Starting at 3rd level, you can use your reaction to deflect or catch the missile when you are hit by a ranged weapon attack. When you do so, the damage you take from the attack is reduced by 1d10 + your Dexterity modifier + your monk level.
If you reduce the damage to 0, you can catch the missile if it is small enough for you to hold in one hand and you have at least one hand free. If you catch a missile in this way, you can spend 1 ki point to make a ranged attack with the weapon or piece of ammunition you just caught, as part of the same reaction. You make this attack with proficiency, regardless of your weapon proficiencies, and the missile counts as a monk weapon for the attack, which has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet.
Now that said - nowhere in there does it say a missile that you see. So I assume, for example - if a Monk is fleeing from a line of hobgoblin archers - and the archers fire - and one technically hits the monk (who has their back to the attacker, and thus technically not seeing or aware of the attack) - they can still use their reaction to Deflect (or catch) the missile that would have otherwise hit them?
D&D 5th edition doesn't use facing by default and instead assumes all participants in a combat encounter have broad, 360 degree situational awareness at all times. So the fact the monk has their back to the archers is irrelevant, they would see (or more accurately, perceive) the attack incoming.
However you are correct that the ability does not require you to see the source of the attack, so you can use deflect missiles if blinded, in total darkness, etc
I figured as much - and that's how I ruled it - even flavored it that they heard the whistling of the arrows coming down, mid run, did a jump spin, slapped the arrow away, continued their spin, landing forward and continuing to run.
The only reason I was thinking about it today is I was prepping for my Tuesday game - and one of the enemies has the Enlarge/Reduce spell which actually specifies:
You cause a creature or an object you can see within range to grow larger or smaller for the duration.
So this would make it impossible, for example for the caster to cast it on someone who is behind them (if they were running away)? Or would that also rule along the 360 degree situational awareness as well?
Thank you sir for answering with the Monk thing. Glad I went the route I did make for a fun, cool story visual.
The only reason I was thinking about it today is I was prepping for my Tuesday game - and one of the enemies has the Enlarge/Reduce spell which actually specifies:
You cause a creature or an object you can see within range to grow larger or smaller for the duration.
So this would make it impossible, for example for the caster to cast it on someone who is behind them (if they were running away)? Or would that also rule along the 360 degree situational awareness as well?
Thank you sir for answering with the Monk thing. Glad I went the route I did make for a fun, cool story visual.
Assuming you aren't using the optional rules for facing, being able to see somebody just means that they aren't heavily obscured or behind total cover. You can cast enlarge/reduce while running away from the target.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
So this would make it impossible, for example for the caster to cast it on someone who is behind them (if they were running away)? Or would that also rule along the 360 degree situational awareness as well?
Again, facing is an optional rule and being behind someone doesn't mean they can't see you. What way you are facing has zero impact on what you can see if you're not using the facing optional rule
And let's face it, it's very on-brand for a Monk to blindly catch an arrow fired at the back of their head :)
I know it wasn't intentional - but the choice of words of "and let's face it" when the question was in regards of whether they need to see it - made me chuckle.
Im wonering how work deflect missiles against rune knights fire rune.
Situation:
Rune knight hits target with ranged weapon attack for 7 dmg monk deflect missile and even uses ki Point to throw it back.
However ON A HIT runeknight can use fire rune to restrain monk but monk ON A HIT uses reaction to deflect.
Does logical terms to activate rune (on A hit) works? Monk deflect missile even catch it and throw it but fire rune restrained him? Or missile deflection change hit info a Miss so rune activation is imposible?
The trigger for each Feature appears to use wording with identical meanings: "when you are hit by" and "when you hit a creature".
In my opinion, this is a good time to use the optional rule from Xanathar's Guide to Everything for Simultaneous Events:
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.
So, the player who controls the Rune Knight (assuming that this all happens on the Rune Knight's turn) gets to decide the order in which these two events are resolved.
Keep in mind that this rule book is considered optional and there really isn't an equivalent rule in the PHB or DMG so by default the DM would just make the ruling.
Does logical terms to activate rune (on A hit) works? Monk deflect missile even catch it and throw it but fire rune restrained him? Or missile deflection change hit info a Miss so rune activation is imposible?
Deflect Missiles does not change a "hit" to a "miss" even if you reduce all the damage from the attack. And being restrained does not stop you from being able to take reactions or make attacks.
So nothing in each feature stops the other from being possible and thus both can happen just fine and the timing of which goes first doesn't matter much (it could give the Monk disadvantage to attack with the projectile).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It reads...
Now that said - nowhere in there does it say a missile that you see. So I assume, for example - if a Monk is fleeing from a line of hobgoblin archers - and the archers fire - and one technically hits the monk (who has their back to the attacker, and thus technically not seeing or aware of the attack) - they can still use their reaction to Deflect (or catch) the missile that would have otherwise hit them?
Check out my publication on DMs Guild: https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?author=Tawmis%20Logue
Check out my comedy web series - Neverending Nights: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Wr4-u9-zw0&list=PLbRG7dzFI-u3EJd0usasgDrrFO3mZ1lOZ
Need a character story/background written up? I do it for free (but also take donations!) - https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?591882-Need-a-character-background-written-up
D&D 5th edition doesn't use facing by default and instead assumes all participants in a combat encounter have broad, 360 degree situational awareness at all times. So the fact the monk has their back to the archers is irrelevant, they would see (or more accurately, perceive) the attack incoming.
However you are correct that the ability does not require you to see the source of the attack, so you can use deflect missiles if blinded, in total darkness, etc
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
I figured as much - and that's how I ruled it - even flavored it that they heard the whistling of the arrows coming down, mid run, did a jump spin, slapped the arrow away, continued their spin, landing forward and continuing to run.
The only reason I was thinking about it today is I was prepping for my Tuesday game - and one of the enemies has the Enlarge/Reduce spell which actually specifies:
So this would make it impossible, for example for the caster to cast it on someone who is behind them (if they were running away)? Or would that also rule along the 360 degree situational awareness as well?
Thank you sir for answering with the Monk thing. Glad I went the route I did make for a fun, cool story visual.
Check out my publication on DMs Guild: https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?author=Tawmis%20Logue
Check out my comedy web series - Neverending Nights: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Wr4-u9-zw0&list=PLbRG7dzFI-u3EJd0usasgDrrFO3mZ1lOZ
Need a character story/background written up? I do it for free (but also take donations!) - https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?591882-Need-a-character-background-written-up
Assuming you aren't using the optional rules for facing, being able to see somebody just means that they aren't heavily obscured or behind total cover. You can cast enlarge/reduce while running away from the target.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Again, facing is an optional rule and being behind someone doesn't mean they can't see you. What way you are facing has zero impact on what you can see if you're not using the facing optional rule
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
And let's face it, it's very on-brand for a Monk to blindly catch an arrow fired at the back of their head :)
I know it wasn't intentional - but the choice of words of "and let's face it" when the question was in regards of whether they need to see it - made me chuckle.
Check out my publication on DMs Guild: https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?author=Tawmis%20Logue
Check out my comedy web series - Neverending Nights: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Wr4-u9-zw0&list=PLbRG7dzFI-u3EJd0usasgDrrFO3mZ1lOZ
Need a character story/background written up? I do it for free (but also take donations!) - https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?591882-Need-a-character-background-written-up
Hi
Im wonering how work deflect missiles against rune knights fire rune.
Situation:
Rune knight hits target with ranged weapon attack for 7 dmg monk deflect missile and even uses ki Point to throw it back.
However ON A HIT runeknight can use fire rune to restrain monk but monk ON A HIT uses reaction to deflect.
Does logical terms to activate rune (on A hit) works? Monk deflect missile even catch it and throw it but fire rune restrained him? Or missile deflection change hit info a Miss so rune activation is imposible?
The trigger for each Feature appears to use wording with identical meanings: "when you are hit by" and "when you hit a creature".
In my opinion, this is a good time to use the optional rule from Xanathar's Guide to Everything for Simultaneous Events:
So, the player who controls the Rune Knight (assuming that this all happens on the Rune Knight's turn) gets to decide the order in which these two events are resolved.
Keep in mind that this rule book is considered optional and there really isn't an equivalent rule in the PHB or DMG so by default the DM would just make the ruling.
Deflect Missiles does not change a "hit" to a "miss" even if you reduce all the damage from the attack. And being restrained does not stop you from being able to take reactions or make attacks.
So nothing in each feature stops the other from being possible and thus both can happen just fine and the timing of which goes first doesn't matter much (it could give the Monk disadvantage to attack with the projectile).