Show me one instance anywhere in the rules that mentions a monster using Multiattack in any other way than “on its turn.”
Show me one example anywhere in the rules that uses ready at all.
It's a simple decision tree
Ready requires you to define an action. Is multiattack an action? Yes.
Does ready specify that you cannot ready multiattack? No.
Does multiattack state that it only works on your turn, or cannot be readied, or that it cannot be used off of turn, or any other wording that limits its off-turn usage? No.
Therefore, multiattack can be readied, and works normally when you do so.
Now, I assume that multiattack is supposed to be the monster equivalent of extra attack, which does have phrasing limiting it to use on your turn, but it's simply not what they actually wrote.
Show me one instance anywhere in the rules that mentions a monster using Multiattack in any other way than “on its turn.”
Show me one example anywhere in the rules that uses ready at all.
It's a simple decision tree
Ready requires you to define an action. Is multiattack an action? Yes.
Does ready specify that you cannot ready multiattack? No.
Does multiattack state that it only works on your turn, or cannot be readied, or that it cannot be used off of turn, or any other wording that limits its off-turn usage? Yes.
Therefore, multiattack can be readied, but not performed after your turn ends.
*fixed.
Now, I assume that multiattack is supposed to be the monster equivalent of extra attack, which does have phrasing limiting it to use on your turn, but it's simply not what they actually wrote.
You acknowledge that "on your turn" in extra attack prevents its use on other creature's turns, but argue that "on your turn" in the multiattack rule still lets it be used on other creature's turns?
Would you mind explaining what rule or even logic you used to justify the same phrase having opposite meanings?
You acknowledge that "on your turn" in extra attack prevents its use on other creature's turns, but argue that "on your turn" in the multiattack rule still lets it be used on other creature's turns?
Would you mind explaining what rule or even logic you used to justify the same phrase having opposite meanings?
Simple. They aren't actually the same rule.
Extra Attack modifies the attack action, when you do it on your turn. You are still permitted to attack off turn, you just don't get extra attacks, because the extra attack trait says it only applies on your turn. If there was a general rule that permitted extra attacks off of your turn, that rule would still apply -- but there isn't one.
Multiattack is its own action. As the general rules for multiattack do not say you cannot use it off of your turn, you use the general rules for an action, and the general rules for an action says you can ready it and it functions normally when you do so.
You acknowledge that "on your turn" in extra attack prevents its use on other creature's turns, but argue that "on your turn" in the multiattack rule still lets it be used on other creature's turns?
Would you mind explaining what rule or even logic you used to justify the same phrase having opposite meanings?
Simple. They aren't actually the same rule.
Extra Attack modifies the attack action, when you do it on your turn. You are still permitted to attack off turn, you just don't get extra attacks, because the extra attack trait says it only applies on your turn. If there was a general rule that permitted extra attacks off of your turn, that rule would still apply -- but there isn't one.
Multiattack is its own action. As the general rules for multiattack do not say you cannot use it off of your turn, you use the general rules for an action, and the general rules for an action says you can ready it and it functions normally when you do so.
The rules are not written to point out things you can't do. If they want you to not be able to do something at certain times, they just put use clauses on that thing like "when you move 10 feet" or "on your turn" to indicate that if these clauses are not met the option is not available.
Heck, normally I’m all in favor of anything that makes the game more challenging to players. Heck, when a PC saves for half damage I round up for cryin’ out loud. But reading a Multiattack when PCs cannot is not only against RAI, and RAF, it’s against RAW. Both Multiattack and Extra Attack use the exact same phrasing of “on [your/its] turn” to prohibit their use on another creature’s turn. It’s undeniable.
And the Multiattack action says it only applies on the monster’s turn, but they can still take the Attack action normally.
No, it does not say that. It certainly could have been worded in a way that said that, but it wasn't. What they say is:
"A creature that can make multiple attacks on its turn has the Multiattack ability." This in no way limits when multiattack can be used -- all it does is say what the expected use is, and like all actions, the expected use is on your turn.
"A creature can’t use Multiattack when making an opportunity attack, which must be a single melee attack." That disallows opportunity attacks but says nothing about ready.
If they wanted it to be not usable off turn, and they weren't just kinda bad at writing rules, the second sentence would be or include "A creature can't use multiattack outside of its turn".
But nowhere anywhere is there a single instance of “a creature that can take multiple attacks on any turn,” so your distinction lacks credulity at best.
The ability is just stating that the reason they have multiattack is due to the fact they can make several attacks. This does not stop them from just simply readying the action Multiattack.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Anyone can smith at the cosmic anvil, yet only I can forge a weapon as good as thee."
But nowhere anywhere is there a single instance of “a creature that can take multiple attacks on any turn,” so your distinction lacks credulity at best.
Sure there is. Creatures with multiattack and readied actions. There are plenty of rules-legal situations that don't have any published examples.
But nowhere anywhere is there a single instance of “a creature that can take multiple attacks on any turn,” so your distinction lacks credulity at best.
Sure there is. Creatures with multiattack and readied actions. There are plenty of rules-legal situations that don't have any published examples.
That’s a circular argument, that the thing proves itself. Sorry, I ain’t buyin.’
That’s a circular argument, that the thing proves itself. Sorry, I ain’t buyin.’
My primary point there is that lack of a specific statement is meaningless, because there are tons of things that are possible but not specifically mentioned. However, if you want an unambiguously legal case of making multiple attacks outside of your turn, just readyeldritch blast at level 5+.
The Ready action has a whole separate clause for spells that have no bearing on this conversation.
You asked for an example other than multiattack that allowed multiple attacks outside of your turn. I gave you one.
Rules do what they say they do. Ready says it allows you to take an action outside of your turn. Multiattack is an action. Unless you can point me to rules text that forbids readying multiattack, you can. The description of the ready action does not. The general description of multiattack does not (it addresses intended purpose but never says it can't be used outside its intended purpose). No specific multiattack power I'm aware of forbids it, though I haven't read every multiattack power in the game so there might be some.
The general description of multiattack does not (it addresses intended purpose but never says it can't be used outside its intended purpose).
While it would be convenient if rules were explicitly prescriptive, I think admitting that the intent is clear and then saying "but it never actually says you can't" is exceedingly disingenuous. It's not even a case of the intent being clarified by Crawford's out-of-game statements. The intent of the rule is actually written. The finger-wagging here isn't interesting or productive.
The general description of multiattack does not (it addresses intended purpose but never says it can't be used outside its intended purpose).
While it would be convenient if rules were explicitly prescriptive, I think admitting that the intent is clear and then saying "but it never actually says you can't" is exceedingly disingenuous. It's not even a case of the intent being clarified by Crawford's out-of-game statements. The intent of the rule is actually written. The finger-wagging here isn't interesting or productive.
I have no problem with someone saying that RAI is that it can't be readied; I'm inclined to agree. However, RAW does permit it to be readied.
FWIW, in my games I allow multiattack to be readied, but I also allow extra attacks on a readied attack action, because unlike the devs I don't hate readied actions.
Show me one example anywhere in the rules that uses ready at all.
It's a simple decision tree
Now, I assume that multiattack is supposed to be the monster equivalent of extra attack, which does have phrasing limiting it to use on your turn, but it's simply not what they actually wrote.
*fixed.
You acknowledge that "on your turn" in extra attack prevents its use on other creature's turns, but argue that "on your turn" in the multiattack rule still lets it be used on other creature's turns?
Would you mind explaining what rule or even logic you used to justify the same phrase having opposite meanings?
What he said.👆
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Simple. They aren't actually the same rule.
Extra Attack modifies the attack action, when you do it on your turn. You are still permitted to attack off turn, you just don't get extra attacks, because the extra attack trait says it only applies on your turn. If there was a general rule that permitted extra attacks off of your turn, that rule would still apply -- but there isn't one.
Multiattack is its own action. As the general rules for multiattack do not say you cannot use it off of your turn, you use the general rules for an action, and the general rules for an action says you can ready it and it functions normally when you do so.
And the Multiattack action says it only applies on the monster’s turn, but they can still take the Attack action normally.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The rules are not written to point out things you can't do. If they want you to not be able to do something at certain times, they just put use clauses on that thing like "when you move 10 feet" or "on your turn" to indicate that if these clauses are not met the option is not available.
Heck, normally I’m all in favor of anything that makes the game more challenging to players. Heck, when a PC saves for half damage I round up for cryin’ out loud. But reading a Multiattack when PCs cannot is not only against RAI, and RAF, it’s against RAW. Both Multiattack and Extra Attack use the exact same phrasing of “on [your/its] turn” to prohibit their use on another creature’s turn. It’s undeniable.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
No, it does not say that. It certainly could have been worded in a way that said that, but it wasn't. What they say is:
If they wanted it to be not usable off turn, and they weren't just kinda bad at writing rules, the second sentence would be or include "A creature can't use multiattack outside of its turn".
But nowhere anywhere is there a single instance of “a creature that can take multiple attacks on any turn,” so your distinction lacks credulity at best.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The ability is just stating that the reason they have multiattack is due to the fact they can make several attacks. This does not stop them from just simply readying the action Multiattack.
"Anyone can smith at the cosmic anvil, yet only I can forge a weapon as good as thee."
My Homebrew Please click it, they have my family.
This is right to be honest.
"Anyone can smith at the cosmic anvil, yet only I can forge a weapon as good as thee."
My Homebrew Please click it, they have my family.
Sure there is. Creatures with multiattack and readied actions. There are plenty of rules-legal situations that don't have any published examples.
Its like looking at an ability and saying. "Oh It doesn't say this so it doesn't work!" Or "It doesn't say i can't fire 5 firebolts at once"
"Anyone can smith at the cosmic anvil, yet only I can forge a weapon as good as thee."
My Homebrew Please click it, they have my family.
That’s a circular argument, that the thing proves itself. Sorry, I ain’t buyin.’
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
My primary point there is that lack of a specific statement is meaningless, because there are tons of things that are possible but not specifically mentioned. However, if you want an unambiguously legal case of making multiple attacks outside of your turn, just ready eldritch blast at level 5+.
The Ready action has a whole separate clause for spells that have no bearing on this conversation.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
You asked for an example other than multiattack that allowed multiple attacks outside of your turn. I gave you one.
Rules do what they say they do. Ready says it allows you to take an action outside of your turn. Multiattack is an action. Unless you can point me to rules text that forbids readying multiattack, you can. The description of the ready action does not. The general description of multiattack does not (it addresses intended purpose but never says it can't be used outside its intended purpose). No specific multiattack power I'm aware of forbids it, though I haven't read every multiattack power in the game so there might be some.
I never said you cannot Ready Multiattack. What I said is that you can’t use it if it isn’t “on [the monster’s] turn.”
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
While it would be convenient if rules were explicitly prescriptive, I think admitting that the intent is clear and then saying "but it never actually says you can't" is exceedingly disingenuous. It's not even a case of the intent being clarified by Crawford's out-of-game statements. The intent of the rule is actually written. The finger-wagging here isn't interesting or productive.
I have no problem with someone saying that RAI is that it can't be readied; I'm inclined to agree. However, RAW does permit it to be readied.
FWIW, in my games I allow multiattack to be readied, but I also allow extra attacks on a readied attack action, because unlike the devs I don't hate readied actions.