Look, if you are a DM and feel the need to go to this length to prevent a combo a player of yours is using you're not acting in good faith. They're dedicating weapon type, 2 feat selections, their action and their bonus action to do what? 1d6 and prone? And you want to stop that by rules lawyering against your players? You control everything in the game except their character and their turn. That is their time. And they get to choose when things happen on that turn. You don't. If you are unsatisfied with controlling everything else and feel the need to start controlling your player's turns too, you should take a break as reevaluate why you're DMing. Because you've forgotten the whole reason you're there, to tell a story cooperatively with friends.
Keep in mind that is the kind of ruling that would apply to the timing of every bonus action, not just this one.
Yes.
"Rules lawyering against your players" so.... if a player wanted to cast a spell their character does not have, or jump further than the rules allow or anything else that seems against the rules, would saying 'no' similarly be breaching your 'everything in the game except their character and their turn' rule?
Violating a black and white rule isn't allowed. So players cannot do those things.
Nothing in the rulebooks say a player cannot control when they use their bonus action, in fact, the text says the opposite. That they can choose when they use their bonus action. If you as a DM are trying to find a way to stop it despite the rules saying the player can choose when, then yes, you're "trying to rules lawyer" them back under your control. But they shouldn't be under your control, they control their own turn.
The very last line of the bonus action section declares "and anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action." You cannot an action or bonus action during a different action because you are busy doing that action. This is unlike reactions, which do operate as interrupts.
Nonsequitor.
And saying 'Sorry, you cannot do this' is in no way equivalent with the kind of complete control you are conflating it into.
In this case it is. The rules say they control when. You're trying to take that control from them with no rule-based justification. Not a pro-gamer move there.
You can't take action or bonus action during an instantaneous event that last a split second. You can't cast Dispel Magic on an instantaneous spell for exemple. It was clarified in a Sage Advice.
There are rules for falling, and those rules say you fall instantaneously. By any sensible reading of those rules, you can't interrupt the instantaneous five foot fall with your bonus action, unless it's something that specifically says it can interrupt a fall. You can try and convince your DM that two feats is enough payment to bend those rules but it's certainly not rules lawyering(lmao) for them to reject you.
You are insisting not only that NPC's cannot use reactions until the PC has declared everything they are doing done, but that the PC can run off a cliff and choose not to fall until their turn is over.
I've made no such claim. This is silliness right here.
RAW does not say what you think it says.
Yes, it does, and I am still the only person quoting it. "You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn"
That is the RAW. You have not provided any rules, as they are written, that says otherwise.
There are rules for falling, and those rules say you fall instantaneously.
Sure. We can even concede this point and assume: No amount of time exists between starting the fall and ending the fall.
We would still have the Bonus Action happen before the start of the fall. So the TK push happens pre-fall not mid-fall. The fact that falls are instantaneous was and is a red herring.
By any sensible reading of those rules, you can't interrupt the instantaneous five foot fall with your bonus action, unless it's something that specifically says it can interrupt a fall.
We're not interrupting the fall.
You can try and convince your DM that two feats is enough payment to bend those rules but it's certainly not rules lawyering(lmao) for them to reject you.
Pretty easy to convince myself not to try to take over my player's turns.
Keep in mind that is the kind of ruling that would apply to the timing of every bonus action, not just this one.
Yes.
"Rules lawyering against your players" so.... if a player wanted to cast a spell their character does not have, or jump further than the rules allow or anything else that seems against the rules, would saying 'no' similarly be breaching your 'everything in the game except their character and their turn' rule?
Violating a black and white rule isn't allowed. So players cannot do those things.
Nothing in the rulebooks say a player cannot control when they use their bonus action, in fact, the text says the opposite. That they can choose when they use their bonus action. If you as a DM are trying to find a way to stop it despite the rules saying the player can choose when, then yes, you're "trying to rules lawyer" them back under your control. But they shouldn't be under your control, they control their own turn.
The very last line of the bonus action section declares "and anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action." You cannot an action or bonus action during a different action because you are busy doing that action. This is unlike reactions, which do operate as interrupts.
Nonsequitor.
I point out a line that does place a limit on that timing and you dismiss it as a non sequitur.
That has nothing to do with this situation. Yes, if someone is stunned or unconscious they're not doing this combo. That was never in contention.
Despite it being in the bonus action section and your presenting no argument other than that one word as to its irrelevancy.
I concede if they're under the effects of the hold person spell they're not performing this combo. Still has nothing to do with the conversation.
If 'black and white rules' can control when and how a bonus action is used, in what way is it some massive travesty of player justice for there to be a limit preventing bonus actions working like interrupts?
"You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn"
No one else gets to choose for you. Unless, (and I'll concede this point too...)they're using magic that forces your character to act under their control, like dominate person.
In your simple 'yes' response, you are arguing that you can literally be casting two spells simultaneously, even if they both have somatic components , pausing between resolution steps of a full action cantrip to cast a bonus action spell.
No, I'm not. But when in doubt if 2 or more things happen at the same time, the player whose turn it is decides which order things resolve. Doubt? See this rules text:
"If two or more things happen at the same time on a character or monster's turn, the person at the game table - whether player or DM - who controls that creature decides the order in which those things happen."
The rules always default to the person whose turn it is deciding the timing and order of events to transpire. If you as a DM are violating this principle you've overstepped your role.
You cannot take an action or bonus action during an instantaneous event such as a fall.
Big if true. Got rules text saying that? I have rule text saying otherwise.
"You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn"
The quote doesn't say that. Got rule text saying you can use an action or bonus action to interrupt something instantaneous?
"You choose when"
Unless your argument is that the event happens outside the flow of time, there is a time when the target is 5ft off the ground after being knocked up by crusher. You get to choose when the bonus action happens. Choose that moment in time.
Great! I choose 100 years ago, before this temple was looted! <uses Fast Hands bonus action to be the one who looted the temple 100 years ago>
Presumably you agree that would not work, so presumably you agree there are limits on that 'when.' In the middle of an instantaneous action is arguably a similarly non-choose-able time.
"during your turn"
Right. During my turn, I choose to take this bonus action 100 years ago. It is ""You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn" not ""You choose when during your turn to take a bonus action during your turn."
Even limiting it to having to take place during your turn, though, you could have it happen simultaneously with something else you are doing, resulting in impossible situations where the character is literally doing two contradictory things simultaneously.
Right. Sure.
Look, if you are a DM and feel the need to go to this length to prevent a combo a player of yours is using you're not acting in good faith. They're dedicating weapon type, 2 feat selections, their action and their bonus action to do what? 1d6 and prone? And you want to stop that by rules lawyering against your players? You control everything in the game except their character and their turn. That is their time. And they get to choose when things happen on that turn. You don't. If you are unsatisfied with controlling everything else and feel the need to start controlling your player's turns too, you should take a break as reevaluate why you're DMing. Because you've forgotten the whole reason you're there, to tell a story cooperatively with friends.
I'd say the rules lawyering in this case is on the side of the player even being able to use the Crusher feat to hit a monster into the air. Yes, the exact text only specifies that you can move a creature 5 feet to an unoccupied space, but let's look at this for a moment. Hitting a creature with a hammer hard enough to make them stumble for a moment and stagger to the side or backward is VERY DIFFERENT from lifting them completely off of the ground, especially creatures one size larger than you. One is completely reasonable and perhaps even expected in an encounter with someone using a weapon designed for blunt force, the other is completely anime. If you want to rule this is possible at your table, sure, but to me this reads like a player finding a "gotcha" in the rules and sounds much more like rules lawyering on the part of the player to even allow this to happen.
One is completely reasonable and perhaps even expected in an encounter with someone using a weapon designed for blunt force, the other is completely anime.
D&D is a fantasy roleplaying game. Realism isn't included in the box. I mean, the followup to the combo being discussed here is Telekinetically pushing the target with your mind alone. We left grounded realism a long, long time ago.
You said "everything in the game except their character and their turn." Are you now acknowledging that the DM does actually control some things within a player's turn?
Your phrasing here is slippery. But, generally no. The DM doesn't control the player's turn, the player does. Can something change this? Yes. But it'll be printed in black and white as a deviation from the norm. A spell effect, monster ability, condition, etc.
A DM should use these effects against their players sparingly, and only when they add to the drama of the story they're telling. Players have only a limited scope to contribute and shouldn't be hamstrung by taking control over their characters too frequently. Always try to keep their perspective in mind, having this limited scope of involvement removed from them too often or for too long would be incredibly frustrating.
You quote the portion of RAW which fits your argument and dismiss the part inconvenient to it.
People often provide quotes for their argument. I'm not sure, until now, anyone has attempted to say that providing a supporting quote for my argument was somehow a bad thing.
"Stunned or unconscious" are not the only things that could prevent you taking an action at any given time. Being already in the middle of an action can prevent you from taking a different action.
Neat! What rule quote supports this? I'm not saying I agree or disagree. I just don't remember seeing anything that has ever said what you're saying and would love to read it if you could point to it.
Being in the middle of an action using specific limbs can prevent you from using those same limbs to simultaneously do something else.
Sure I guess. Seems to also not be explicitly stated in the rules and falls under some of the common sense understanding foundations we all rely on, but if you got a rule saying this go ahead and quote it whenever.
And you were insisting that the player can control the timing of everything they do during their turn.
Unless otherwise stated, they sure do. This is supported over and over by the rules text itself as well as guidance by the authors. It is their turn, they decide what order they do things.
You are still insisting that a player can run their character off a cliff and have their character just hang there in the air while they are doing their bonus action, choosing to fall only after said bonus action is finished.
I have never made this claim. Looking back over the comments here, you seem to have invented it yourself.
I'm not sure I disagree with it, mind you. But I've certainly never said or insisted what you're falsely saying I've insisted. Please don't do that. It is a bad way to interact with anyone.
Gravity is something that 'that forces your character to act under (its) control.' The fact your limbs and mind are already in the middle of performing an action is 'something that forces your character to act under (their) control.'
Sure.
"the order in which those things happen," still normally means 'A then B.' The player can decide whether A happens first or B does but that is not the same as deciding half of A does then three quarters of B then the last half of A then the last quarter of B.
A.Knock up 5ft. B. TK Push 5ft. C. Fall 5ft D. Fall 5ft.
These are the 4 possible events we're discussing the order of. This is the order you'd place them to combo a 10ft fall/prone result.
No need to 3/4th anything. Just A->B->C->D->Bonus E (1d6/prone).
Strangely, there does not seem to be any description of the Dungeon Master's role in the actual core rules, however, this can be found here:
D&D Overview
In D&D, each player creates a character who is an adventurer and teams up with other adventurers (played by friends). One player, however, takes on the role of the DM, the game’s lead storyteller and referee. The DM runs adventures for the characters, who navigate its hazards and decide which paths to explore. The DM describes the locations and creatures that the adventurers face, and the players decide what they want their characters to do. Then the DM determines the results of the adventurers’ actions and narrates what they experience. Because the DM can improvise to react to anything the players attempt, D&D is infinitely flexible, and each adventure can be unexpected.
The DM has a much bigger role than you seem to understand.
k
You don't get to decide what their character does, dude. That's their job. They got one job, let em do it.
A common misconception is that the game is somehow adversarial in a conventional board game or sports sense but it simply is not.
It isn't supposed to be, and I often advocate for it not to be. But... reality isn't always what we wish it were, and adversarial DMs are not uncommon. Trying to take over a player's turn, for example, is certainly adversarial behavior.
The DM literally controls everything except the PC's. They literally control the laws of physics and are not obligated to interpret any given rule identically to any given character.
Here I disagree. A DM that interprets rules differently on a per-character basis specifically and intentionally is 'playing favorites' or even more nefariously 'punishing' players. This is not the behavior of a fair DM and they're probably fostering a hostile environment. Can they do it? Sure. But can and should aren't the same question. You can end every session by saying "rocks fall you all die". You'd be a DM, and that technically is allowed. But you'd not be a good one.
This is not merely deciding order one does things in a turn. A bonus action can normally be used before or after an action. But not during, since the person is occupied doing that full action during the time they are carrying out that full action. Pausing it in the middle would be aborting it.
Sure. But the Fall isn't a part of their action. Is it a natural consequence of their action? Yes. But the Fall, similarly, cannot happen during their action that caused them to be knocked up. The fall must also necessarily happen after their action. Simply interject the Bonus Action TK push before the fall happens. Between the action and the fall. That is the "when". Even if that is only a zero point in time. A millisecond. A microsecond. A Nanosecond. Even a picosecond. No matter how infinitesimally small you go, there is a point after their action and before the fall. That is the "when" they chose for their bonus action.
And as we all know by now: "You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn"
You cannot check your blade mid swing and still hit full force.
You cannot thrust your blade into a foe's shoulder and then sit down to tea with the foe not taking damage from the blade until after you finish your tea.
There are reasonable limits to what can be done.
Yes, the reasonable limits here are that the player decides when his bonus action happens on his turn.
I would probably allow this but maybe have them make a STR check for the crusher feat to lift the enemy. There would be more than enough time for the player to then use the telekinetic push before the enemy starts to fall. My reasoning is because the rules for falling are not very good. XGtE helps but not enough.
Here is an example of how the rules can be silly. Your fighting on a flying mount and you are 505 feet in the air and your party is directly below you. If you get knocked off your mount you fall 500 feet then the turn ends. You still have 5 feet to fall. Now it's your party members turn. They are a goliath who is 6-7 feet tall. RAW they could just walk over and grab you and then put you down because you don't continue falling till your next turn.
Is this ridiculous and overly specific? Yes, but you are arguing in favor of this by staying adamant on RAW. Now the DM could say that is silly and just have you fall the extra 5 feet on the same turn or maybe require the Goliath to make a STR check to try and reduce some of the damage the falling player would take, but then it's not RAW anymore it's RAI. The reason for instantaneous failing and a flat 500 feet per 6 secs is to make things easy because calculating fall times and wind resistance would be hard and time consuming. It also would not be balanced. Any race that is large or "counts as large" would almost always die and gnomes and fairies would take little to no damage regardless of how far they fell. The intent is to make falling be a quick and easy occurrence to manage, not to make things fall 500 feet instantaneously and then hover in place for 6 seconds.
Here is an example of how the rules can be silly. Your fighting on a flying mount and you are 505 feet in the air and your party is directly below you. If you get knocked off your mount you fall 500 feet then the turn ends. You still have 5 feet to fall. Now it's your party members turn. They are a goliath who is 6-7 feet tall. RAW they could just walk over and grab you and then put you down because you don't continue falling till your next turn.
not to make things fall 500 feet instantaneously and then hover in place for 6 seconds.
Your 6 seconds and my 6 seconds and the Goliath's 6 seconds are all the same 6 seconds, you get that right?
Here is an example of how the rules can be silly. Your fighting on a flying mount and you are 505 feet in the air and your party is directly below you. If you get knocked off your mount you fall 500 feet then the turn ends. You still have 5 feet to fall. Now it's your party members turn. They are a goliath who is 6-7 feet tall. RAW they could just walk over and grab you and then put you down because you don't continue falling till your next turn.
If at all possible, putting you down would end the fall and at the end of a fall, you take 20d6 bludgeoning damage.
Not sure someone could lift or push a creature that fell 500 feet considering all the velocity though.
Once per turn, when you hit a creature with an attack that deals bludgeoning damage, you can move it 5 feet to an unoccupied space, provided the target is no more than one size larger than you.
Telikinetic
As a bonus action, you can try to telekinetically shove one creature you can see within 30 feet of you. When you do so, the target must succeed on a Strength saving throw (DC 8 + your proficiency bonus + the ability modifier of the score increased by this feat) or be moved 5 feet toward or away from you. A creature can willingly fail this save.
Does this mean I can hit someone pick up with crusher then immediately as a bonus action before they come down try to push them 5' back?
Stepping back from the questions as to whether falling can be mitigated by non readied actions and bonus actions (no) there's the question as to whether any height can be achieved from which falling could occur.
No where does it specify you cannot pick up. Other forms of forced movement such as swarm Druid make a point of stating you can't pick up this one does not.
If empty air isn't unoccupied space then it can't be occupied space when there is something there meaning your making it so flying creatures cannot be targeted by a lot of things. Fliers are strong enough already.
Yes, the Swarmkeeper Ranger's Gathered Swarm ability means that "The attack’s target must succeed on a Strength saving throw against your spell save DC or be moved by the swarm up to 15 feet horizontally in a direction of your choice" while crusher only says that "Once per turn, when you hit a creature with an attack that deals bludgeoning damage, you can move it 5 feet to an unoccupied space".
In the context of a grid or hex-based game, it would then be up to the DM to decide whether any non-horizontal movement is possible. To me it's a cheat. Why mention unoccupied spaces at all if the player can just say, "well, in that case I'll hit the opponent into the space above the other opponent".
I can imagine a powerful boxer hitting an opponent so that their feet come off the ground - but 5 feet off the ground?
I'd rule that crusher moves an opponent predominantly in a horizontal direction and that the strength-based saving throw for a subsequent use of the telekinetic feat would still typically apply.
Here is an example of how the rules can be silly. Your fighting on a flying mount and you are 505 feet in the air and your party is directly below you. If you get knocked off your mount you fall 500 feet then the turn ends. You still have 5 feet to fall. Now it's your party members turn. They are a goliath who is 6-7 feet tall. RAW they could just walk over and grab you and then put you down because you don't continue falling till your next turn.
not to make things fall 500 feet instantaneously and then hover in place for 6 seconds.
Your 6 seconds and my 6 seconds and the Goliath's 6 seconds are all the same 6 seconds, you get that right?
You're not speaking to their actual point. Aggressively not speaking to their point.
if they were flying at 495 feet up their friend would be unable to have helped.
if they were flying at 530 feet up their friend wouldn't be able to jump high enough to grab them on his turn.
but somehow if they were falling from exact 505 feet they'd be just above the ground when it was the goliath's turn and they could casually stroll over and grab their party member who is theoretically milliseconds from splattering on the ground travelling at terminal velocity.
There are rules for falling, and those rules say you fall instantaneously.
Sure. We can even concede this point and assume: No amount of time exists between starting the fall and ending the fall.
We would still have the Bonus Action happen before the start of the fall. So the TK push happens pre-fall not mid-fall. The fact that falls are instantaneous was and is a red herring.
It's really not a red herring. It's all that needs to be said to put the subject to rest.
Instantaneous is a very intentional, specific word. It means that it happens right away. It means that you can't do anything before it happens unless the thing specifically interrupts that thing. That is the whole reason they put the word there. If they wanted to allow what you're saying, they wouldn't have used that word. You are shoving aside the definition of the word to claim that you can trigger an ability before an instantaneous thing happens. If you could do that it wouldn't be instantaneous. Cause that's what the word means. I'm not sure how many other ways it needs to be said.
There are rules for falling, and those rules say you fall instantaneously.
Sure. We can even concede this point and assume: No amount of time exists between starting the fall and ending the fall.
We would still have the Bonus Action happen before the start of the fall. So the TK push happens pre-fall not mid-fall. The fact that falls are instantaneous was and is a red herring.
It's really not a red herring. It's all that needs to be said to put the subject to rest.
Instantaneous is a very intentional, specific word. It means that it happens right away. It means that you can't do anything before it happens unless the thing specifically interrupts that thing. That is the whole reason they put the word there. If they wanted to allow what you're saying, they wouldn't have used that word. You are shoving aside the definition of the word to claim that you can trigger an ability before an instantaneous thing happens. If you could do that it wouldn't be instantaneous. Cause that's what the word means. I'm not sure how many other ways it needs to be said.
Time exists before instantaneous events. We can concede you cannot interrupt the fall because it happens instantaneously, sure, but we're not trying to interrupt the fall. The Bonus Action happens before the fall. The fall, from start to finish, is still instantaneous.
Remember. The rule that says falls are immediate says exactly this:
"The rule for falling assumes that a creature immediately drops the entire distancewhen it falls."
This rule tells us that the distance of the fall itself happens immediately. NOT that the fall begins immediately. It also calls this an "assumption" because given no other interactions this is the outcome. When the rules say something is an assumption, it means that they're readily acknowledging that this is something that can sometimes not be the case, that exceptions exist. And, finally, this oft quoted rule is an optional rule. No standard rules refer to falling as instantaneous. Nothing in RAW prevents the combo, nor does anything prevent it if you do decide to adopt the XGTE optional falling rule that calls the drop distance instantaneous.
Time exists before instantaneous events. We can concede you cannot interrupt the fall because it happens instantaneously, sure, but we're not trying to interrupt the fall. The Bonus Action happens before the fall. The fall, from start to finish, is still instantaneous.
Remember. The rule that says falls are immediate says exactly this:
This rule tells us that the distance of the fall itself happens immediately. NOT that the fall begins immediately.
When a creature is in mid air, it immediatly fall unless it can fly.
And before it falls, you are moving it 5 feet up during an attack action you are making with your Crusher feat. You can't take a bonus action while using another action like you're saying. This has been clarified by the Dev before.
@JeremyECrawford The basic falling rules in D&D assume a fall is instantaneous. If you'd like rules for a very long fall, take a look at the section called "Falling" in "Xanathar's Guide to Everything" (p. 77). #DnD
@JeremyECrawford No general rule allows you to insert a bonus action between attacks in a single action. You can interrupt a multiple-attack action with a bonus action/reaction only if the trigger of the bonus action/reaction is an attack, rather than the action. #DnD
Time exists before instantaneous events. We can concede you cannot interrupt the fall because it happens instantaneously, sure, but we're not trying to interrupt the fall. The Bonus Action happens before the fall. The fall, from start to finish, is still instantaneous.
Remember. The rule that says falls are immediate says exactly this:
This rule tells us that the distance of the fall itself happens immediately. NOT that the fall begins immediately.
When a creature is in mid air, it immediatly fall unless it can fly.
You are welcome to make this up as a ruling for your games and at your table, absolutely. DMs are encouraged to make up rulings that suit their needs.
Meanwhile, if we're discussing RAW, we should probably limit ourselves to discussing what is actually said by the rules. You might be conflating your personal rulings with what RAW is.
And before it falls, you are moving it 5 feet up during an attack action you are making with your Crusher feat. You can't take a bonus action while using another action like you're saying. This has been clarified by the Dev before.
@JeremyECrawford The basic falling rules in D&D assume a fall is instantaneous. If you'd like rules for a very long fall, take a look at the section called "Falling" in "Xanathar's Guide to Everything" (p. 77). #DnD
@JeremyECrawford No general rule allows you to insert a bonus action between attacks in a single action. You can interrupt a multiple-attack action with a bonus action/reaction only if the trigger of the bonus action/reaction is an attack, rather than the action. #DnD
Falling is not part of your action. Nothing about the attack, feat, or ability says that the target falls. Falling happens after your action as a natural consequence of not being on the ground. It is not caused by the player. It is not part of their action.
Falling is not part of your action. Nothing about the attack, feat, or ability says that the target falls. Falling happens after your action as a natural consequence of not being on the ground. It is not caused by the player. It is not part of their action.
I never said falling was part of the attack.Falling happen instantly when you move the target up 5 feet. Even if you could attack twice with Extra attack, the creature would fall before you attack it again because the rules says you instantly falls. And the Develepper too.
Falling is not part of your action. Nothing about the attack, feat, or ability says that the target falls. Falling happens after your action as a natural consequence of not being on the ground. It is not caused by the player. It is not part of their action.
I never said falling was part of the attack.Falling happen instantly when you move the target up 5 feet. Even if you could attack twice with Extra attack, the creature would fall before you attack it again because the rules says you instantly falls. And the Develepper too.
They do not, and this has already been explained to you.
Quote:
"The rule for falling assumes that a creature immediately drops the entire distance when it falls."
The rule is that from start to finish the fall is assumed to be instantaneous. The rule is not that the fall begins instantaneously. The quote from the dev is consistent with this.
There are two different questions here and you are conflating their answers.
When does the fall start?
How long does the fall last?
The rules and quotes you've referenced all are answering question 2. The fall's duration is instantaneous.
But question 1... now that is the more important question. When. When does the fall start? For questions about when, I gotta go back to the quote I've referenced from the start. "You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn". You choose when the bonus action happens. You choose to have it before the fall, then the When does the fall happen question is: After the bonus action.
Nothing, RAW, prevents this combo. Nothing. Not the official rules, nor this optional rule on falling XGTE. Nada. Devs have repeatedly gone out of their way to stress that whoever's turn it is is in control of timing of events on their turn unless that timing is otherwise specified.
Nothing, RAW, prevents this combo. Nothing. Not the official rules, nor this optional rule on falling XGTE. Nada. Devs have repeatedly gone out of their way to stress that whoever's turn it is is in control of timing of events on their turn unless that timing is otherwise specified.
So you can literally stab two different targets simultaneously with the same weapon then? Roll to hit, find you hit and then before rolling damage, use a bonus attack to strike another target with the same weapon even before it has actually done damage? You what... mark an 'enter the enemy's body here' spot, stab some other foe then return to finish the job against that first foe, hitting (since you know in advance you hit) the exact spot you marked?
No.
By your interpretation of the rules that is completely fair game.
Nope.
Rather certain that is not what they intended nor anything they have gone out of their way to stress.
Yes.
Violating a black and white rule isn't allowed. So players cannot do those things.
Nothing in the rulebooks say a player cannot control when they use their bonus action, in fact, the text says the opposite. That they can choose when they use their bonus action. If you as a DM are trying to find a way to stop it despite the rules saying the player can choose when, then yes, you're "trying to rules lawyer" them back under your control. But they shouldn't be under your control, they control their own turn.
Nonsequitor.
In this case it is. The rules say they control when. You're trying to take that control from them with no rule-based justification. Not a pro-gamer move there.
I got quotes!
You can't take action or bonus action during an instantaneous event that last a split second. You can't cast Dispel Magic on an instantaneous spell for exemple. It was clarified in a Sage Advice.
There are rules for falling, and those rules say you fall instantaneously. By any sensible reading of those rules, you can't interrupt the instantaneous five foot fall with your bonus action, unless it's something that specifically says it can interrupt a fall. You can try and convince your DM that two feats is enough payment to bend those rules but it's certainly not rules lawyering(lmao) for them to reject you.
true.
I've made no such claim. This is silliness right here.
Yes, it does, and I am still the only person quoting it. "You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn"
That is the RAW. You have not provided any rules, as they are written, that says otherwise.
Sure. We can even concede this point and assume: No amount of time exists between starting the fall and ending the fall.
We would still have the Bonus Action happen before the start of the fall. So the TK push happens pre-fall not mid-fall. The fact that falls are instantaneous was and is a red herring.
We're not interrupting the fall.
Pretty easy to convince myself not to try to take over my player's turns.
That has nothing to do with this situation. Yes, if someone is stunned or unconscious they're not doing this combo. That was never in contention.
I concede if they're under the effects of the hold person spell they're not performing this combo. Still has nothing to do with the conversation.
"You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn"
No one else gets to choose for you. Unless, (and I'll concede this point too...)they're using magic that forces your character to act under their control, like dominate person.
No, I'm not. But when in doubt if 2 or more things happen at the same time, the player whose turn it is decides which order things resolve. Doubt? See this rules text:
"If two or more things happen at the same time on a character or monster's turn, the person at the game table - whether player or DM - who controls that creature decides the order in which those things happen."
The rules always default to the person whose turn it is deciding the timing and order of events to transpire. If you as a DM are violating this principle you've overstepped your role.
I got quotes!
I'd say the rules lawyering in this case is on the side of the player even being able to use the Crusher feat to hit a monster into the air. Yes, the exact text only specifies that you can move a creature 5 feet to an unoccupied space, but let's look at this for a moment. Hitting a creature with a hammer hard enough to make them stumble for a moment and stagger to the side or backward is VERY DIFFERENT from lifting them completely off of the ground, especially creatures one size larger than you. One is completely reasonable and perhaps even expected in an encounter with someone using a weapon designed for blunt force, the other is completely anime. If you want to rule this is possible at your table, sure, but to me this reads like a player finding a "gotcha" in the rules and sounds much more like rules lawyering on the part of the player to even allow this to happen.
D&D is a fantasy roleplaying game. Realism isn't included in the box. I mean, the followup to the combo being discussed here is Telekinetically pushing the target with your mind alone. We left grounded realism a long, long time ago.
Your phrasing here is slippery. But, generally no. The DM doesn't control the player's turn, the player does. Can something change this? Yes. But it'll be printed in black and white as a deviation from the norm. A spell effect, monster ability, condition, etc.
A DM should use these effects against their players sparingly, and only when they add to the drama of the story they're telling. Players have only a limited scope to contribute and shouldn't be hamstrung by taking control over their characters too frequently. Always try to keep their perspective in mind, having this limited scope of involvement removed from them too often or for too long would be incredibly frustrating.
People often provide quotes for their argument. I'm not sure, until now, anyone has attempted to say that providing a supporting quote for my argument was somehow a bad thing.
Neat! What rule quote supports this? I'm not saying I agree or disagree. I just don't remember seeing anything that has ever said what you're saying and would love to read it if you could point to it.
Sure I guess. Seems to also not be explicitly stated in the rules and falls under some of the common sense understanding foundations we all rely on, but if you got a rule saying this go ahead and quote it whenever.
Unless otherwise stated, they sure do. This is supported over and over by the rules text itself as well as guidance by the authors. It is their turn, they decide what order they do things.
I have never made this claim. Looking back over the comments here, you seem to have invented it yourself.
I'm not sure I disagree with it, mind you. But I've certainly never said or insisted what you're falsely saying I've insisted. Please don't do that. It is a bad way to interact with anyone.
Sure.
A.Knock up 5ft. B. TK Push 5ft. C. Fall 5ft D. Fall 5ft.
These are the 4 possible events we're discussing the order of. This is the order you'd place them to combo a 10ft fall/prone result.
No need to 3/4th anything. Just A->B->C->D->Bonus E (1d6/prone).
k
You don't get to decide what their character does, dude. That's their job. They got one job, let em do it.
It isn't supposed to be, and I often advocate for it not to be. But... reality isn't always what we wish it were, and adversarial DMs are not uncommon. Trying to take over a player's turn, for example, is certainly adversarial behavior.
Here I disagree. A DM that interprets rules differently on a per-character basis specifically and intentionally is 'playing favorites' or even more nefariously 'punishing' players. This is not the behavior of a fair DM and they're probably fostering a hostile environment. Can they do it? Sure. But can and should aren't the same question. You can end every session by saying "rocks fall you all die". You'd be a DM, and that technically is allowed. But you'd not be a good one.
Sure. But the Fall isn't a part of their action. Is it a natural consequence of their action? Yes. But the Fall, similarly, cannot happen during their action that caused them to be knocked up. The fall must also necessarily happen after their action. Simply interject the Bonus Action TK push before the fall happens. Between the action and the fall. That is the "when". Even if that is only a zero point in time. A millisecond. A microsecond. A Nanosecond. Even a picosecond. No matter how infinitesimally small you go, there is a point after their action and before the fall. That is the "when" they chose for their bonus action.
And as we all know by now: "You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn"
Yes, the reasonable limits here are that the player decides when his bonus action happens on his turn.
I got quotes!
I would probably allow this but maybe have them make a STR check for the crusher feat to lift the enemy. There would be more than enough time for the player to then use the telekinetic push before the enemy starts to fall. My reasoning is because the rules for falling are not very good. XGtE helps but not enough.
Here is an example of how the rules can be silly. Your fighting on a flying mount and you are 505 feet in the air and your party is directly below you. If you get knocked off your mount you fall 500 feet then the turn ends. You still have 5 feet to fall. Now it's your party members turn. They are a goliath who is 6-7 feet tall. RAW they could just walk over and grab you and then put you down because you don't continue falling till your next turn.
Is this ridiculous and overly specific? Yes, but you are arguing in favor of this by staying adamant on RAW. Now the DM could say that is silly and just have you fall the extra 5 feet on the same turn or maybe require the Goliath to make a STR check to try and reduce some of the damage the falling player would take, but then it's not RAW anymore it's RAI. The reason for instantaneous failing and a flat 500 feet per 6 secs is to make things easy because calculating fall times and wind resistance would be hard and time consuming. It also would not be balanced. Any race that is large or "counts as large" would almost always die and gnomes and fairies would take little to no damage regardless of how far they fell. The intent is to make falling be a quick and easy occurrence to manage, not to make things fall 500 feet instantaneously and then hover in place for 6 seconds.
Your 6 seconds and my 6 seconds and the Goliath's 6 seconds are all the same 6 seconds, you get that right?
If at all possible, putting you down would end the fall and at the end of a fall, you take 20d6 bludgeoning damage.
Not sure someone could lift or push a creature that fell 500 feet considering all the velocity though.
This reminds me of Viva La Dirt League videos on D&D turn order loll
Stepping back from the questions as to whether falling can be mitigated by non readied actions and bonus actions (no) there's the question as to whether any height can be achieved from which falling could occur.
Yes, the Swarmkeeper Ranger's Gathered Swarm ability means that "The attack’s target must succeed on a Strength saving throw against your spell save DC or be moved by the swarm up to 15 feet horizontally in a direction of your choice" while crusher only says that "Once per turn, when you hit a creature with an attack that deals bludgeoning damage, you can move it 5 feet to an unoccupied space".
In the context of a grid or hex-based game, it would then be up to the DM to decide whether any non-horizontal movement is possible. To me it's a cheat. Why mention unoccupied spaces at all if the player can just say, "well, in that case I'll hit the opponent into the space above the other opponent".
I can imagine a powerful boxer hitting an opponent so that their feet come off the ground - but 5 feet off the ground?
I'd rule that crusher moves an opponent predominantly in a horizontal direction and that the strength-based saving throw for a subsequent use of the telekinetic feat would still typically apply.
You're not speaking to their actual point. Aggressively not speaking to their point.
if they were flying at 495 feet up their friend would be unable to have helped.
if they were flying at 530 feet up their friend wouldn't be able to jump high enough to grab them on his turn.
but somehow if they were falling from exact 505 feet they'd be just above the ground when it was the goliath's turn and they could casually stroll over and grab their party member who is theoretically milliseconds from splattering on the ground travelling at terminal velocity.
It is silly. They're right.
I got quotes!
It's really not a red herring. It's all that needs to be said to put the subject to rest.
Instantaneous is a very intentional, specific word. It means that it happens right away. It means that you can't do anything before it happens unless the thing specifically interrupts that thing. That is the whole reason they put the word there. If they wanted to allow what you're saying, they wouldn't have used that word. You are shoving aside the definition of the word to claim that you can trigger an ability before an instantaneous thing happens. If you could do that it wouldn't be instantaneous. Cause that's what the word means. I'm not sure how many other ways it needs to be said.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Time exists before instantaneous events. We can concede you cannot interrupt the fall because it happens instantaneously, sure, but we're not trying to interrupt the fall. The Bonus Action happens before the fall. The fall, from start to finish, is still instantaneous.
Remember. The rule that says falls are immediate says exactly this:
This rule tells us that the distance of the fall itself happens immediately. NOT that the fall begins immediately. It also calls this an "assumption" because given no other interactions this is the outcome. When the rules say something is an assumption, it means that they're readily acknowledging that this is something that can sometimes not be the case, that exceptions exist. And, finally, this oft quoted rule is an optional rule. No standard rules refer to falling as instantaneous. Nothing in RAW prevents the combo, nor does anything prevent it if you do decide to adopt the XGTE optional falling rule that calls the drop distance instantaneous.
I got quotes!
When a creature is in mid air, it immediatly fall unless it can fly.
And before it falls, you are moving it 5 feet up during an attack action you are making with your Crusher feat. You can't take a bonus action while using another action like you're saying. This has been clarified by the Dev before.
You are welcome to make this up as a ruling for your games and at your table, absolutely. DMs are encouraged to make up rulings that suit their needs.
Meanwhile, if we're discussing RAW, we should probably limit ourselves to discussing what is actually said by the rules. You might be conflating your personal rulings with what RAW is.
Falling is not part of your action. Nothing about the attack, feat, or ability says that the target falls. Falling happens after your action as a natural consequence of not being on the ground. It is not caused by the player. It is not part of their action.
I got quotes!
I never said falling was part of the attack.Falling happen instantly when you move the target up 5 feet. Even if you could attack twice with Extra attack, the creature would fall before you attack it again because the rules says you instantly falls. And the Develepper too.
They do not, and this has already been explained to you.
Quote:
The rule is that from start to finish the fall is assumed to be instantaneous. The rule is not that the fall begins instantaneously. The quote from the dev is consistent with this.
There are two different questions here and you are conflating their answers.
The rules and quotes you've referenced all are answering question 2. The fall's duration is instantaneous.
But question 1... now that is the more important question. When. When does the fall start? For questions about when, I gotta go back to the quote I've referenced from the start. "You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn". You choose when the bonus action happens. You choose to have it before the fall, then the When does the fall happen question is: After the bonus action.
Nothing, RAW, prevents this combo. Nothing. Not the official rules, nor this optional rule on falling XGTE. Nada. Devs have repeatedly gone out of their way to stress that whoever's turn it is is in control of timing of events on their turn unless that timing is otherwise specified.
I got quotes!
No.
Nope.
It isn't.
I got quotes!
at some point in various discussions, it may be worth factions splitting off to discuss their new topic so as to prevent derailing a thread,