste overrides the other part of Bladesinger's extra attack (the you can attack twice bit), then it should override all of the bladesinger's extra attack (the replacing a attack with a spell)
However I, again, concede that it doesn't say which is more specific, I just believe this version makes far more sense than the alternative due to the reasons above.
And, not for the first time, I'll point out that if you want to be consistent, you also need to ban the Haste action from shoving or grappling. Both shoves and grapples use a special rule to replace a weapon attack (neither shove nor grapple is a weapon attack), just as the Bladesinger cantrip ability does. Either all three should work, or none of them should.
I explicitly said the opposite. Nevertheless, I'm glad to see whenever DnD is picked up by someone such as yourself whose native language isn't English.
Three things:
The books are all available in multiple languages.
You don't know whether anyone reads, speaks, or writes English as a first, second, or even third language.
If you're going to resort to insults, then I'm invoking Hanlon's razor and will treat you accordingly.
As we have all tried to tell you, it does not matter if a spell makes use of a weapon attack because you are casting a spell. [Tooltip Not Found] is its own action. It is wholly distinct from the Attack action. And it is the Attack that haste grants an additional use of. What's more, haste includes in parenthesis, "one weapon attack only." This means if someone has Extra Attack, they cannot benefit from it for this additional Attack.
We also know that spells which include weapon attacks are not only weapon attacks. They are something more. That something more is expressly prohibited by the spell. It doesn't matter if a spell, like booming blade, is an attack. It's not usable with this Attack. And there is a difference.
I explicitly said the opposite. Nevertheless, I'm glad to see whenever DnD is picked up by someone such as yourself whose native language isn't English.
Three things:
The books are all available in multiple languages.
You don't know whether anyone reads, speaks, or writes English as a first, second, or even third language.
If you're going to resort to insults, then I'm invoking Hanlon's razor and will treat you accordingly.
As we have all tried to tell you, it does not matter if a spell makes use of a weapon attack because you are casting a spell. [Tooltip Not Found] is its own action. It is wholly distinct from the Attack action. And it is the Attack that haste grants an additional use of. What's more, haste includes in parenthesis, "one weapon attack only." This means if someone has Extra Attack, they cannot benefit from it for this additional Attack.
We also know that spells which include weapon attacks are not only weapon attacks. They are something more. That something more is expressly prohibited by the spell. It doesn't matter if a spell, like booming blade, is an attack. It's not usable with this Attack. And there is a difference.
You do not get to take the moral highground while ignoring that my position has been consistently straw-manned.
If that straw-manning was deliberate, then it was hostile and intended to create a hostile environment.
If it wasn’t deliberate, but rather comes down to a lack of skill with the English language, then my comments that the person building straw-men should still feel welcome despite that person being wrong, is warranted.
The bladesinger ability does indeed allow you to cast a spell using a attack action.
However haste overrides this by stating that the attack action can only be used to make a weapon attack, not a spell.
You may argue that bladesinger overrides this by stating it replaces a weapon attack; however I would say that it's the other way around, normally bladesinger allows you to cast a spell but haste overrides bladesinger's ability to do this, because you must make a weapon attack that cannot be replaced with a spell (otherwise it wouldn't be a weapon attack).
I say this because haste is a spell, which are naturally more specific than constantly on abilities, and that if haste overrides the other part of Bladesinger's extra attack (the you can attack twice bit), then it should override all of the bladesinger's extra attack (the replacing a attack with a spell)
However I, again, concede that it doesn't say which is more specific, I just believe this version makes far more sense than the alternative due to the reasons above.
And, not for the first time, I'll point out that if you want to be consistent, you also need to ban the Haste action from shoving or grappling. Both shoves and grapples use a special rule to replace a weapon attack (neither shove nor grapple is a weapon attack), just as the Bladesinger cantrip ability does. Either all three should work, or none of them should.
No. That's not how it works. Your talking about two entirely different abilities given by entirely different things. And I believe you've been told that in the thread. One rule allowing one thing does not mean that another rule allowing something else automatically mean that if one works that they all should work.
That being said. Shove and Grapple don't work. Haste specifically excludes them. So your argument doesn't matter anyway.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In fact, under "Making an Attack," it says,
It sure does look like it is saying that making an attack roll as part of a spell is an attack.
This is willful misunderstanding on your part. It is non-correctable. An attack is not the attack action.
If casting a cantrip (even specifically booming blade) isn't usually taking the attack action (i.e. you normally can't replace an attack with a cantrip when you have extra attack, for example) then why is it in the haste case when no text indicates that change within haste?
Also, if the attack you make using booming blade requires you to use your action, you couldn't actually take that attack since you've already spent your action casting the spell in the first place.
Casting a cantrip can be an attack when you make an attack roll. But that's not the issue. When it comes to rules interactions in D&D, specific beats general. Always.
The spell haste specifically only allows for taking one additional, "Attack (one weapon attack only)." So, if you're going to argue that the bladesinger's Extra Attack is more specific, then we'd like to see your reasoning.
Yes, specific trumps general. The rules for Haste are general compared to the rules for Booming Blade (which belongs to the rare number of cantrips whose casting is a weapon attach with a single weapon).
Except for that haste only allows for a weapon attack via the Attack action, not using the [Tooltip Not Found] action to attack with a weapon because that just happens to be the somatic component.
To put it another way, the Extra Attack feature cannot apply to this additional attack. So the substitution isn't possible.
EDIT: When you cast booming blade or green-flame blade, you aren't only making a weapon attack. You're doing more than that. The spell haste doesn't allow for that. It is a very specific addition to the normal limit on performable actions.
I’m still waiting for any of you to quote a rule which says that casting a spell can’t be part of an attack action. Give book, page, and quite.
Against my better judgement, I'm going to go in-depth on this. First, the bladesinger's revised Extra Attack.
The ability to cast a cantrip is incredibly powerful, and limiting this discussion to just one or two spells is a disservice.
If I want to cast green-flame blade, and potentially hit three targets in one turn, I can. If I want to cast lightning lure to reel in a target just outside my melee reach so I can hit them with my sword, I can. If I want to cast fire bolt to tag someone 100 feet away, I can. If I want to cast blade ward so I have resistance to Bludgeoning, Piercing, and Slashing damage for one round, I can.
The bladesinger's Extra Attack feature allows for any substitution. But the haste spell does not allow for any substitution. It only grants permission for, "one weapon attack only." You cannot combine the weapon attack with anything else; not even a spell which includes a weapon attack. Because then it's not only a weapon attack; it's something more.
No one here has said that, when you attack with booming blade or green-flame blade, you aren't also making a weapon attack. You are, and therein lies the problem. You cannot have an also.
Intentionally misunderstanding is great. By the way, wren, you are still confusing making an attack and taking the attack.
The Attack action is its own thing.
Haste has a capitalized Attack, so it's referring to the action and not any old attack. Just because a spell might have an attack roll, that doesn't mean you are using the Attack action. The [Tooltip Not Found] action is the very next one in the chapter.
If you'll notice, the game draws a distinction between weapon attacks (a paladin's Divine Smite) and spell attacks (scorching ray). You can even see it in creature stat blocks, like the ankheg and the banshee. And the wizard, after all, does have a spell attack modifier included in its Spellcasting feature.
[REDACTED]
By the way you're choosing to look at Booming blade, it seems like you're saying that you can use Booming Blade with any weapon attack. So a Fighter could use Booming Blade with each of their extra attack features, basically letting them to do 16d8+(Modifier x4) worth of damage every turn if they were wielding a longsword. This seems silly that you would believe this to be the case. However, it seems more like willful obstinance at this point because you don't want to admit to being wrong twice, but here you go with links and such.
Player's Handbook, Chapter 9, Actions in Combat. Here is the link.
The first line of this section reads "When you take your action on your turn, you can take ONE of the actions presented here, an action you gained from your class or a special feature, or an action that you improvise." As you read further on the "Attack" action is a separate Action from the "Cast a Spell" action.
With the spell (Yes it is in fact a spell. If you want to argue that go look up what a cantrip is first) Booming Blade, "you brandish the weapon used in the spell’s casting and make a melee attack". This means that you've cast the spell first then you attack with a weapon, not make a weapon attack and then used booming blade with it such as you would with the Paladin's Smite.
As Haste does not allow you to use it's special action to "Cast a Spell", you are unable to use Booming Blade.
Below, I'm going to repeat my position regarding Extra Attack and Bladesiger. I thought I'd been specific about it earlier. I guess not.
This is a quote from the Bladesinger rules. Note that it says that you are able to replace one of "those attacks" with a cantrip. That implies that you can't replace any attack with a cantrip, only one of "those attacks."
My postion is that a Bladesinger cannot, in general, spend ANY attack he has from ANY source with ANY cantrip,
Okay, now let me clear up another point?
Scroll back through my comments. Do you see me ever argue that an attack can, in general, be replaced with Firebolt or Chill Touch or Acid Spray?
No. I am specifically discussing Booming Blade.
I do not believe that there is a general rule game-wide that any cantrip can be done with any attack gained by any means. My position is very specific. It is that Booming Blade can be done as the weapon attack granted by Haste.
I do believe that this discussion would benefit if we all do two things.
1.) Understand what the other person is actually arguing
2.) Assume that they are arguing in good faith
[REDACTED] Direct Quotes under Actions in Combat.
Notice how these are two different actions? That's how they are not the same thing. These are Two specifically different Actions under that section. Casting a Spell is not part of an Attack Action. It is it's own separate action.
This is a direct Copy from Chapter 10 on Casting a spell. When you combine the Bolded Section with the fact that Cast a Spell above is a completely different action from the Attack Action. Then there is only one result from this. Any attacks, Including Weapon Attacks, Are merely a function of a spell and not their own action. They Exist Entirely within the Cast a Spell Action unless spell specifies otherwise.
So this means something else on top of that. Not only does Haste's Specificity block the use of the cantrip on the haste action. But Booming Blade also blocks it because of it's generality. Which your willfully ignoring.
And just so I don't have to hear you say yet again "Give me a page number or your lying" in effect. I'm going to do you one better.
Combat - Player's Handbook - Sources - D&D Beyond (dndbeyond.com)
This is the Direct DDB link to the Chapter 9 Entry of Actions in Combat. But then I'm sure you'll give me "I don't have access to that!"
So you'll be interested to know that actions in Combat is Page 192, Half way down the left Hand column. With the Attack Action and Cast a Spell being the first two entries under that section.
And just as further proof beyond that. Let's look at Making an Attack on page 194.
Again one, more, time.
The bladesinger ability does indeed allow you to cast a spell using a attack action.
However haste overrides this by stating that the attack action can only be used to make a weapon attack, not a spell.
You may argue that bladesinger overrides this by stating it replaces a weapon attack; however I would say that it's the other way around, normally bladesinger allows you to cast a spell but haste overrides bladesinger's ability to do this, because you must make a weapon attack that cannot be replaced with a spell (otherwise it wouldn't be a weapon attack).
I say this because haste is a spell, which are naturally more specific than constantly on abilities, and that if haste overrides the other part of Bladesinger's extra attack (the you can attack twice bit), then it should override all of the bladesinger's extra attack (the replacing a attack with a spell)
However I, again, concede that it doesn't say which is more specific, I just believe this version makes far more sense than the alternative due to the reasons above.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
Huh. So, Wren, you are still trying to argue that a feature that modifies the attack action to allow you to cast a spell as part of your extra attacks turns all spells no matter what into attack actions? That is novel.
I notice that the rules don't actually say that any action involving casting a spell does not count as an attack.. The rules actually say the opposite. So, while these are two different things, they are not mutually exclusive categories.
You are arguing against Something I never said. I never said that all spell casting counts as an attack.
I've pointed that out repeatedly and you keep willfully ignoring it.
That makes no sense. But, thanks for acknowledging that your argument is based on your own interpretation of the rules and not actually RAW.
I explicitly said the opposite. [REDACTED]
And, not for the first time, I'll point out that if you want to be consistent, you also need to ban the Haste action from shoving or grappling. Both shoves and grapples use a special rule to replace a weapon attack (neither shove nor grapple is a weapon attack), just as the Bladesinger cantrip ability does. Either all three should work, or none of them should.
Three things:
As we have all tried to tell you, it does not matter if a spell makes use of a weapon attack because you are casting a spell. [Tooltip Not Found] is its own action. It is wholly distinct from the Attack action. And it is the Attack that haste grants an additional use of. What's more, haste includes in parenthesis, "one weapon attack only." This means if someone has Extra Attack, they cannot benefit from it for this additional Attack.
We also know that spells which include weapon attacks are not only weapon attacks. They are something more. That something more is expressly prohibited by the spell. It doesn't matter if a spell, like booming blade, is an attack. It's not usable with this Attack. And there is a difference.
You do not get to take the moral highground while ignoring that my position has been consistently straw-manned.
If that straw-manning was deliberate, then it was hostile and intended to create a hostile environment.
If it wasn’t deliberate, but rather comes down to a lack of skill with the English language, then my comments that the person building straw-men should still feel welcome despite that person being wrong, is warranted.
No. That's not how it works. Your talking about two entirely different abilities given by entirely different things. And I believe you've been told that in the thread. One rule allowing one thing does not mean that another rule allowing something else automatically mean that if one works that they all should work.
That being said. Shove and Grapple don't work. Haste specifically excludes them. So your argument doesn't matter anyway.