If you are making an Attack action you usually check to see if you are in range and if not you don't make that action.
But I was asked if you can make an attack action knowing you're out of range anyway? Knowing that you're going to fail but still make the attack action anyways. This normally does not have any benefit but there are some defensive abilities that as long as you make the action regardless of its outcome you get a benefit.
If you are making an Attack action you usually check to see if you are in range and if not you don't make that action.
But I was asked if you can make an attack action knowing you're out of range anyway? Knowing that you're going to fail but still make the attack action anyways. This normally does not have any benefit but there are some defensive abilities that as long as you make the action regardless of its outcome you get a benefit.
You can always attack a target that is within range (e.g. the ground), but there are two competing answers to this:
As Quindraco points out this is not something the rules give a clear answer on. The rule from the PHB requires that your target be within range of the attack, but doesn't clarify what happens if a player knowingly or unknowingly attempts to target an invalid target.
Xanathar's rule at least addresses what happens with spells that unknowingly target an invalid target, but doesn't state that a player can knowingly target an invalid target. Also this rule is specific to spell targeting and is not necessarily applicable to weapon attacks.
Ultimately this is something that will come down to DM fiat. Personally I would allow a player to target the point in space nearest to a creature that is out of range or behind cover, given their character knows the creature's location. This would still allow the player to attack futilely for flavor and RP but not run afoul of any rules. This would qualify for features that require taking the attack action, but not qualify for features that require attacking a creature (since what was attacked was a point in space). But I can easily see a DM ruling differently as the player is spending their action that could have been used to do other things, like Dash or Dodge.
If it's with a melee weapon attack, you can't extend your arms beyond your reach. However, there actually are sword throwing mechanics in 5e! These rules state that if you throw a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, you treat it as an improvised ranged weapon for the attack, meaning that the attack has a range of 20/60ft and deals 1d4 + your STR modifier damage of a type appropriate to the object thrown (PHB page 148).
In the case of a ranged weapon attack or any spell attack, you can't attack out of range. Long range on ranged weapons already represents making an attack from a point that is hard to aim at the target well from, but you can still physically fire your weapon that far. Beyond that range, you simply can't make the weapon or ammunition go farther (PHB page 195). In terms of spells, a spell that is cast at an out-of-range target, as Quindraco mentioned above, fails.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Panda-wat (I hate my username) is somehow convinced that he is objectively right about everything D&D related even though he obviously is not. Considering that, he'd probably make a great D&D youtuber.
"If I die, I can live with that." ~Luke Hart, the DM lair
You can always swing a sword or throw an axe at a creature that is too far away to possibly hit it, but that may not constitute an attack against a valid target for game rule purposes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If you are making an Attack action you usually check to see if you are in range and if not you don't make that action.
But I was asked if you can make an attack action knowing you're out of range anyway? Knowing that you're going to fail but still make the attack action anyways. This normally does not have any benefit but there are some defensive abilities that as long as you make the action regardless of its outcome you get a benefit.
You can always attack a target that is within range (e.g. the ground), but there are two competing answers to this:
As Quindraco points out this is not something the rules give a clear answer on. The rule from the PHB requires that your target be within range of the attack, but doesn't clarify what happens if a player knowingly or unknowingly attempts to target an invalid target.
Xanathar's rule at least addresses what happens with spells that unknowingly target an invalid target, but doesn't state that a player can knowingly target an invalid target. Also this rule is specific to spell targeting and is not necessarily applicable to weapon attacks.
Ultimately this is something that will come down to DM fiat. Personally I would allow a player to target the point in space nearest to a creature that is out of range or behind cover, given their character knows the creature's location. This would still allow the player to attack futilely for flavor and RP but not run afoul of any rules. This would qualify for features that require taking the attack action, but not qualify for features that require attacking a creature (since what was attacked was a point in space). But I can easily see a DM ruling differently as the player is spending their action that could have been used to do other things, like Dash or Dodge.
If it's with a melee weapon attack, you can't extend your arms beyond your reach. However, there actually are sword throwing mechanics in 5e! These rules state that if you throw a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, you treat it as an improvised ranged weapon for the attack, meaning that the attack has a range of 20/60ft and deals 1d4 + your STR modifier damage of a type appropriate to the object thrown (PHB page 148).
In the case of a ranged weapon attack or any spell attack, you can't attack out of range. Long range on ranged weapons already represents making an attack from a point that is hard to aim at the target well from, but you can still physically fire your weapon that far. Beyond that range, you simply can't make the weapon or ammunition go farther (PHB page 195). In terms of spells, a spell that is cast at an out-of-range target, as Quindraco mentioned above, fails.
Panda-wat (I hate my username) is somehow convinced that he is objectively right about everything D&D related even though he obviously is not. Considering that, he'd probably make a great D&D youtuber.
"If I die, I can live with that." ~Luke Hart, the DM lair
You can always swing a sword or throw an axe at a creature that is too far away to possibly hit it, but that may not constitute an attack against a valid target for game rule purposes.