Except it doesn't say that. It says it can use it on its turn, but it never says only.
It doesn’t have to, the fact that it says “on its turn” at all implies that it is only possible “on its turn.”
Just want to reiterate this. It seems lost on some of the recent discussion.
It wasn't lost, it's just either false or irrelevant. "On its turn" does not mean "Only on its turn", that's simple grammar. It might mean the author intended "Only on its turn", but that's an argument about RAI, not about RAW.
That is certainly an opinion to have, but ignoring a direct rules statement seems a poor choice in rules discussion. I guess there isn't much more to say on this then.
Right, ignoring a rule that tells you when you can do something in a game that almost exclusively tells you when you can do something is tantamount to ignoring the rule entirely. Your opinion is different, so fine.
Right, ignoring a rule that tells you when you can do something in a game that almost exclusively tells you when you can do something is tantamount to ignoring the rule entirely. Your opinion is different, so fine.
The rule doesn't tell you anything about when you can use multiattack. It tells you what class of monsters have multiattack.
Right, ignoring a rule that tells you when you can do something in a game that almost exclusively tells you when you can do something is tantamount to ignoring the rule entirely. Your opinion is different, so fine.
The rule doesn't tell you anything about when you can use multiattack. It tells you what class of monsters have multiattack.
Are you implying that there is any evidence at all that any class of monsters can or cannot use multiattack outside of their turn? Or are you just assuming based on the class of monsters that can use it on their turn?
Are you implying that there is any evidence at all that any class of monsters can or cannot use multiattack outside of their turn? Or are you just assuming based on the class of monsters that can use it on their turn?
Neither one. I'm saying that the text you're pointing to is descriptive, not prescriptive.
Right, so we agree that no text describes any class of creatures that can make multiple attacks outside of their turn. (Though I admit that individual creatures may have legendary actions granting them that ability.)
Are you implying that there is any evidence at all that any class of monsters can or cannot use multiattack outside of their turn? Or are you just assuming based on the class of monsters that can use it on their turn?
Neither one. I'm saying that the text you're pointing to is descriptive, not prescriptive.
In the MM, page 10, the Actions section starts with:
When a monster takes its action, it can choose from the options in the Actions section of its stat block or use one of the actions available to all creatures
Multiattack is then listed as one of the more common actions found in stat blocks
Is there some reading or usage of "takes its action" or "take your action" that you're aware of that does not include an unstated but very clearly implied "on its turn"?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Is there some reading or usage of "takes its action" or "take your action" that you're aware of that does not include an unstated but very clearly implied "on its turn"?
The ready allows you to specify an action which you will take in reaction to a trigger.
Is there some reading or usage of "takes its action" or "take your action" that you're aware of that does not include an unstated but very clearly implied "on its turn"?
The ready allows you to specify an action which you will take in reaction to a trigger.
That didn't answer my question
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Creatures take their action on their turn. One of the actions they can take is ready. Ready allows specifying an action, such as one of the actions in their stat block. Thus, while the actions in the stat block can be taken on the creature's turn, and normally are, there is nothing saying that they must be.
Creatures take their action on their turn. One of the actions they can take is ready. Ready allows specifying an action, such as one of the actions in their stat block. Thus, while the actions in the stat block can be taken on the creature's turn, and normally are, there is nothing saying that they must be.
So, not gonna answer the question then. Got it
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The answer to your question is "Yes but irrelevant".
Wait, you know of some rules text that would support your position, but you think it's irrelevant?
That's, uhh... OK. Seems like nothing more needs be said then
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Wait, you know of some rules text that would support your position, but you think it's irrelevant?
Sorry, I misread the original question. You are correct that "take your action" implies on your turn. It's just that this observation... doesn't matter. The fact that a creature is permitted to do something on its turn does not mean that it is not permitted to do it outside of its turn.
This keeps coming down to the same logical fallacy of denying the antecedent: the fact that you can do something on your turn says nothing about whether you can do it outside of your turn.
Right , it is simply that the rules don’t say that you can do something that makes doing it not RAW.
The rules do say you can do it, though. The rules say you can ready an action. Multiattack is an action. Unless some other rule says you cannot do so, it is thus legal, and no amount of pointing at rules that say when you can do something will turn them into a rule that says when you cannot.
Right , it is simply that the rules don’t say that you can do something that makes doing it not RAW.
The rules do say you can do it, though. The rules say you can ready an action. Multiattack is an action. Unless some other rule says you cannot do so, it is thus legal, and no amount of pointing at rules that say when you can do something will turn them into a rule that says when you cannot.
There are multiple examples of creatures whose Multiattack allows them to replace an attack with a Spellcasting action
However, the Ready action has separate rules for spells. Do those rules apply, in your mind, when you "Ready the Multiattack action?" Because you're not readying a spell, you're readying Multiattack
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
There are multiple examples of creatures whose Multiattack allows them to replace an attack with a Spellcasting action
However, the Ready action has separate rules for spells. Do those rules apply, in your mind, when you "Ready the Multiattack action?" Because you're not readying a spell, you're readying Multiattack
I would consider that legitimately unclear.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It wasn't lost, it's just either false or irrelevant. "On its turn" does not mean "Only on its turn", that's simple grammar. It might mean the author intended "Only on its turn", but that's an argument about RAI, not about RAW.
That is certainly an opinion to have, but ignoring a direct rules statement seems a poor choice in rules discussion. I guess there isn't much more to say on this then.
Who's ignoring a direct rules statement? The argument is about what the statement means, not whether it exists.
Right, ignoring a rule that tells you when you can do something in a game that almost exclusively tells you when you can do something is tantamount to ignoring the rule entirely. Your opinion is different, so fine.
The rule doesn't tell you anything about when you can use multiattack. It tells you what class of monsters have multiattack.
Are you implying that there is any evidence at all that any class of monsters can or cannot use multiattack outside of their turn? Or are you just assuming based on the class of monsters that can use it on their turn?
Neither one. I'm saying that the text you're pointing to is descriptive, not prescriptive.
Right, so we agree that no text describes any class of creatures that can make multiple attacks outside of their turn. (Though I admit that individual creatures may have legendary actions granting them that ability.)
In the MM, page 10, the Actions section starts with:
Multiattack is then listed as one of the more common actions found in stat blocks
Is there some reading or usage of "takes its action" or "take your action" that you're aware of that does not include an unstated but very clearly implied "on its turn"?
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The ready allows you to specify an action which you will take in reaction to a trigger.
That didn't answer my question
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Creatures take their action on their turn. One of the actions they can take is ready. Ready allows specifying an action, such as one of the actions in their stat block. Thus, while the actions in the stat block can be taken on the creature's turn, and normally are, there is nothing saying that they must be.
So, not gonna answer the question then. Got it
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The answer to your question is "Yes but irrelevant".
Wait, you know of some rules text that would support your position, but you think it's irrelevant?
That's, uhh... OK. Seems like nothing more needs be said then
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Sorry, I misread the original question. You are correct that "take your action" implies on your turn. It's just that this observation... doesn't matter. The fact that a creature is permitted to do something on its turn does not mean that it is not permitted to do it outside of its turn.
This keeps coming down to the same logical fallacy of denying the antecedent: the fact that you can do something on your turn says nothing about whether you can do it outside of your turn.
Right , it is simply that the rules don’t say that you can do something that makes doing it not RAW.
The rules do say you can do it, though. The rules say you can ready an action. Multiattack is an action. Unless some other rule says you cannot do so, it is thus legal, and no amount of pointing at rules that say when you can do something will turn them into a rule that says when you cannot.
There are multiple examples of creatures whose Multiattack allows them to replace an attack with a Spellcasting action
However, the Ready action has separate rules for spells. Do those rules apply, in your mind, when you "Ready the Multiattack action?" Because you're not readying a spell, you're readying Multiattack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I would consider that legitimately unclear.