Yeah, about three, but i see around 4 ish people that agree with me (Not including me of course) Now maybe you should bring some actual factual evidence to the adults table so you can "prove me wrong"
why are you resorting to personal attacks for your argument? I would apprecaite if you did not do so
and I have, part of the issue here is the ambigous language of the rules as written, which as has been seen, can be used in either argument, but, we have at least one source of rai, and i have checked for other sources, and seen a few others, that all state you cant
with the ambigous wording, you can make an argument against it, but with the fact it can, and has been argued against, with included rai, id say the ruling should be with those that fall in line with rai, this is not something that you can firmly state rules as written you can do anyways, as there is no hard evidence saying you can, nor is there hard evidence other then the wording and the rai
now if you want to argue you can, im gonna hop off this thread so im no longer disrespected
this is not something that you can firmly state rules as written you can do anyways, as there is no hard evidence saying you can, nor is there hard evidence other then the wording and the rai
Sure it is. Ready Action rules allow you to ready any action you have available. Multiattack is an action.
And, that's it. That's all we need to know we can do this.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
The wording is not in fact ambiguous. The confusion comes because people have expectations about what the rule says and thus read things into it that are not present.
No one is saying it means anything else. Just cause you read the magical 3 three words "On its turn" Does not mean it is limited to its turn, use some context mate.
I should use some context??? Well that's amusing.
The ability references "on its turn" and also specifies that it only gets one attack with an OA. The PC version of the ability, Extra Attack, also only works on your turn. The context is that a creature isn't expected to be able to make multiple attack rolls outside of its turn. Sure some spells will allow you to do so but they would allow you to do so not just by the use of the Ready action but they would allow that if you somehow get to cast the spell as a reaction (for example as an OA) too. They clearly break the norm.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think it would create much of a problem if you allowed monsters to use Multiattack outside of its turn with a Ready action. I just find it hilarious that the "on its turn" part should be nullified because it didn't include an "only". If that was the intention why include the "on its turn" part at all?
I just find it hilarious that the "on its turn" part should be nullified because it didn't include an "only". If that was the intention why include the "on its turn" part at all?
You may find it hilarious, but it's the way grammar works. As for why, perhaps to distinguish from other methods of granting multiple attacks that normally work outside of its turn, such as legendary actions?
No one is saying it means anything else. Just cause you read the magical 3 three words "On its turn" Does not mean it is limited to its turn, use some context mate.
Except that it literally does. See the rest of the thread.
It literally does not. Literal means that it's actually written in the text.
It absolutely does not. Please google what the word "literal" means. XD
It does not say it is limited to their turn does it? No. It says a creature that can multiple attacks on their turn, HAS the multiattack ability. The Multiattack ability is an action. Therefore it can be readied. Simple as that mate.
Where does it say that you can't conjure magic unicorns from you belly button that automatically kill all your enemies when you roll for initiative?
It does not say it is limited to their turn does it? No. It says a creature that can multiple attacks on their turn, HAS the multiattack ability. The Multiattack ability is an action. Therefore it can be readied. Simple as that mate.
Where does it say that you can't conjure magic unicorns from you belly button that automatically kill all your enemies when you roll for initiative?
We're not doing that. Instead, we're Readying an Action. The rules that allow us to do this are found in the PHB, Chapter 9, combat. On Actions in Combat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
FWIW I know of at least one instance in the game where Multiattack is usable off turn as a reaction. It's the Duergar Screamer's Engine of Pain from Mordenkainen’s Tomb of Foes;
Engine of Pain. Once per turn, a creature that attacks the screamer can target the duergar trapped in it. The attacker has disadvantage on the attack roll. On a hit, the attack deals an extra 11 (2dl0) damage to the screamer, and the screamer can respond by using its Multiattack with its reaction.
It does not say it is limited to their turn does it? No. It says a creature that can multiple attacks on their turn, HAS the multiattack ability. The Multiattack ability is an action. Therefore it can be readied. Simple as that mate.
Where does it say that you can't conjure magic unicorns from you belly button that automatically kill all your enemies when you roll for initiative?
We're not doing that. Instead, we're Readying an Action. The rules that allow us to do this are found in the PHB, Chapter 9, combat. On Actions in Combat.
FWIW I know of at least one instance in the game where Multiattack is usable off turn as a reaction. It's the Duergar Screamer's Engine of Pain from Mordenkainen’s Tomb of Foes;
Engine of Pain. Once per turn, a creature that attacks the screamer can target the duergar trapped in it. The attacker has disadvantage on the attack roll. On a hit, the attack deals an extra 11 (2dl0) damage to the screamer, and the screamer can respond by using its Multiattack with its reaction.
So it's an explicity stated exception, then. Which doesn't overrule the limitations of readied actions.
It does not say it is limited to their turn does it? No. It says a creature that can multiple attacks on their turn, HAS the multiattack ability. The Multiattack ability is an action. Therefore it can be readied. Simple as that mate.
Where does it say that you can't conjure magic unicorns from you belly button that automatically kill all your enemies when you roll for initiative?
We're not doing that. Instead, we're Readying an Action. The rules that allow us to do this are found in the PHB, Chapter 9, combat. On Actions in Combat.
You are using the exact kind of "logic".
No.
Your example is something the rules don't say you can do.
What we're doing the rules do say we can do. Readying an Action is well defined in the rules.
FWIW I know of at least one instance in the game where Multiattack is usable off turn as a reaction. It's the Duergar Screamer's Engine of Pain from Mordenkainen’s Tomb of Foes;
Engine of Pain. Once per turn, a creature that attacks the screamer can target the duergar trapped in it. The attacker has disadvantage on the attack roll. On a hit, the attack deals an extra 11 (2dl0) damage to the screamer, and the screamer can respond by using its Multiattack with its reaction.
So it's an explicity stated exception, then. Which doesn't overrule the limitations of readied actions.
What limitation exactly? "Limitation of readied actions" I understand that you believe there is a limitation. Would you happen to have a rule that says this limitation?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
It does not say it is limited to their turn does it? No. It says a creature that can multiple attacks on their turn, HAS the multiattack ability. The Multiattack ability is an action. Therefore it can be readied. Simple as that mate.
Where does it say that you can't conjure magic unicorns from you belly button that automatically kill all your enemies when you roll for initiative?
We're not doing that. Instead, we're Readying an Action. The rules that allow us to do this are found in the PHB, Chapter 9, combat. On Actions in Combat.
FWIW I know of at least one instance in the game where Multiattack is usable off turn as a reaction. It's the Duergar Screamer's Engine of Pain from Mordenkainen’s Tomb of Foes;
Engine of Pain. Once per turn, a creature that attacks the screamer can target the duergar trapped in it. The attacker has disadvantage on the attack roll. On a hit, the attack deals an extra 11 (2dl0) damage to the screamer, and the screamer can respond by using its Multiattack with its reaction.
So it's an explicity stated exception, then. Which doesn't overrule the limitations of readied actions.
The exception is on the action used (reaction instead of action) just like Ready let you do.
It does not say it is limited to their turn does it? No. It says a creature that can multiple attacks on their turn, HAS the multiattack ability. The Multiattack ability is an action. Therefore it can be readied. Simple as that mate.
Where does it say that you can't conjure magic unicorns from you belly button that automatically kill all your enemies when you roll for initiative?
We're not doing that. Instead, we're Readying an Action. The rules that allow us to do this are found in the PHB, Chapter 9, combat. On Actions in Combat.
You are using the exact kind of "logic".
No.
Your example is something the rules don't say you can do.
The rules don't say "you can use the multiattack as a readied action".
What we're doing the rules do say we can do. Readying an Action is well defined in the rules.
Really? Can you quote the book and page number where it says "you can use multiattack as a readied action", please?
FWIW I know of at least one instance in the game where Multiattack is usable off turn as a reaction. It's the Duergar Screamer's Engine of Pain from Mordenkainen’s Tomb of Foes;
Engine of Pain. Once per turn, a creature that attacks the screamer can target the duergar trapped in it. The attacker has disadvantage on the attack roll. On a hit, the attack deals an extra 11 (2dl0) damage to the screamer, and the screamer can respond by using its Multiattack with its reaction.
So it's an explicity stated exception, then. Which doesn't overrule the limitations of readied actions.
What limitation exactly? "Limitation of readied actions" I understand that you believe there is a limitation. Would you happen to have a rule that says this limitation?
I don't believe anything, I've read the rules. The rules in questions have already been mentioned in this thread numerous times.
It does not say it is limited to their turn does it? No. It says a creature that can multiple attacks on their turn, HAS the multiattack ability. The Multiattack ability is an action. Therefore it can be readied. Simple as that mate.
Where does it say that you can't conjure magic unicorns from you belly button that automatically kill all your enemies when you roll for initiative?
We're not doing that. Instead, we're Readying an Action. The rules that allow us to do this are found in the PHB, Chapter 9, combat. On Actions in Combat.
You are using the exact kind of "logic".
No.
Your example is something the rules don't say you can do.
The rules don't say "you can use the multiattack as a readied action".
They sort do actually. They twll you to choose which action you're readying. So, if you can multiattack, which is an action, then you'd just pick that...
What we're doing the rules do say we can do. Readying an Action is well defined in the rules.
Really? Can you quote the book and page number where it says "you can use multiattack as a readied action", please?
Readying an Action rules are in the PHB, chapter 9, Combat. In the Actions in Combat section. I mentioned this earlier. It is helpful if you read how Readying an Action works if you wanna get into the nuts and bolts of how it interacts with other rules and have a conversation about. I'd absolutely suggest start there.
FWIW I know of at least one instance in the game where Multiattack is usable off turn as a reaction. It's the Duergar Screamer's Engine of Pain from Mordenkainen’s Tomb of Foes;
Engine of Pain. Once per turn, a creature that attacks the screamer can target the duergar trapped in it. The attacker has disadvantage on the attack roll. On a hit, the attack deals an extra 11 (2dl0) damage to the screamer, and the screamer can respond by using its Multiattack with its reaction.
So it's an explicity stated exception, then. Which doesn't overrule the limitations of readied actions.
What limitation exactly? "Limitation of readied actions" I understand that you believe there is a limitation. Would you happen to have a rule that says this limitation?
I don't believe anything, I've read the rules. The rules in questions have already been mentioned in this thread numerous times.
Ah. Someone somewhere said it.
"limitations of readied actions."
What does that mean anyway? I suspect you're trying to say that only some specific list of actions can be readied? But since there is no rules to go along with this claim it really is just me guessing at what you're saying.
Multiattack is an action.
Readying an Action lets you: ready an action.
And... Multiattack is, as we know, an action. So you can ready it just like any other action you can do.
Which is why I'd love to hear more about this "limitations of readied actions". If there is such a thing it'd be nice to know I've overlooked some list of action you can or cannot ready.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
It does not say it is limited to their turn does it? No. It says a creature that can multiple attacks on their turn, HAS the multiattack ability. The Multiattack ability is an action. Therefore it can be readied. Simple as that mate.
Where does it say that you can't conjure magic unicorns from you belly button that automatically kill all your enemies when you roll for initiative?
We're not doing that. Instead, we're Readying an Action. The rules that allow us to do this are found in the PHB, Chapter 9, combat. On Actions in Combat.
You are using the exact kind of "logic".
No.
Your example is something the rules don't say you can do.
The rules don't say "you can use the multiattack as a readied action".
They sort do actually. They twll you to choose which action you're readying. So, if you can multiattack, which is an action, then you'd just pick that...
What we're doing the rules do say we can do. Readying an Action is well defined in the rules.
Really? Can you quote the book and page number where it says "you can use multiattack as a readied action", please?
Readying an Action rules are in the PHB, chapter 9, Combat. In the Actions in Combat section. I mentioned this earlier. It is helpful if you read how Readying an Action works if you wanna get into the nuts and bolts of how it interacts with other rules and have a conversation about. I'd absolutely suggest start there.
Nowhere in chapter 9 does it say that you "can use multiattack as a readied action". Why didn't you just say so?
FWIW I know of at least one instance in the game where Multiattack is usable off turn as a reaction. It's the Duergar Screamer's Engine of Pain from Mordenkainen’s Tomb of Foes;
Engine of Pain. Once per turn, a creature that attacks the screamer can target the duergar trapped in it. The attacker has disadvantage on the attack roll. On a hit, the attack deals an extra 11 (2dl0) damage to the screamer, and the screamer can respond by using its Multiattack with its reaction.
So it's an explicity stated exception, then. Which doesn't overrule the limitations of readied actions.
What limitation exactly? "Limitation of readied actions" I understand that you believe there is a limitation. Would you happen to have a rule that says this limitation?
I don't believe anything, I've read the rules. The rules in questions have already been mentioned in this thread numerous times.
Ah. Someone somewhere said it.
"limitations of readied actions."
What does that mean anyway? I suspect you're trying to say that only some specific list of actions can be readied? But since there is no rules to go along with this claim it really is just me guessing at what you're saying.
Multiattack is an action.
Readying an Action lets you: ready an action.
And... Multiattack is, as we know, an action. So you can ready it just like any other action you can do.
Which is why I'd love to hear more about this "limitations of readied actions". If there is such a thing it'd be nice to know I've overlooked some list of action you can or cannot ready.
Again, see previous thread. If you haven't read what people have written it's rather pointless to repeat things that you are just going to ignore anyway.
Again, see previous thread. If you haven't read what people have written it's rather pointless to repeat things that you are just going to ignore anyway.
It's kind of hard to read things that don't exist. No-one has actually talked about limitations of readied actions. They've claimed that the description of multiattack disallows readying, but no-one has been making particular claims about limitations on ready.
We should all agree that you can Ready the Multiattack action.
The debate lies more around wether it can only be used as a reaction on your turn, or on others too.
Similarly, if a L5 fighter Ready the Attack action and use it on it's turn as a reaction, it should be able to make Extra Attack too since it use the Attack action on it's turn...
We should all agree that you can Ready the Multiattack action.
The debate lies more around wether it can only be used as a reaction on your turn, or on others too.
Similarly, if a L5 fighter Ready the Attack action and use it on it's turn as a reaction, it should be able to make Extra Attack too since it use the Attack action on it's turn...
Yes, if a fighter readies an attack and then uses it on their turn, they get the benefit of extra attack.
The core difference is that extra attacks is not an action -- it is a modification to the attack when performed on your turn. It would be totally possible to build multiattack in the same way as extra attacks. This would mean that, for example, a brown bear, instead of having a multiattack action, would have a trait that looked like
Multiattack: if the bear takes the attack on its turn, it may make two attacks, one with its bite, one with its claws.
If written that way, it would work just like extra attacks. But... it wasn't. Instead, it was written up as a distinct action, and that action doesn't have any explicit limits that prevent using it in any situation where you can use an action.
why are you resorting to personal attacks for your argument? I would apprecaite if you did not do so
and I have, part of the issue here is the ambigous language of the rules as written, which as has been seen, can be used in either argument, but, we have at least one source of rai, and i have checked for other sources, and seen a few others, that all state you cant
with the ambigous wording, you can make an argument against it, but with the fact it can, and has been argued against, with included rai, id say the ruling should be with those that fall in line with rai, this is not something that you can firmly state rules as written you can do anyways, as there is no hard evidence saying you can, nor is there hard evidence other then the wording and the rai
now if you want to argue you can, im gonna hop off this thread so im no longer disrespected
Sure it is. Ready Action rules allow you to ready any action you have available. Multiattack is an action.
And, that's it. That's all we need to know we can do this.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
The wording is not in fact ambiguous. The confusion comes because people have expectations about what the rule says and thus read things into it that are not present.
I should use some context??? Well that's amusing.
The ability references "on its turn" and also specifies that it only gets one attack with an OA. The PC version of the ability, Extra Attack, also only works on your turn. The context is that a creature isn't expected to be able to make multiple attack rolls outside of its turn. Sure some spells will allow you to do so but they would allow you to do so not just by the use of the Ready action but they would allow that if you somehow get to cast the spell as a reaction (for example as an OA) too. They clearly break the norm.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think it would create much of a problem if you allowed monsters to use Multiattack outside of its turn with a Ready action. I just find it hilarious that the "on its turn" part should be nullified because it didn't include an "only". If that was the intention why include the "on its turn" part at all?
You may find it hilarious, but it's the way grammar works. As for why, perhaps to distinguish from other methods of granting multiple attacks that normally work outside of its turn, such as legendary actions?
It absolutely does not. Please google what the word "literal" means. XD
Where does it say that you can't conjure magic unicorns from you belly button that automatically kill all your enemies when you roll for initiative?
We're not doing that. Instead, we're Readying an Action. The rules that allow us to do this are found in the PHB, Chapter 9, combat. On Actions in Combat.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
FWIW I know of at least one instance in the game where Multiattack is usable off turn as a reaction. It's the Duergar Screamer's Engine of Pain from Mordenkainen’s Tomb of Foes;
You are using the exact kind of "logic".
So it's an explicity stated exception, then. Which doesn't overrule the limitations of readied actions.
No.
Your example is something the rules don't say you can do.
What we're doing the rules do say we can do. Readying an Action is well defined in the rules.
What limitation exactly? "Limitation of readied actions" I understand that you believe there is a limitation. Would you happen to have a rule that says this limitation?
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
The exception is on the action used (reaction instead of action) just like Ready let you do.
The rules don't say "you can use the multiattack as a readied action".
Really? Can you quote the book and page number where it says "you can use multiattack as a readied action", please?
I don't believe anything, I've read the rules. The rules in questions have already been mentioned in this thread numerous times.
The limitations on readied actions are:
They sort do actually. They twll you to choose which action you're readying. So, if you can multiattack, which is an action, then you'd just pick that...
Readying an Action rules are in the PHB, chapter 9, Combat. In the Actions in Combat section. I mentioned this earlier. It is helpful if you read how Readying an Action works if you wanna get into the nuts and bolts of how it interacts with other rules and have a conversation about. I'd absolutely suggest start there.
Ah. Someone somewhere said it.
"limitations of readied actions."
What does that mean anyway? I suspect you're trying to say that only some specific list of actions can be readied? But since there is no rules to go along with this claim it really is just me guessing at what you're saying.
Multiattack is an action.
Readying an Action lets you: ready an action.
And... Multiattack is, as we know, an action. So you can ready it just like any other action you can do.
Which is why I'd love to hear more about this "limitations of readied actions". If there is such a thing it'd be nice to know I've overlooked some list of action you can or cannot ready.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Nowhere in chapter 9 does it say that you "can use multiattack as a readied action". Why didn't you just say so?
Again, see previous thread. If you haven't read what people have written it's rather pointless to repeat things that you are just going to ignore anyway.
It's kind of hard to read things that don't exist. No-one has actually talked about limitations of readied actions. They've claimed that the description of multiattack disallows readying, but no-one has been making particular claims about limitations on ready.
We should all agree that you can Ready the Multiattack action.
The debate lies more around wether it can only be used as a reaction on your turn, or on others too.
Similarly, if a L5 fighter Ready the Attack action and use it on it's turn as a reaction, it should be able to make Extra Attack too since it use the Attack action on it's turn...
Yes, if a fighter readies an attack and then uses it on their turn, they get the benefit of extra attack.
The core difference is that extra attacks is not an action -- it is a modification to the attack when performed on your turn. It would be totally possible to build multiattack in the same way as extra attacks. This would mean that, for example, a brown bear, instead of having a multiattack action, would have a trait that looked like
Multiattack: if the bear takes the attack on its turn, it may make two attacks, one with its bite, one with its claws.
If written that way, it would work just like extra attacks. But... it wasn't. Instead, it was written up as a distinct action, and that action doesn't have any explicit limits that prevent using it in any situation where you can use an action.
Just want to reiterate this. It seems lost on some of the recent discussion.