Hi, This post is meant to be a discussion and I understand that my viewpoint is either amongst the few or just my own. In this post I will often refer to the rulings of related parts of the game to defend my claim (I would hyperlink them, but I'm new to threads. Sorry). Please keep discussion related to the discussion/topics being mentioned rather than calling the opposition confused or stating that they to reread the same paragraph multiple times.
Out of curiosity, I'm going to add a poll to this post to see how the people generally feel about the subject. :D
The main topic that I am posting about is whether the new Rouge "Soulknife" subclass and the 3rd level feature of "Psychic Blades." For ease of access I've attached the current rulings below:
"You can manifest your psionic power as shimmering blades of psychic energy. Whenever you take the Attack action, you can manifest a psychic blade from your free hand and make the attack with that blade. This magic blade is a simple melee weapon with the finesse and thrown properties. It has a normal range of 60 feet and no long range, and on a hit, it deals psychic damage equal to 1d6 plus the ability modifier you used for the attack roll. The blade vanishes immediately after it hits or misses its target, and it leaves no mark on its target if it deals damage.
After you attack with the blade, you can make a melee or ranged weapon attack with a second psychic blade as a bonus action on the same turn, provided your other hand is free to create it. The damage die of this bonus attack is 1d4, instead of 1d6."
Main Discussion:Do the basic rules and game mechanics support the use of psychic blades when making an Opportunity Attack?
Due to the wording used in Psychic Blades, I believe that a majority of the community has accepted the term "Attack action" as meaning that this ability can only be used when the one action on their turn is used to make an attack and these blades cannot be manifested unless the "specific" requirements are met above.
According to the Ch.9 of the Basic Rules, the most common action usually involves using weapon, such as a sword, bow or psychic blade to attack an enemy. This most common form of attack action is performed using the one action the character gets per turn. In the "Making an Attack" section of Ch.9 states that "If there's ever any question whether something you're doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack." This is where the discussion ends for most individuals as the wording on psychic blades does not specifically state the uncommon attack action methods such as Opportunity Attacks.
Further in this section in "Melee Attacks," the requirements to perform a Opportunity Attack is that "you use your reaction to make one melee attack against the provoking creature." As defined by the simple rule mentioned in the "Making an Attack" section, an Opportunity Attack is an attack action since the player would have to make an attack roll even though a reaction is consumed instead.
The proceeding rebuttal to this claim is that an Opportunity Attack is a special form of an attack action and does not count as the blades can only be manifested using the one action to attack. However, nothing mentioned in the ruling stating that there is a difference between these attack actions and these "special" attack actions. Even "Shoving a Creature" is defined as using an Attack action to make a special melee attack to , well, shove a creature.
If a given the action, bonus or reaction action allows the player to make an attack roll, then that player is performing an attack action regardless of whether it is a normal or special melee attack in this instance. Therefor, Opportunity Attacks is an Attack action that can be used to manifest a psychic blade.
Please let me know your opinion on this topic! I am relatively new to D&D and I would to discuss this topic with others from the community! If there a rule that impedes my statement, please let me know! I would love to learn more about the game and how these strange interactions work together!
Sorry but the feature literally does not allow this:
Psychic Blades
3rd-level Soulknife feature
You can manifest your psionic power as shimmering blades of psychic energy. Whenever you take the Attack action, you can manifest a psychic blade from your free hand and make the attack with that blade. This magic blade is a simple melee weapon with the finesse and thrown properties. It has a normal range of 60 feet and no long range, and on a hit, it deals psychic damage equal to 1d6 plus the ability modifier you used for the attack roll. The blade vanishes immediately after it hits or misses its target, and it leaves no mark on its target if it deals damage.
After you attack with the blade, you can make a melee or ranged weapon attack with a second psychic blade as a bonus action on the same turn, provided your other hand is free to create it. The damage die of this bonus attack is 1d4, instead of 1d6.
This is a specific thing in the game, the Attack action is not "whenever you make an attack roll, or plan to attack" it is specifically the thing on your turn that uses your action. If you need more evidence go look at features like extra attack. They don't allow you to make Multiple attacks on AoO because you have the feature.
A lot of your argument misconstrues a lot of the actual rules and conflates things. First is an attack roll is not at all connected to an attack action in A=B means B=A. When you make the attack action you make one or multiple attacks, but not all attacks are attack actions. For the case you bring up, an AoO is an attack that uses your reaction. Reactions are specific and different from actions in their own right. These are two different game terms that are not interchangeable. If something requires a reaction is cannot be used as an action, and if something requires an action it cannot be used in a reaction.
It's unfortunate that you can't leave a psychic blade in your hand beyond your Attack action, but the wording is pretty explicit that the blade "vanishes immediately after it hits or misses its target," and only manifests "when you take the Attack action." But the issue you're having seems to be less about the balance of this particular ability, than it is about misunderstanding the action economy in 5E.
It is true that 5th edition has some poorly chosen wording for its basic terms: there are three types of "actions" in the action economy of a turn (not including movement), the "Action", the "Bonus Action," and the "Reaction." Everyone has an "Action" every turn, which they can use to take one of the default "Action" actions in PHB Chapter 9 "Actions in Combat": Attack, Dodge, Dash, Disengage, [Tooltip Not Found], [Tooltip Not Found], Hide, Search, Ready, and Help. Your class, race, and other features may also give you other special actions that you can take using your Action.
Your "Reaction" is different from your "Action", and can't be used to take one of those "Action" actions I listed above. By default, the only general "Reaction" action that characters have is the Opportunity Attack.
There are no default uses for a "Bonus Action", apart from Two-Weapon Fightingif you're holding the right equipment. Again, your class, race, and other features may give you others.
So you might make an attack as part of the Attack action, and also as a Bonus Action with Two-Weapon Fighting, and then also when your enemy runs away as an Opportunity Attack. But while all of these are types of "actions" you might take to make an "attack," only one was made using the "Attack Action."
It would be helpful if 5E at least capitalized these terms the way I have, to distinguish between various actions, the Action unit, and the Attack Action. I can't even imagine trying to parse what I just wrote above if English wasn't your first language, for example... But, just stick with it, the terms will get less confusing with time.
It would be helpful if 5E at least capitalized these terms the way I have, to distinguish between various actions, the Action unit, and the Attack Action. I can't even imagine trying to parse what I just wrote above if English wasn't your first language, for example... But, just stick with it, the terms will get less confusing with time.
Let's not pretend that capitals would help people in differantiating between the standard use of the word action and a game term Action.
But yes 5e is written in a less formal game wording but it does make it easier to read, just sometimes people tend to read words the way they want to read them.
I think it gets very confusing when you come across things like a Tortle's Shell Defense that describes "the only action you can take is a bonus action to..." huh!? But bonus actions aren't actions, though they're a type of action...
Same problem with Incapacitated. Can't take actions or reactions... so can take bonus actions? Or, bonus actions are a type of action even though they aren't an action, but then, why was reaction spelled out but not bonus action, since both bonus action and reaction are actions that aren't actions...
Capitalizing Action/Bonus Action/Reaction vs. actions would help. Better editing so that fundamental game terms only had one context would be even better, it's true.
It would be helpful if 5E at least capitalized these terms the way I have, to distinguish between various actions, the Action unit, and the Attack Action. I can't even imagine trying to parse what I just wrote above if English wasn't your first language, for example... But, just stick with it, the terms will get less confusing with time.
Let's not pretend that capitals would help people in differantiating between the standard use of the word action and a game term Action.
But yes 5e is written in a less formal game wording but it does make it easier to read, just sometimes people tend to read words the way they want to read them.
There are two basic schools of thought for rules: 1. Write clear rules with unambiguous language so there's no argument over meaning. 2. Write plain language rules that rely on the people and the story to interpret appropriately.
Either one works very well, the problem comes when you try to do both.
”You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn, unless the bonus action's timing is specified, and anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action.”
still definitely poor editing.
kind of like how everything needed for stealth rules wise is all over the place. Crafting rules being in multiple different books. Incapacitation ending concentration along with other things not provided in the actual condition description.
It's unfortunate that you can't leave a psychic blade in your hand beyond your Attack action, but the wording is pretty explicit that the blade "vanishes immediately after it hits or misses its target," and only manifests "when you take the Attack action." But the issue you're having seems to be less about the balance of this particular ability, than it is about misunderstanding the action economy in 5E.
It is true that 5th edition has some poorly chosen wording for its basic terms: there are three types of "actions" in the action economy of a turn (not including movement), the "Action", the "Bonus Action," and the "Reaction." Everyone has an "Action" every turn, which they can use to take one of the default "Action" actions in PHB Chapter 9 "Actions in Combat": Attack, Dodge, Dash, Disengage, Cast a Spell, Use an Object, Hide, Search, Ready, and Help. Your class, race, and other features may also give you other special actions that you can take using your Action.
Your "Reaction" is different from your "Action", and can't be used to take one of those "Action" actions I listed above. By default, the only general "Reaction" action that characters have is the Opportunity Attack.
There are no default uses for a "Bonus Action", apart from Two-Weapon Fightingif you're holding the right equipment. Again, your class, race, and other features may give you others.
So you might make an attack as part of the Attack action, and also as a Bonus Action with Two-Weapon Fighting, and then also when your enemy runs away as an Opportunity Attack. But while all of these are types of "actions" you might take to make an "attack," only one was made using the "Attack Action."
It would be helpful if 5E at least capitalized these terms the way I have, to distinguish between various actions, the Action unit, and the Attack Action. I can't even imagine trying to parse what I just wrote above if English wasn't your first language, for example... But, just stick with it, the terms will get less confusing with time.
I believe that they use the word action for both the "3 types" the act of doing something and that's why this ruling is unclear. Maybe these "3 types" could be placed by a some sorts of tier like speed? I played yu-gi-oh a little bit and there are different casting speeds that couldn't be beat unless by a faster spell in short.
Melee attacks in the basic rules are considered an Attack action as they are used in the Action section that you previously stated. However, Opportunity Attack allows you to make a melee attack (an Attack action) by using your reaction. Opportunity Attack does not use the reaction to attack the enemy, instead it gives the "opportunity" [;D] to perform an attack roll (an Attack action) to actually attack the enemy whether you hit or miss the target. In short, the reaction is not used to attack, but rather to allow you to make an attack. Which supports the ruling of "Making an Attack" (again, sorry) that states that making an attack roll is making an "act of attack" or making an "attack action."
As for your comment about the Bonus action attacks involving two-handed weapons, psychic blades, and I know Polearm Master lists an additional attack amongst various different qualifications. These bonus actions are still listed as a melee attack which is an Attack action. Although I will say that these acts are being done on your turn unlike an opportunity attack.
--------
Also, I'm not implying that performing a AoO with the psychic blades would allow a 1st and 2nd attack with the blades as that's not even a thing with two-weapon fighting. I may have misread a different comment, but I wanted to clarify it anyway. Plus this would not work as bonus actions can only be used on your turn, right?
It would be helpful if 5E at least capitalized these terms the way I have, to distinguish between various actions, the Action unit, and the Attack Action. I can't even imagine trying to parse what I just wrote above if English wasn't your first language, for example... But, just stick with it, the terms will get less confusing with time.
Let's not pretend that capitals would help people in differantiating between the standard use of the word action and a game term Action.
But yes 5e is written in a less formal game wording but it does make it easier to read, just sometimes people tend to read words the way they want to read them.
Although a simple Capital letter would not change much, a hyper link could be attached the the "Action" and define what a game action is in comparison to a "role-playing" action.
This in theory could be a simple temporary fix to this issue, although I would strive for something better personally.
”You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn, unless the bonus action's timing is specified, and anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action.”
still definitely poor editing.
kind of like how everything needed for stealth rules wise is all over the place. Crafting rules being in multiple different books. Incapacitation ending concentration along with other things not provided in the actual condition description.
bad editing.
I agree that this is a bit confusing, but I understand that these books are not always written by the same individuals and that's why there is such variation between the wording used between them. Although, I believe that setting some standardized terms would help resolve this issue at least to some degree.
I believe that if anything this thread has shown that the word "action" is used in a variety of ways throughout the ruling which does not clarify what truly is and is not an "action."
I believe that this stealth ruling is implying these "actions" (underlined above) are the "acts" (?) that you can attempt using your bonus action. If that clarifies anything.
Melee attacks in the basic rules are considered an Attack action as they are used in the Action section that you previously stated. However, Opportunity Attack allows you to make a melee attack (an Attack action) by using your reaction. Opportunity Attack does not use the reaction to attack the enemy, instead it gives the "opportunity" [;D] to perform an attack roll (an Attack action) to actually attack the enemy whether you hit or miss the target. In short, the reaction is not used to attack, but rather to allow you to make an attack. Which supports the ruling of "Making an Attack" (again, sorry) that states that making an attack roll is making an "act of attack" or making an "attack action."
Yeah no this is incorrect. Melee attacks are not anything, they CAN be an attack, BA, or reaction depending on what is done. You are again conflating rules. Making a melee attack is nothing unless it is done as part of some action, a specific bonus action, or a reaction like an AoO. So this is where you need to read and understand more. Reactions can NOT do any "actions" they can only DO things that are a reaction, again an AoO is not an action or Action, it IS a reaction that allows a melee attack.
As I quoted in my first post, the blades are only formed when you take the Attack Action, something that can only be done on your turn. Not on a bonus action, and not on a reaction. Since the feature directly calls out the Attack action it is not capable of being used at any other time. Again you need more proof let me list all the correct rules.
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.
Reactions
Certain special abilities, spells, and situations allow you to take a special action called a reaction. A reaction is an instant response to a trigger of some kind, which can occur on your turn or on someone else's. The opportunity attack, described later in this chapter, is the most common type of reaction.
When you take a reaction, you can't take another one until the start of your next turn. If the reaction interrupts another creature's turn, that creature can continue its turn right after the reaction.
Opportunity Attacks
In a fight, everyone is constantly watching for a chance to strike an enemy who is fleeing or passing by. Such a strike is called an opportunity attack.
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 avoid provoking an opportunity attack by taking the Disengage action. You also don't provoke an opportunity attack when you teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction. For example, you don't provoke an opportunity attack if an explosion hurls you out of a foe's reach or if gravity causes
Opportunity attacks use your reaction, not your action so anything queuing off of attack actions cannot be used AND in the description is even tells you the only thing you can do it make one melee attack against the creature. This reaction mentions no use of any for of actions it simply lets you make a melee attack - that is it.
It would be helpful if 5E at least capitalized these terms the way I have, to distinguish between various actions, the Action unit, and the Attack Action. I can't even imagine trying to parse what I just wrote above if English wasn't your first language, for example... But, just stick with it, the terms will get less confusing with time.
Let's not pretend that capitals would help people in differantiating between the standard use of the word action and a game term Action.
But yes 5e is written in a less formal game wording but it does make it easier to read, just sometimes people tend to read words the way they want to read them.
Although a simple Capital letter would not change much, a hyper link could be attached the the "Action" and define what a game action is in comparison to a "role-playing" action.
This in theory could be a simple temporary fix to this issue, although I would strive for something better personally.
So like the fact that in the literal text of the physic blade is links directly to what anAttack action is (that is what the green text is). Making an attack is NOT an action it is simply the rules for how to attack. That section is clearly sperate from all the listed actions in the "actions in combat" part of the chapter so you cannot interchange the rules in "how to attack" with the part of the rules explaining actions.
Actions in Combat
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. Many monsters have action options of their own in their stat blocks.
When you describe an action not detailed elsewhere in the rules, the DM tells you whether that action is possible and what kind of roll you need to make, if any, to determine success or failure.
I'm confused but what you are trying to bring up with "role-play" actions since we are talking about the strict part of the rules that are well defined: combat.
Here is the biggest issue in your understandings - making an "act of attack" or making an "attack action." - This is not interchangeable. The reason is pretty clear because attacking can be used for many different things and it stands to reason that if something says "you can make a attack as a bonus action" that the act of attacking with you BA is pretty clearly NOT the same as making an "attack action."
You are reading the section on "making an attack" as some sort of action iniself where it never even uses that phrase, where as the actions in combat call out specifically the "attack action" and other area like reaction call out "the ability to make on melee attack" - again making an attack is not an action because the rules in that section are specifically for how the game resolves an attack, but that does not make all attack rolls the equivalent of the "attack action" called out by features or the earlier action section.
Please look at this feature of fighters and tell me that they can make extra attacks when they make an AoO:
Extra Attack
Beginning at 5th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn.
Same wording as you rogues action - specially calling out attack actions in the feature but under your idea of the rules this would mean a lvl 20 fighter can attack 4 times on their turn AND 4 times when they make an AoO
Melee attacks in the basic rules are considered an Attack action as they are used in the Action section that you previously stated. However, Opportunity Attack allows you to make a melee attack (an Attack action) by using your reaction. Opportunity Attack does not use the reaction to attack the enemy, instead it gives the "opportunity" [;D] to perform an attack roll (an Attack action) to actually attack the enemy whether you hit or miss the target. In short, the reaction is not used to attack, but rather to allow you to make an attack. Which supports the ruling of "Making an Attack" (again, sorry) that states that making an attack roll is making an "act of attack" or making an "attack action."
Yeah no this is incorrect. Melee attacks are not anything, they CAN be an attack, BA, or reaction depending on what is done. You are again conflating rules. Making a melee attack is nothing unless it is done as part of some action, a specific bonus action, or a reaction like an AoO. So this is where you need to read and understand more. Reactions can NOT do any "actions" they can only DO things that are a reaction, again an AoO is not an action or Action, it IS a reaction that allows a melee attack.
As I quoted in my first post, the blades are only formed when you take the Attack Action, something that can only be done on your turn. Not on a bonus action, and not on a reaction. Since the feature directly calls out the Attack action it is not capable of being used at any other time. Again you need more proof let me list all the correct rules.
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.
Reactions
Certain special abilities, spells, and situations allow you to take a special action called a reaction. A reaction is an instant response to a trigger of some kind, which can occur on your turn or on someone else's. The opportunity attack, described later in this chapter, is the most common type of reaction.
When you take a reaction, you can't take another one until the start of your next turn. If the reaction interrupts another creature's turn, that creature can continue its turn right after the reaction.
Opportunity Attacks
In a fight, everyone is constantly watching for a chance to strike an enemy who is fleeing or passing by. Such a strike is called an opportunity attack.
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 avoid provoking an opportunity attack by taking the Disengage action. You also don't provoke an opportunity attack when you teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction. For example, you don't provoke an opportunity attack if an explosion hurls you out of a foe's reach or if gravity causes
Opportunity attacks use your reaction, not your action so anything queuing off of attack actions cannot be used AND in the description is even tells you the only thing you can do it make one melee attack against the creature. This reaction mentions no use of any for of actions it simply lets you make a melee attack - that is it.
I would like to state that we are agreeing on what a AoO is and that it uses a reaction over an action. If anything I was only trying to communicate that further with my previous comments, so I'm sorry if I was misleading or confusing.
I believe that a "Melee Attack," although officially/clearly is not stated in the rules as anything like you stated, the melee attack section a sub section to "making an attack" meaning that it (obviously) is a form of attack. Melee attacks require an attack roll and any action, or "act" as I've been trying to discern their use of the word "action," that requires an attack roll is an attack action.
This is leading to an AoO -> using reaction and not using an action -> using Attack roll for an "act" of attack -> "act" of attack becoming an attack action.
--- EDIT:
Also the "Attack" section states that it is the most common action of attacking is using the one action a turn to attack. It does not state that an attack action cannot be performed using other types actions or "act" ( which I know goes against what I just agreed with you on).
Please look at this feature of fighters and tell me that they can make extra attacks when they make an AoO:
Extra Attack
Beginning at 5th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn.
Same wording as you rogues action - specially calling out attack actions in the feature but under your idea of the rules this would mean a lvl 20 fighter can attack 4 times on their turn AND 4 times when they make an AoO
Again, As I have commented on other comments and quoted them. This thread has become more about the wording used to describe "action" and the other variants such as "Attack Action." The definition of the word "action" leaves quite a bit of interpretation when applied to many of the rules at moments, especially when the word is also used a key mechanic in combat and then used in other rulings that are not specifically combat related.
For instance, Psychic Blades does not specifically state "an Attack action on your turn," this implies that this "act" or "action" could be performed on another characters' turn after a reaction. This is why I have not been referring to Extra Attack as this specifically only works on your turn.
I also stated that in a previous comment that I made that I am not implying that AoO would allow multiple attacks. Plus Opportunity Attack specifically states that you can only make 1 melee attack. Plus, as previously mentioned that Extra Attack only works on your turn anyway.
The blades are only formed when you take the Attack action and disappear immediately after the attack. Therefore, they cannot be used to make Opportunity Attacks per RAW. Opportunity Attacks use the Reaction, not the Attack Action.
It would be nice if they were more persistent as I feel it limits out-of-combat roleplay aspects such as popping an incorporeal blade into existence, flipping it around in your hand, and then making it disappear. This is one example of class flavour limited by the rules as, technically, this is not possible per RAW.
Melee attacks in the basic rules are considered an Attack action as they are used in the Action section that you previously stated. However, Opportunity Attack allows you to make a melee attack (an Attack action) by using your reaction. Opportunity Attack does not use the reaction to attack the enemy, instead it gives the "opportunity" [;D] to perform an attack roll (an Attack action) to actually attack the enemy whether you hit or miss the target. In short, the reaction is not used to attack, but rather to allow you to make an attack. Which supports the ruling of "Making an Attack" (again, sorry) that states that making an attack roll is making an "act of attack" or making an "attack action."
Yeah no this is incorrect. Melee attacks are not anything, they CAN be an attack, BA, or reaction depending on what is done. You are again conflating rules. Making a melee attack is nothing unless it is done as part of some action, a specific bonus action, or a reaction like an AoO. So this is where you need to read and understand more. Reactions can NOT do any "actions" they can only DO things that are a reaction, again an AoO is not an action or Action, it IS a reaction that allows a melee attack.
As I quoted in my first post, the blades are only formed when you take the Attack Action, something that can only be done on your turn. Not on a bonus action, and not on a reaction. Since the feature directly calls out the Attack action it is not capable of being used at any other time. Again you need more proof let me list all the correct rules.
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.
Reactions
Certain special abilities, spells, and situations allow you to take a special action called a reaction. A reaction is an instant response to a trigger of some kind, which can occur on your turn or on someone else's. The opportunity attack, described later in this chapter, is the most common type of reaction.
When you take a reaction, you can't take another one until the start of your next turn. If the reaction interrupts another creature's turn, that creature can continue its turn right after the reaction.
Opportunity Attacks
In a fight, everyone is constantly watching for a chance to strike an enemy who is fleeing or passing by. Such a strike is called an opportunity attack.
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 avoid provoking an opportunity attack by taking the Disengage action. You also don't provoke an opportunity attack when you teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction. For example, you don't provoke an opportunity attack if an explosion hurls you out of a foe's reach or if gravity causes
Opportunity attacks use your reaction, not your action so anything queuing off of attack actions cannot be used AND in the description is even tells you the only thing you can do it make one melee attack against the creature. This reaction mentions no use of any for of actions it simply lets you make a melee attack - that is it.
I would like to state that we are agreeing on what a AoO is and that it uses a reaction over an action. If anything I was only trying to communicate that further with my previous comments, so I'm sorry if I was misleading or confusing.
I believe that a "Melee Attack," although officially/clearly is not stated in the rules as anything like you stated, the melee attack section a sub section to "making an attack" meaning that it (obviously) is a form of attack. Melee attacks require an attack roll and any action, or "act" as I've been trying to discern their use of the word "action," that requires an attack roll is an attack action.
This is leading to an AoO -> using reaction and not using an action -> using Attack roll for an "act" of attack -> "act" of attack becoming an attack action.
--- EDIT:
Also the "Attack" section states that it is the most common action of attacking is using the one action a turn to attack. It does not state that an attack action cannot be performed using other types actions or "act" ( which I know goes against what I just agreed with you on).
This might be where the confusion comes in. When talking about combat, the word 'action' is very specific and refers to a very specific set of things you can do:
When Psychic Blades, (or any other feature) refers to the attack action specifically, it refers to only what is in the red box, and that is it. Action cannot (and should not) be interpreted as an 'action' or an 'act' but very specifically one of the things in that list, no ifs ands or buts. Once you accept this, everything else falls into place. Reactions (such as AoO) are not in this list, and therefore do not qualify for the use of the psychic blade feature.
This might be where the confusion comes in. When talking about combat, the word 'action' is very specific and refers to a very specific set of things you can do:
When Psychic Blades, (or any other feature) refers to the attack action specifically, it refers to only what is in the red box, and that is it. Action cannot (and should not) be interpreted as an 'action' or an 'act' but very specifically one of the things in that list, no ifs ands or buts. Once you accept this, everything else falls into place. Reactions (such as AoO) are not in this list, and therefore do not qualify for the use of the psychic blade feature.
If anything, I think that I am being unclear with my "action" and "act" explanations. My apologies as I'm not the best a describing my thoughts with words. I will try to explain from another angle.
I understand that under the "actions" section that it specifically mentions "Attack" and using your one action a turn to perform an attack action. The rulings however, or at least to my knowledge, does not state that an "attack action" is only when the one action per turn is used. Under the "Attack" section of "Actions in combat" it states the using this one action a turn is the most common form of the attack action and does not specifically state that an attack action has to derive only from using the one action per turn. These rulings mention nothing about it being specifically on your turn to perform an attack action.
Again this is a wording issue, looking at the ruling of the "Actions in Combat" it states the follow:
"When you take your action [1st] on your turn, you can take one of the actions [2nd] presented here, an action* you gained from your class or a special feature, or an action* that you improvise. Many monsters have action* options of their own in their stat blocks."
The ruling above uses the word "action" with two different meanings. First use being the key interactive mechanic of combat and the second use(and the other proceeding uses or the word "action*") being the actual definition of the word: the fact or process of doing something, typically to achieve an aim; a thing done; an act. [definition acquired by searching "define action" in google]
---
The difference between the action used by the games mechanics and the word definition of action are not the same. The term action used by the game mechanics is used to create an interaction between characters.
This brings me to my next point there are no sections, again to my knowledge, that clearly state the difference of the actions (by definition) that can be performed using your action, bonus action or reaction interaction. I personally see these 3 types of interaction mechanics all falling under the same singular category of action (by interaction) that are only the means for ruling when a player can roleplay their actions (by definition). By definition of the word "action," any normal or special attack would be considered as a form of attack action.
As it has been previously stated, an attack is an attack action when you use your one action (an interaction) to perform this action (by definition) to swing your weapon. Following the same ruling of Two-Weapon Fighting, a second attack (action by definition) by swinging a dagger in your offhand can be performed by using your bonus action (an interaction). Why are individuals attached to the "bonus" tag of the "Bonus Action," when the interaction mechanic bonus action to attack performs in the same way that the interaction mechanic action to attack?
So, swinging a weapon at your target is an attack and the aim of my swing is my action (by definition). However a interactive mechanic, such as using an action, bonus action or reaction, must be used prior to my attempt to make the action (by definition) of attacking the target.
---
If I am being confusing again, please let me know!
This might be where the confusion comes in. When talking about combat, the word 'action' is very specific and refers to a very specific set of things you can do:
When Psychic Blades, (or any other feature) refers to the attack action specifically, it refers to only what is in the red box, and that is it. Action cannot (and should not) be interpreted as an 'action' or an 'act' but very specifically one of the things in that list, no ifs ands or buts. Once you accept this, everything else falls into place. Reactions (such as AoO) are not in this list, and therefore do not qualify for the use of the psychic blade feature.
If anything, I think that I am being unclear with my "action" and "act" explanations. My apologies as I'm not the best a describing my thoughts with words. I will try to explain from another angle.
I understand that under the "actions" section that it specifically mentions "Attack" and using your one action a turn to perform an attack action. The rulings however, or at least to my knowledge, does not state that an "attack action" is only when the one action per turn is used. Under the "Attack" section of "Actions in combat" it states the using this one action a turn is the most common form of the attack action and does not specifically state that an attack action has to derive only from using the one action per turn. These rulings mention nothing about it being specifically on your turn to perform an attack action.
Again this is a wording issue, looking at the ruling of the "Actions in Combat" it states the follow:
"When you take your action [1st] on your turn, you can take one of the actions [2nd] presented here, an action* you gained from your class or a special feature, or an action* that you improvise. Many monsters have action* options of their own in their stat blocks."
The ruling above uses the word "action" with two different meanings. First use being the key interactive mechanic of combat and the second use(and the other proceeding uses or the word "action*") being the actual definition of the word: the fact or process of doing something, typically to achieve an aim; a thing done; an act. [definition acquired by searching "define action" in google]
---
The difference between the action used by the games mechanics and the word definition of action are not the same. The term action used by the game mechanics is used to create an interaction between characters.
This brings me to my next point there are no sections, again to my knowledge, that clearly state the difference of the actions (by definition) that can be performed using your action, bonus action or reaction interaction. I personally see these 3 types of interaction mechanics all falling under the same singular category of action (by interaction) that are only the means for ruling when a player can roleplay their actions (by definition). By definition of the word "action," any normal or special attack would be considered as a form of attack action.
As it has been previously stated, an attack is an attack action when you use your one action (an interaction) to perform this action (by definition) to swing your weapon. Following the same ruling of Two-Weapon Fighting, a second attack (action by definition) by swinging a dagger in your offhand can be performed by using your bonus action (an interaction). Why are individuals attached to the "bonus" tag of the "Bonus Action," when the interaction mechanic bonus action to attack performs in the same way that the interaction mechanic action to attack?
So, swinging a weapon at your target is an attack and the aim of my swing is my action (by definition). However a interactive mechanic, such as using an action, bonus action or reaction, must be used prior to my attempt to make the action (by definition) of attacking the target.
---
If I am being confusing again, please let me know!
The Rulings do specify that an attack action is only granted by using your action. if you read opportunity attacks granted by reaction:
Opportunity Attacks
In a fight, everyone is constantly watching for a chance to strike an enemy who is fleeing or passing by. Such a strike is called an opportunity attack.
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..."
At no point in that text does it ever mention attack action. the attack is specifically called an 'opportunity attack' and that allows you to make a 'melee attack'.
Now if Psychic blades said 'melee attack' OR if you could use your reaction to perform an 'attack action' it would work differently, but it does not.
Now lets look at the rest:
This brings me to my next point there are no sections, again to my knowledge, that clearly state the difference of the actions (by definition) that can be performed using your action, bonus action or reaction interaction. I personally see these 3 types of interaction mechanics all falling under the same singular category of action (by interaction) that are only the means for ruling when a player can roleplay their actions (by definition). By definition of the word "action," any normal or special attack would be considered as a form of attack action.
There very much are sections, the issue is that nearly all bonus actions and reactions (other than PHB two weapon fighting and opportunity attack) are granted by other specific rules that override the general rule, and are discussed in their relevant rules sections (some of which are not in the PHB and can therefore not be included in the PHB rules section, since you need to purchase those source books separately). Psychic blades is one such feature.
This 'category' of action(by interaction) that you created is not referenced anywhere in the game rules, all 3 are separate and only interact with each other when it is specifically referred to in a rule such as two weapon fighting.
As it has been previously stated, an attack is an attack action when you use your one action (an interaction) to perform this action (by definition) attack to swing your weapon. Following the same ruling of Two-Weapon Fighting, a second attack (action by definition by using your bonus action resource) by swinging a dagger in your offhand can be performed by using your bonus action (an interaction). Why are individuals attached to the "bonus" tag of the "Bonus Action," when the interaction mechanic bonus action to attack performs in the same way that the interaction mechanic action to attack?
Although they may appear to act in the same way, action and bonus action are two independent resources. With Two-Weapon Fighting, using your action to attack which grants you the opportunity to use your bonus action to attack (action used, bonus action used, 2 attacks made) is different to using your action to attack when you have the extra attack feature (action used, bonus action unused, 2 attacks made). The bonus tag for bonus action is to indicate that, indeed, these are very specific things you can do granted by very specific rules that override the general rule.
For another example:
Let's use Timmy the level 2 wizard. Timmy uses his action to dash (and his action is now used up). He cannot use his bonus action to do anything, unless he has a spell, class feature or feat that grants him things to do with his bonus action (such as expeditious retreat).
Now lets look at Ronny the level 2 rogue. Ronny has the class feature Cunning action:
Cunning Action
Starting at 2nd level, your quick thinking and agility allow you to move and act quickly. You can take a bonus action on each of your turns in combat. This action can be used only to take the Dash, Disengage, or Hide action.
So Ronny can use his class feature 'cunning action' to use his bonus action to dash (instead of using his action like Timmy) and can still use his action to attack, disengage, hide etc.
What this is alluding to is the idea of 'action economy' and how these rules change the possibilities, combinations and efficiency that characters can use as they gain new ways to use their actions/bonus actions/reactions..
At this point there have been numerous explanations from different people that are sound, if you still cannot understand and accept the approach we have illustrated, then I suggest you tweet Jeremy Crawford and hope you gives you a response.
Various class features, spells, and other abilities let you take an additional action on your turn called a bonus action.
So a bonus action is just a special type of action. So anything that stops you taking actions would also prevent you taking bonus actions (apparently this last bit is also explicitly stated in the Bonus Actions section, but shouldn't really be necessary).
At this point there have been numerous explanations from different people that are sound, if you still cannot understand and accept the approach we have illustrated, then I suggest you tweet Jeremy Crawford and hope you gives you a response.
In multiple sections and comments that I have made, I have been stating that this is discussion about the topic about the strange wording used on some of the D&D 5e rules. I am making a claim that is not follow the traditional viewpoint of a D&D player or DM and asking a question in hopes that others join me on discussing the subject. My statement claim is not officially apart of any rulings and I have never made the claim that they are.
When given a sound explanation, I acknowledge them and then try to bring back the discussion to what had transitioned to the now topic being the wording of the word "action" in particular rules of D&D (Yes, still including opportunity attack to some degree). In hindsight, I probably should have created a new thread and I might do that shortly. I would also like to ask a staff member and thought this was theoretical way to achieve that. Is there another means to contact someone besides sending a tweet?
Thank you for the explanations as it was described better than what I would have provided for others and I may refer to it later on. Also, I am not arguing to change the "Action Economy" as I think it is a decent system and have no complaints about it. I am trying to differentiate the Game action mechanic and find what defines the action being made by the character.
Before I do anything else, Do you know of any of the rulings specifically stating the difference between an "Action," "Bonus Action," or other mechanics from the Action Economy? I would like to read them if possible.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hi, This post is meant to be a discussion and I understand that my viewpoint is either amongst the few or just my own. In this post I will often refer to the rulings of related parts of the game to defend my claim (I would hyperlink them, but I'm new to threads. Sorry). Please keep discussion related to the discussion/topics being mentioned rather than calling the opposition confused or stating that they to reread the same paragraph multiple times.
Out of curiosity, I'm going to add a poll to this post to see how the people generally feel about the subject. :D
The main topic that I am posting about is whether the new Rouge "Soulknife" subclass and the 3rd level feature of "Psychic Blades." For ease of access I've attached the current rulings below:
"You can manifest your psionic power as shimmering blades of psychic energy. Whenever you take the Attack action, you can manifest a psychic blade from your free hand and make the attack with that blade. This magic blade is a simple melee weapon with the finesse and thrown properties. It has a normal range of 60 feet and no long range, and on a hit, it deals psychic damage equal to 1d6 plus the ability modifier you used for the attack roll. The blade vanishes immediately after it hits or misses its target, and it leaves no mark on its target if it deals damage.
After you attack with the blade, you can make a melee or ranged weapon attack with a second psychic blade as a bonus action on the same turn, provided your other hand is free to create it. The damage die of this bonus attack is 1d4, instead of 1d6."
Main Discussion: Do the basic rules and game mechanics support the use of psychic blades when making an Opportunity Attack?
Due to the wording used in Psychic Blades, I believe that a majority of the community has accepted the term "Attack action" as meaning that this ability can only be used when the one action on their turn is used to make an attack and these blades cannot be manifested unless the "specific" requirements are met above.
According to the Ch.9 of the Basic Rules, the most common action usually involves using weapon, such as a sword, bow or psychic blade to attack an enemy. This most common form of attack action is performed using the one action the character gets per turn. In the "Making an Attack" section of Ch.9 states that "If there's ever any question whether something you're doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack." This is where the discussion ends for most individuals as the wording on psychic blades does not specifically state the uncommon attack action methods such as Opportunity Attacks.
Further in this section in "Melee Attacks," the requirements to perform a Opportunity Attack is that "you use your reaction to make one melee attack against the provoking creature." As defined by the simple rule mentioned in the "Making an Attack" section, an Opportunity Attack is an attack action since the player would have to make an attack roll even though a reaction is consumed instead.
The proceeding rebuttal to this claim is that an Opportunity Attack is a special form of an attack action and does not count as the blades can only be manifested using the one action to attack. However, nothing mentioned in the ruling stating that there is a difference between these attack actions and these "special" attack actions. Even "Shoving a Creature" is defined as using an Attack action to make a special melee attack to , well, shove a creature.
If a given the action, bonus or reaction action allows the player to make an attack roll, then that player is performing an attack action regardless of whether it is a normal or special melee attack in this instance. Therefor, Opportunity Attacks is an Attack action that can be used to manifest a psychic blade.
Please let me know your opinion on this topic! I am relatively new to D&D and I would to discuss this topic with others from the community! If there a rule that impedes my statement, please let me know! I would love to learn more about the game and how these strange interactions work together!
Sorry but the feature literally does not allow this:
This is a specific thing in the game, the Attack action is not "whenever you make an attack roll, or plan to attack" it is specifically the thing on your turn that uses your action. If you need more evidence go look at features like extra attack. They don't allow you to make Multiple attacks on AoO because you have the feature.
A lot of your argument misconstrues a lot of the actual rules and conflates things. First is an attack roll is not at all connected to an attack action in A=B means B=A. When you make the attack action you make one or multiple attacks, but not all attacks are attack actions. For the case you bring up, an AoO is an attack that uses your reaction. Reactions are specific and different from actions in their own right. These are two different game terms that are not interchangeable. If something requires a reaction is cannot be used as an action, and if something requires an action it cannot be used in a reaction.
It's unfortunate that you can't leave a psychic blade in your hand beyond your Attack action, but the wording is pretty explicit that the blade "vanishes immediately after it hits or misses its target," and only manifests "when you take the Attack action." But the issue you're having seems to be less about the balance of this particular ability, than it is about misunderstanding the action economy in 5E.
It is true that 5th edition has some poorly chosen wording for its basic terms: there are three types of "actions" in the action economy of a turn (not including movement), the "Action", the "Bonus Action," and the "Reaction." Everyone has an "Action" every turn, which they can use to take one of the default "Action" actions in PHB Chapter 9 "Actions in Combat": Attack, Dodge, Dash, Disengage, [Tooltip Not Found], [Tooltip Not Found], Hide, Search, Ready, and Help. Your class, race, and other features may also give you other special actions that you can take using your Action.
Your "Reaction" is different from your "Action", and can't be used to take one of those "Action" actions I listed above. By default, the only general "Reaction" action that characters have is the Opportunity Attack.
There are no default uses for a "Bonus Action", apart from Two-Weapon Fighting if you're holding the right equipment. Again, your class, race, and other features may give you others.
So you might make an attack as part of the Attack action, and also as a Bonus Action with Two-Weapon Fighting, and then also when your enemy runs away as an Opportunity Attack. But while all of these are types of "actions" you might take to make an "attack," only one was made using the "Attack Action."
It would be helpful if 5E at least capitalized these terms the way I have, to distinguish between various actions, the Action unit, and the Attack Action. I can't even imagine trying to parse what I just wrote above if English wasn't your first language, for example... But, just stick with it, the terms will get less confusing with time.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Let's not pretend that capitals would help people in differantiating between the standard use of the word action and a game term Action.
But yes 5e is written in a less formal game wording but it does make it easier to read, just sometimes people tend to read words the way they want to read them.
I think it gets very confusing when you come across things like a Tortle's Shell Defense that describes "the only action you can take is a bonus action to..." huh!? But bonus actions aren't actions, though they're a type of action...
Same problem with Incapacitated. Can't take actions or reactions... so can take bonus actions? Or, bonus actions are a type of action even though they aren't an action, but then, why was reaction spelled out but not bonus action, since both bonus action and reaction are actions that aren't actions...
Capitalizing Action/Bonus Action/Reaction vs. actions would help. Better editing so that fundamental game terms only had one context would be even better, it's true.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
There are two basic schools of thought for rules: 1. Write clear rules with unambiguous language so there's no argument over meaning. 2. Write plain language rules that rely on the people and the story to interpret appropriately.
Either one works very well, the problem comes when you try to do both.
PHB 189, bonus actions, 3rd paragraph.
”You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn, unless the bonus action's timing is specified, and anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action.”
still definitely poor editing.
kind of like how everything needed for stealth rules wise is all over the place. Crafting rules being in multiple different books. Incapacitation ending concentration along with other things not provided in the actual condition description.
bad editing.
I believe that they use the word action for both the "3 types" the act of doing something and that's why this ruling is unclear. Maybe these "3 types" could be placed by a some sorts of tier like speed? I played yu-gi-oh a little bit and there are different casting speeds that couldn't be beat unless by a faster spell in short.
Melee attacks in the basic rules are considered an Attack action as they are used in the Action section that you previously stated. However, Opportunity Attack allows you to make a melee attack (an Attack action) by using your reaction. Opportunity Attack does not use the reaction to attack the enemy, instead it gives the "opportunity" [;D] to perform an attack roll (an Attack action) to actually attack the enemy whether you hit or miss the target. In short, the reaction is not used to attack, but rather to allow you to make an attack. Which supports the ruling of "Making an Attack" (again, sorry) that states that making an attack roll is making an "act of attack" or making an "attack action."
As for your comment about the Bonus action attacks involving two-handed weapons, psychic blades, and I know Polearm Master lists an additional attack amongst various different qualifications. These bonus actions are still listed as a melee attack which is an Attack action. Although I will say that these acts are being done on your turn unlike an opportunity attack.
--------
Also, I'm not implying that performing a AoO with the psychic blades would allow a 1st and 2nd attack with the blades as that's not even a thing with two-weapon fighting. I may have misread a different comment, but I wanted to clarify it anyway. Plus this would not work as bonus actions can only be used on your turn, right?
Although a simple Capital letter would not change much, a hyper link could be attached the the "Action" and define what a game action is in comparison to a "role-playing" action.
This in theory could be a simple temporary fix to this issue, although I would strive for something better personally.
I agree that this is a bit confusing, but I understand that these books are not always written by the same individuals and that's why there is such variation between the wording used between them. Although, I believe that setting some standardized terms would help resolve this issue at least to some degree.
I believe that if anything this thread has shown that the word "action" is used in a variety of ways throughout the ruling which does not clarify what truly is and is not an "action."
I believe that this stealth ruling is implying these "actions" (underlined above) are the "acts" (?) that you can attempt using your bonus action. If that clarifies anything.
Yeah no this is incorrect. Melee attacks are not anything, they CAN be an attack, BA, or reaction depending on what is done. You are again conflating rules. Making a melee attack is nothing unless it is done as part of some action, a specific bonus action, or a reaction like an AoO. So this is where you need to read and understand more. Reactions can NOT do any "actions" they can only DO things that are a reaction, again an AoO is not an action or Action, it IS a reaction that allows a melee attack.
As I quoted in my first post, the blades are only formed when you take the Attack Action, something that can only be done on your turn. Not on a bonus action, and not on a reaction. Since the feature directly calls out the Attack action it is not capable of being used at any other time. Again you need more proof let me list all the correct rules.
Opportunity attacks use your reaction, not your action so anything queuing off of attack actions cannot be used AND in the description is even tells you the only thing you can do it make one melee attack against the creature. This reaction mentions no use of any for of actions it simply lets you make a melee attack - that is it.
So like the fact that in the literal text of the physic blade is links directly to what an Attack action is (that is what the green text is). Making an attack is NOT an action it is simply the rules for how to attack. That section is clearly sperate from all the listed actions in the "actions in combat" part of the chapter so you cannot interchange the rules in "how to attack" with the part of the rules explaining actions.
I'm confused but what you are trying to bring up with "role-play" actions since we are talking about the strict part of the rules that are well defined: combat.
Here is the biggest issue in your understandings - making an "act of attack" or making an "attack action." - This is not interchangeable. The reason is pretty clear because attacking can be used for many different things and it stands to reason that if something says "you can make a attack as a bonus action" that the act of attacking with you BA is pretty clearly NOT the same as making an "attack action."
You are reading the section on "making an attack" as some sort of action iniself where it never even uses that phrase, where as the actions in combat call out specifically the "attack action" and other area like reaction call out "the ability to make on melee attack" - again making an attack is not an action because the rules in that section are specifically for how the game resolves an attack, but that does not make all attack rolls the equivalent of the "attack action" called out by features or the earlier action section.
Please look at this feature of fighters and tell me that they can make extra attacks when they make an AoO:
Same wording as you rogues action - specially calling out attack actions in the feature but under your idea of the rules this would mean a lvl 20 fighter can attack 4 times on their turn AND 4 times when they make an AoO
I would like to state that we are agreeing on what a AoO is and that it uses a reaction over an action. If anything I was only trying to communicate that further with my previous comments, so I'm sorry if I was misleading or confusing.
I believe that a "Melee Attack," although officially/clearly is not stated in the rules as anything like you stated, the melee attack section a sub section to "making an attack" meaning that it (obviously) is a form of attack. Melee attacks require an attack roll and any action, or "act" as I've been trying to discern their use of the word "action," that requires an attack roll is an attack action.
This is leading to an AoO -> using reaction and not using an action -> using Attack roll for an "act" of attack -> "act" of attack becoming an attack action.
--- EDIT:
Also the "Attack" section states that it is the most common action of attacking is using the one action a turn to attack. It does not state that an attack action cannot be performed using other types actions or "act" ( which I know goes against what I just agreed with you on).
Again, As I have commented on other comments and quoted them. This thread has become more about the wording used to describe "action" and the other variants such as "Attack Action." The definition of the word "action" leaves quite a bit of interpretation when applied to many of the rules at moments, especially when the word is also used a key mechanic in combat and then used in other rulings that are not specifically combat related.
For instance, Psychic Blades does not specifically state "an Attack action on your turn," this implies that this "act" or "action" could be performed on another characters' turn after a reaction. This is why I have not been referring to Extra Attack as this specifically only works on your turn.
I also stated that in a previous comment that I made that I am not implying that AoO would allow multiple attacks. Plus Opportunity Attack specifically states that you can only make 1 melee attack. Plus, as previously mentioned that Extra Attack only works on your turn anyway.
The blades are only formed when you take the Attack action and disappear immediately after the attack. Therefore, they cannot be used to make Opportunity Attacks per RAW. Opportunity Attacks use the Reaction, not the Attack Action.
It would be nice if they were more persistent as I feel it limits out-of-combat roleplay aspects such as popping an incorporeal blade into existence, flipping it around in your hand, and then making it disappear. This is one example of class flavour limited by the rules as, technically, this is not possible per RAW.
This might be where the confusion comes in. When talking about combat, the word 'action' is very specific and refers to a very specific set of things you can do:
When Psychic Blades, (or any other feature) refers to the attack action specifically, it refers to only what is in the red box, and that is it. Action cannot (and should not) be interpreted as an 'action' or an 'act' but very specifically one of the things in that list, no ifs ands or buts. Once you accept this, everything else falls into place. Reactions (such as AoO) are not in this list, and therefore do not qualify for the use of the psychic blade feature.
This might be where the confusion comes in. When talking about combat, the word 'action' is very specific and refers to a very specific set of things you can do:
If anything, I think that I am being unclear with my "action" and "act" explanations. My apologies as I'm not the best a describing my thoughts with words. I will try to explain from another angle.
I understand that under the "actions" section that it specifically mentions "Attack" and using your one action a turn to perform an attack action. The rulings however, or at least to my knowledge, does not state that an "attack action" is only when the one action per turn is used. Under the "Attack" section of "Actions in combat" it states the using this one action a turn is the most common form of the attack action and does not specifically state that an attack action has to derive only from using the one action per turn. These rulings mention nothing about it being specifically on your turn to perform an attack action.
Again this is a wording issue, looking at the ruling of the "Actions in Combat" it states the follow:
"When you take your action [1st] on your turn, you can take one of the actions [2nd] presented here, an action* you gained from your class or a special feature, or an action* that you improvise. Many monsters have action* options of their own in their stat blocks."
The ruling above uses the word "action" with two different meanings. First use being the key interactive mechanic of combat and the second use (and the other proceeding uses or the word "action*") being the actual definition of the word: the fact or process of doing something, typically to achieve an aim; a thing done; an act. [definition acquired by searching "define action" in google]
---
The difference between the action used by the games mechanics and the word definition of action are not the same. The term action used by the game mechanics is used to create an interaction between characters.
This brings me to my next point there are no sections, again to my knowledge, that clearly state the difference of the actions (by definition) that can be performed using your action, bonus action or reaction interaction. I personally see these 3 types of interaction mechanics all falling under the same singular category of action (by interaction) that are only the means for ruling when a player can roleplay their actions (by definition). By definition of the word "action," any normal or special attack would be considered as a form of attack action.
As it has been previously stated, an attack is an attack action when you use your one action (an interaction) to perform this action (by definition) to swing your weapon. Following the same ruling of Two-Weapon Fighting, a second attack (action by definition) by swinging a dagger in your offhand can be performed by using your bonus action (an interaction). Why are individuals attached to the "bonus" tag of the "Bonus Action," when the interaction mechanic bonus action to attack performs in the same way that the interaction mechanic action to attack?
So, swinging a weapon at your target is an attack and the aim of my swing is my action (by definition). However a interactive mechanic, such as using an action, bonus action or reaction, must be used prior to my attempt to make the action (by definition) of attacking the target.
---
If I am being confusing again, please let me know!
The Rulings do specify that an attack action is only granted by using your action. if you read opportunity attacks granted by reaction:
At no point in that text does it ever mention attack action. the attack is specifically called an 'opportunity attack' and that allows you to make a 'melee attack'.
Now if Psychic blades said 'melee attack' OR if you could use your reaction to perform an 'attack action' it would work differently, but it does not.
Now lets look at the rest:
There very much are sections, the issue is that nearly all bonus actions and reactions (other than PHB two weapon fighting and opportunity attack) are granted by other specific rules that override the general rule, and are discussed in their relevant rules sections (some of which are not in the PHB and can therefore not be included in the PHB rules section, since you need to purchase those source books separately). Psychic blades is one such feature.
This 'category' of action(by interaction) that you created is not referenced anywhere in the game rules, all 3 are separate and only interact with each other when it is specifically referred to in a rule such as two weapon fighting.
Although they may appear to act in the same way, action and bonus action are two independent resources. With Two-Weapon Fighting, using your action to attack which grants you the opportunity to use your bonus action to attack (action used, bonus action used, 2 attacks made) is different to using your action to attack when you have the extra attack feature (action used, bonus action unused, 2 attacks made). The bonus tag for bonus action is to indicate that, indeed, these are very specific things you can do granted by very specific rules that override the general rule.
For another example:
Let's use Timmy the level 2 wizard. Timmy uses his action to dash (and his action is now used up). He cannot use his bonus action to do anything, unless he has a spell, class feature or feat that grants him things to do with his bonus action (such as expeditious retreat).
Now lets look at Ronny the level 2 rogue. Ronny has the class feature Cunning action:
So Ronny can use his class feature 'cunning action' to use his bonus action to dash (instead of using his action like Timmy) and can still use his action to attack, disengage, hide etc.
What this is alluding to is the idea of 'action economy' and how these rules change the possibilities, combinations and efficiency that characters can use as they gain new ways to use their actions/bonus actions/reactions..
At this point there have been numerous explanations from different people that are sound, if you still cannot understand and accept the approach we have illustrated, then I suggest you tweet Jeremy Crawford and hope you gives you a response.
The section on Bonus Actions in the PHB state:
So a bonus action is just a special type of action. So anything that stops you taking actions would also prevent you taking bonus actions (apparently this last bit is also explicitly stated in the Bonus Actions section, but shouldn't really be necessary).
In multiple sections and comments that I have made, I have been stating that this is discussion about the topic about the strange wording used on some of the D&D 5e rules. I am making a claim that is not follow the traditional viewpoint of a D&D player or DM and asking a question in hopes that others join me on discussing the subject. My statement claim is not officially apart of any rulings and I have never made the claim that they are.
When given a sound explanation, I acknowledge them and then try to bring back the discussion to what had transitioned to the now topic being the wording of the word "action" in particular rules of D&D (Yes, still including opportunity attack to some degree). In hindsight, I probably should have created a new thread and I might do that shortly. I would also like to ask a staff member and thought this was theoretical way to achieve that. Is there another means to contact someone besides sending a tweet?
Thank you for the explanations as it was described better than what I would have provided for others and I may refer to it later on. Also, I am not arguing to change the "Action Economy" as I think it is a decent system and have no complaints about it. I am trying to differentiate the Game action mechanic and find what defines the action being made by the character.
Before I do anything else, Do you know of any of the rulings specifically stating the difference between an "Action," "Bonus Action," or other mechanics from the Action Economy? I would like to read them if possible.