Yes, when casting Fire Bolt they identify what action they're doing it with: Attack or Cast a Spell. That isn't particularly different than announcing what action you're using to make a weapon attack with either (for PCs there's usually only one option, Attack, but if one were a wildshaped Druid/Barbarian Brown Bear, it might be important to announce if you're using Attack, Multiattack, or even a standaloneBite for some reason).
Either way, the premise stands: you don't "take" an action by merely announcing intent... you "take" the action by performing it (or at least performing a meaningful part of it to demonstrate it's in progress, like making one of the several weapon attacks allowed by your Attack action).
There used to be sage advice that you could take the bonus action first and lock in the action for later, but they have since reversed that opinion and officially (RAW and RAI) you must start the action first (which means making at least 1 attack/shove/grab).
This is always one of my favorite Sage Advice entries because he very clearly says you can do it whenever you want and then a few years later he "clarifies" that what he meant when he said that you can do it any time you want is that you can actually NOT do it anytime you want, but instead, you can do it only after the attack action has been completed.
Oh Jeremy, you're such a rascal!
No, in this case he acknowledged that his previous ruling was different and that he was changing it.
Considering the rule didn't change, but the ruling did 180, it is still pretty rascally. Just not that much.
Default combat in 5E doesn't have a formal "Declaration" phase. You don't announce "I'm going to take the Attack Action" - you take the Attack Action by actually attacking. If you haven't attacked at least one then you haven't taken the Action.
That can't be true or Bladesingers wouldn't be able to exist. When a level 6 Bladesinger casts a cantrip, they have to tell their DM before the spell is cast whether this is the Cast a Spell action or the Attack action, because they're not allowed to choose later - they can only cantrip and then attack if the cantrip was replacing an attack.
Sort of, but not really. They say they are casting the cantrip as part of the attack action. It still is not declared before it will be done, it is declared as it is done like Walker said. Their point was: you can't say you are going to take an action, then do something else without doing that action. Bladesinger's extra attack has nothing to do with that at all.
There used to be sage advice that you could take the bonus action first and lock in the action for later, but they have since reversed that opinion and officially (RAW and RAI) you must start the action first (which means making at least 1 attack/shove/grab).
This is always one of my favorite Sage Advice entries because he very clearly says you can do it whenever you want and then a few years later he "clarifies" that what he meant when he said that you can do it any time you want is that you can actually NOT do it anytime you want, but instead, you can do it only after the attack action has been completed.
Oh Jeremy, you're such a rascal!
No, in this case he acknowledged that his previous ruling was different and that he was changing it.
Considering the rule didn't change, but the ruling did 180, it is still pretty rascally. Just not that much.
Default combat in 5E doesn't have a formal "Declaration" phase. You don't announce "I'm going to take the Attack Action" - you take the Attack Action by actually attacking. If you haven't attacked at least one then you haven't taken the Action.
That can't be true or Bladesingers wouldn't be able to exist. When a level 6 Bladesinger casts a cantrip, they have to tell their DM before the spell is cast whether this is the Cast a Spell action or the Attack action, because they're not allowed to choose later - they can only cantrip and then attack if the cantrip was replacing an attack.
Sort of, but not really. They say they are casting the cantrip as part of the attack action. It still is not declared before it will be done, it is declared as it is done like Walker said. Their point was: you can't say you are going to take an action, then do something else without doing that action. Bladesinger's extra attack has nothing to do with that at all.
Quin has a point, you can't swap something out until you have it. And, you don't have an attack to swap out until you have an attack to swap out. You have to declare you're taking the Attack Action before you can sub out an attack from it to cast a cantrip.
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.
You're casting a cantrip in place of one of the two attacks. The only way you'd have two attacks was by taking the Attack Action first, because the only time you have these attacks is when Taking the Attack action. Just as it says.
So, to cast a cantrip in this way means you needed to have two attacks, one can be swapped out, but to have those two attacks you need to have taken the attack action.
But, according to the shield BA order ruling... you can't be considered to have taken the attack action until you've made an attack with it.
So, if you aren't considered to have taken the attack action until after making an attack with it, you're not eligible to swap "one of those" attacks until you've taken the first attack.
I don't think so. A Bladesinger cannot swap out an attack for a cantrip, generally. They can only swap out an attack from their Extra Attack for a cantrip.
"in place of one of those attacks."
So it has to replace one of the attacks that comes from Extra Attack, which you only get " whenever you take the Attack action on your turn."
Based on the Shield BA ruling...
The Shield Master feat lets you shove someone as a bonus action if you take the Attack action. Can you take that bonus action before the Attack action? No. The bonus action provided by the Shield Master feat has a pre-condition: that you take the Attack action on your turn. Intending to take that action isn’t sufficient; you must actually take it before you can take the bonus action. During your turn, you do get to decide when to take the bonus action after you’ve taken the Attack action.
We can phrase our scenario in this same way.
The Baldesinger's Extra Attack feature lets you cast a cantrip in place of an attack if you take the Attack action. Can you cast a cantrip in place of an attack before the Attack action? No. The casting of a cantrip in place of an attack has a pre-condition: that you take the Attack action on your turn. Intending to take that action isn’t sufficient; you must actually take it before you can cast a cantrip in place of an attack. During your turn, you do get to decide when to cast a cantrip in place of an attack after you’ve taken the Attack action.
It is actually the same thing as the Shield Shove trigger. It requires that you have taken the attack action. Because you can't swap a cantrip for an attack. You can swap a cantrip for one of those attacks. The ones you get when you take the attack action. So you need to have taken the attack action.
It’s not the same. The bonus action is eligible once you take the attack action, but you have not taken it until you make one or more attacks.
The cantrip is eligible as one of the attack action attacks. It is no harder to start the attack action with a cantrip than it is to start it with a weapon attack… you aren’t eligible to make weapon attacks outside the attack action either, so it’s not like there’s anything about them that is any less dependent on the attack action than Bladesinger cantrips are.
Taking Attack by ____ is different than interrupting an Attack that hasn’t yet been taken.
The way that extra attack is different than shield master's BA is that extra attack IS the attack action. You will never have to even consider the possibility of using extra attack before the attack action, it is completely unrelatable to the discussion.
Perhaps the Tavern Brawler feat serves as a good example of the difference from Shield Master. Its third bullet point says:
When you hit a creature with an unarmed strike or an improvised weapon on your turn, you can use a bonus action to attempt to grapple the target.
So all you have to do is land one qualifying attack, and you are free to use the grapple bonus action and then finish off the attack action if you desire.
It’s not the same. The bonus action is eligible once you take the attack action, but you have not taken it until you make one or more attacks.
I've already brought up once in this thread a way to take the Attack action without making any attacks at all - a Bladesinger using the Attack action to launch a cantrip. I don't know what the requirements are to take the Attack action, but actually attacking isn't one of them.
It’s not the same. The bonus action is eligible once you take the attack action, but you have not taken it until you make one or more attacks.
I've already brought up once in this thread a way to take the Attack action without making any attacks at all - a Bladesinger using the Attack action to launch a cantrip. I don't know what the requirements are to take the Attack action, but actually attacking isn't one of them.
When you take the Attack action you attack it's the very definition of it, Bladesingers are no exception, they can cast one cantrip in place of one of their Extra attacks, so it'd still be attacking with the Attack action at least once.
I've already brought up once in this thread a way to take the Attack action without making any attacks at all - a Bladesinger using the Attack action to launch a cantrip. I don't know what the requirements are to take the Attack action, but actually attacking isn't one of them.
I don't see how it affects the timing of Shield Master's bonus action in relation to taking the attack action. Even in your example where someone hypothetically takes the attack action without actually attacking, the bonus action would have to come after the action.
I've already brought up once in this thread a way to take the Attack action without making any attacks at all - a Bladesinger using the Attack action to launch a cantrip. I don't know what the requirements are to take the Attack action, but actually attacking isn't one of them.
I don't see how it affects the timing of Shield Master's bonus action in relation to taking the attack action. Even in your example where someone hypothetically takes the attack action without actually attacking, the bonus action would have to come after the action.
Or were you talking about something else?
There's no question whatsoever Shield Master doesn't have to come after the action. Shield Master lets you bonus action shove if you take the Attack action, and without question, Chicken_Champ was right in terms of attacking being sufficient: if you have Extra Attack and Shield Master, you can take the attack action, attack once, bonus action shove (because when Shield Master asks if you took the Attack action yet, the answer is yes), and then attack a second time from Extra Attack. In other words, as soon as the Attack action has started, you can bonus action Shove. It doesn't need to end.
The question is whether that first attack is necessary for the Attack action to start. That's why I provided at least one other way for the Attack action to start. I can't find any rules backing up C_C's claim that the attack action hasn't started until you X, but I can prove X can't be attack, via Bladesinger.
When you take the Attack action you attack it's the very definition of it, Bladesingers are no exception, they can cast one cantrip in place of one of their Extra attacks, so it'd still be attacking with the Attack action at least once.
No, the second attack is optional. An L6 Bladesinger can cast Toll the Dead using the Attack action and then end their turn having made zero attacks despite having taken the Attack action.
The question is whether that first attack is necessary for the Attack action to start. That's why I provided at least one other way for the Attack action to start. I can't find any rules backing up C_C's claim that the attack action hasn't started until you X, but I can prove X can't be attack, via Bladesinger.
No, the second attack is optional. An L6 Bladesinger can cast Toll the Dead using the Attack action and then end their turn having made zero attacks despite having taken the Attack action.
No they will have taken one attack. It will be an attack with a spell instead of an attack with a weapon but it is still an attack.
There's no question whatsoever Shield Master doesn't have to come after the action. Shield Master lets you bonus action shove if you take the Attack action, and without question, Chicken_Champ was right in terms of attacking being sufficient: if you have Extra Attack and Shield Master, you can take the attack action, attack once, bonus action shove (because when Shield Master asks if you took the Attack action yet, the answer is yes), and then attack a second time from Extra Attack. In other words, as soon as the Attack action has started, you can bonus action Shove. It doesn't need to end.
If you want to disregard RAI, then this works. And that's fine, since the tweets just there for guidance anyway. You can simply refer to the bonus action wording "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." Shield master does not specify the timing--only that the bonus action is dependent on the attack action happening on your turn.
No, the second attack is optional. An L6 Bladesinger can cast Toll the Dead using the Attack action and then end their turn having made zero attacks despite having taken the Attack action.
You just described the cast a spell action. Also, why would a bladesinger use a shield in the first place? They don't have proficiency with them and even if they did, they couldn't use their signature feature while wearing one.
When you take the Attack action you attack it's the very definition of it, Bladesingers are no exception, they can cast one cantrip in place of one of their Extra attacks, so it'd still be attacking with the Attack action at least once.
No, the second attack is optional. An L6 Bladesinger can cast Toll the Dead using the Attack action and then end their turn having made zero attacks despite having taken the Attack action.
Nah. I think that in order to qualify for the second sentence replacing one of "those" attacks, you'd have to use them both. If you've just cast a spell, then there is no reason to imagine you have taken the option of "can attack twice" that allows you to replace an attack with a cantrip. You don't get the ability to replace any attack with a cantrip, it is specifically one of the two when you use the extra attack feature. Didn't that recently come up on the forums?
On the other hand, the attack action tells you that you use it to make an attack. Later on, you're told that you can make a special type of attack to grapple or shove. Are there any other things that allow you to replace attacks generally?
No, I do agree with Quinn that you may take the Attack action, replace your first attack with a cantrip like Toll the Dead, and then end your turn without ever taking a weapon attack as the second attack allowed by the Attack. Just as Extra Attack does not require you to take two attacks, just provides that you can, I don't see anything in the Bladesinger's version that says anything like "when you make a weapon attack as parts of the Attack action, you may substitute the other weapon attack with a cantrip..." If that were in there, it would also be operating to require the cantrip comes second, there's no way to "promise" you'll follow through with a weapon attack in order to qualify to do something else dependent on it beforehand... that's literally trying to do the same thing that bonus action shoving before you actually attack would be attempting, and we're all on the same page that that's out both RAI and RAW.
I just still don't see any issue or parallel between using a cantrip during the Attack action, and attempting to take a bonus action dependent on the Attack acting being taken when it hasn't yet been taken. So not sure why this came up... You take the Attack action when you perform its parts that the action permits. Normally, the parts of Attack are "make a weapon attack". With Bladesinger's Extra Attack , "make a weapon attack" and/or "cast a cantrip" are eligible parts, so you "take" the Attack action when you do one of those while declaring you're taking Attack. This isn't spelled out ad nauseum, but it's clear enough, isn't it?
As for why a character might want to cast Toll the Dead with Attack, rather than with Cast a Spell, if they're not intending to take the other weapon attack that Attack+Extra Attack permits them? I'm not thinking of one off the top of my head, but there's bound to be some sort of "When you take the Attack action on your turn..." feature out there that a Bladesinger might qualify for and want to benefit from, even when they can't or won't get into range to deliver a weapon attack. They've got that flexibility.
I still say the bladesinger example is completely irrelevant to a discussion about shield master for the reasons I listed above. Bladesingers don't use shields and shield users don't use bladesinging.
I still disagree C_C. Nothing in Bladesinger's Extra attack requires that you take two attacks, but if you aren't using both "attacks," then the second sentence doesn't apply. Again, it doesn't actually say "you can replace any of your attacks with a cantrip," it says that you can replace one of those (two) attacks with a cantrip There is no reason to understand the pronoun "those" means "those one".
Greenstone_Walker also makes a valid point with the fact that there is no declaration phase. Your action type is self-evident by what you use it to do.
It is also a valid point that the discussion of bladesinger is kind of irrelevant to shield master.
Note that this cannot trigger any ability that requires you to 'use your action to cast' (such as eldritch knight war magic), as you are not using your action to cast, you are using it to attack.
I've already brought up once in this thread a way to take the Attack action without making any attacks at all - a Bladesinger using the Attack action to launch a cantrip. I don't know what the requirements are to take the Attack action, but actually attacking isn't one of them.
That's an interesting point. Same for grappling or shoving, you can take the Attack Action without making an attack. But you still have to do something - you haven't actually taken the Attack Action until you've cast the spell or attempted the grapple.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What can't be true?
Yes, when casting Fire Bolt they identify what action they're doing it with: Attack or Cast a Spell. That isn't particularly different than announcing what action you're using to make a weapon attack with either (for PCs there's usually only one option, Attack, but if one were a wildshaped Druid/Barbarian Brown Bear, it might be important to announce if you're using Attack, Multiattack, or even a standalone Bite for some reason).
Either way, the premise stands: you don't "take" an action by merely announcing intent... you "take" the action by performing it (or at least performing a meaningful part of it to demonstrate it's in progress, like making one of the several weapon attacks allowed by your Attack action).
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
No, in this case he acknowledged that his previous ruling was different and that he was changing it.
Considering the rule didn't change, but the ruling did 180, it is still pretty rascally. Just not that much.
Sort of, but not really. They say they are casting the cantrip as part of the attack action. It still is not declared before it will be done, it is declared as it is done like Walker said. Their point was: you can't say you are going to take an action, then do something else without doing that action. Bladesinger's extra attack has nothing to do with that at all.
Quin has a point, you can't swap something out until you have it. And, you don't have an attack to swap out until you have an attack to swap out. You have to declare you're taking the Attack Action before you can sub out an attack from it to cast a cantrip.
You're casting a cantrip in place of one of the two attacks. The only way you'd have two attacks was by taking the Attack Action first, because the only time you have these attacks is when Taking the Attack action. Just as it says.
So, to cast a cantrip in this way means you needed to have two attacks, one can be swapped out, but to have those two attacks you need to have taken the attack action.
But, according to the shield BA order ruling... you can't be considered to have taken the attack action until you've made an attack with it.
So, if you aren't considered to have taken the attack action until after making an attack with it, you're not eligible to swap "one of those" attacks until you've taken the first attack.
I got quotes!
No, you’re over thinking that.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I don't think so. A Bladesinger cannot swap out an attack for a cantrip, generally. They can only swap out an attack from their Extra Attack for a cantrip.
"in place of one of those attacks."
So it has to replace one of the attacks that comes from Extra Attack, which you only get " whenever you take the Attack action on your turn."
Based on the Shield BA ruling...
We can phrase our scenario in this same way.
It is actually the same thing as the Shield Shove trigger. It requires that you have taken the attack action. Because you can't swap a cantrip for an attack. You can swap a cantrip for one of those attacks. The ones you get when you take the attack action. So you need to have taken the attack action.
I got quotes!
It’s not the same. The bonus action is eligible once you take the attack action, but you have not taken it until you make one or more attacks.
The cantrip is eligible as one of the attack action attacks. It is no harder to start the attack action with a cantrip than it is to start it with a weapon attack… you aren’t eligible to make weapon attacks outside the attack action either, so it’s not like there’s anything about them that is any less dependent on the attack action than Bladesinger cantrips are.
Taking Attack by ____ is different than interrupting an Attack that hasn’t yet been taken.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
The way that extra attack is different than shield master's BA is that extra attack IS the attack action. You will never have to even consider the possibility of using extra attack before the attack action, it is completely unrelatable to the discussion.
Perhaps the Tavern Brawler feat serves as a good example of the difference from Shield Master. Its third bullet point says:
So all you have to do is land one qualifying attack, and you are free to use the grapple bonus action and then finish off the attack action if you desire.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I've already brought up once in this thread a way to take the Attack action without making any attacks at all - a Bladesinger using the Attack action to launch a cantrip. I don't know what the requirements are to take the Attack action, but actually attacking isn't one of them.
When you take the Attack action you attack it's the very definition of it, Bladesingers are no exception, they can cast one cantrip in place of one of their Extra attacks, so it'd still be attacking with the Attack action at least once.
I don't see how it affects the timing of Shield Master's bonus action in relation to taking the attack action. Even in your example where someone hypothetically takes the attack action without actually attacking, the bonus action would have to come after the action.
Or were you talking about something else?
"Not all those who wander are lost"
There's no question whatsoever Shield Master doesn't have to come after the action. Shield Master lets you bonus action shove if you take the Attack action, and without question, Chicken_Champ was right in terms of attacking being sufficient: if you have Extra Attack and Shield Master, you can take the attack action, attack once, bonus action shove (because when Shield Master asks if you took the Attack action yet, the answer is yes), and then attack a second time from Extra Attack. In other words, as soon as the Attack action has started, you can bonus action Shove. It doesn't need to end.
The question is whether that first attack is necessary for the Attack action to start. That's why I provided at least one other way for the Attack action to start. I can't find any rules backing up C_C's claim that the attack action hasn't started until you X, but I can prove X can't be attack, via Bladesinger.
No, the second attack is optional. An L6 Bladesinger can cast Toll the Dead using the Attack action and then end their turn having made zero attacks despite having taken the Attack action.
No they will have taken one attack. It will be an attack with a spell instead of an attack with a weapon but it is still an attack.
If you want to disregard RAI, then this works. And that's fine, since the tweets just there for guidance anyway. You can simply refer to the bonus action wording "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." Shield master does not specify the timing--only that the bonus action is dependent on the attack action happening on your turn.
You just described the cast a spell action. Also, why would a bladesinger use a shield in the first place? They don't have proficiency with them and even if they did, they couldn't use their signature feature while wearing one.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Nah. I think that in order to qualify for the second sentence replacing one of "those" attacks, you'd have to use them both. If you've just cast a spell, then there is no reason to imagine you have taken the option of "can attack twice" that allows you to replace an attack with a cantrip. You don't get the ability to replace any attack with a cantrip, it is specifically one of the two when you use the extra attack feature. Didn't that recently come up on the forums?
On the other hand, the attack action tells you that you use it to make an attack. Later on, you're told that you can make a special type of attack to grapple or shove. Are there any other things that allow you to replace attacks generally?
No, I do agree with Quinn that you may take the Attack action, replace your first attack with a cantrip like Toll the Dead, and then end your turn without ever taking a weapon attack as the second attack allowed by the Attack. Just as Extra Attack does not require you to take two attacks, just provides that you can, I don't see anything in the Bladesinger's version that says anything like "when you make a weapon attack as parts of the Attack action, you may substitute the other weapon attack with a cantrip..." If that were in there, it would also be operating to require the cantrip comes second, there's no way to "promise" you'll follow through with a weapon attack in order to qualify to do something else dependent on it beforehand... that's literally trying to do the same thing that bonus action shoving before you actually attack would be attempting, and we're all on the same page that that's out both RAI and RAW.
I just still don't see any issue or parallel between using a cantrip during the Attack action, and attempting to take a bonus action dependent on the Attack acting being taken when it hasn't yet been taken. So not sure why this came up... You take the Attack action when you perform its parts that the action permits. Normally, the parts of Attack are "make a weapon attack". With Bladesinger's Extra Attack , "make a weapon attack" and/or "cast a cantrip" are eligible parts, so you "take" the Attack action when you do one of those while declaring you're taking Attack. This isn't spelled out ad nauseum, but it's clear enough, isn't it?
As for why a character might want to cast Toll the Dead with Attack, rather than with Cast a Spell, if they're not intending to take the other weapon attack that Attack+Extra Attack permits them? I'm not thinking of one off the top of my head, but there's bound to be some sort of "When you take the Attack action on your turn..." feature out there that a Bladesinger might qualify for and want to benefit from, even when they can't or won't get into range to deliver a weapon attack. They've got that flexibility.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I still say the bladesinger example is completely irrelevant to a discussion about shield master for the reasons I listed above. Bladesingers don't use shields and shield users don't use bladesinging.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I still disagree C_C. Nothing in Bladesinger's Extra attack requires that you take two attacks, but if you aren't using both "attacks," then the second sentence doesn't apply. Again, it doesn't actually say "you can replace any of your attacks with a cantrip," it says that you can replace one of those (two) attacks with a cantrip There is no reason to understand the pronoun "those" means "those one".
Greenstone_Walker also makes a valid point with the fact that there is no declaration phase. Your action type is self-evident by what you use it to do.
It is also a valid point that the discussion of bladesinger is kind of irrelevant to shield master.
The bladesinger case is:
Note that this cannot trigger any ability that requires you to 'use your action to cast' (such as eldritch knight war magic), as you are not using your action to cast, you are using it to attack.
That's an interesting point. Same for grappling or shoving, you can take the Attack Action without making an attack. But you still have to do something - you haven't actually taken the Attack Action until you've cast the spell or attempted the grapple.