Then by logic the extra attack from the Dual Wielder Feat, based on using a light property weapon for the first attack would function the same way. Using nick to move the extra BA attack to the main Attack Action, and leaving the Light property extra BA attack for use.
This is incorrect. The Dual Wielder Feat is a totally separate rule which works in the way that is specified by that rule. The Nick Mastery property has absolutely no interaction with the Dual Wielder feat. It only interacts with the extra attack of the Light property, NOT the extra attack of the Dual Wielder Feat. The extra attack of the Dual Wielder Feat can never be made as part of your Attack Action. It always requires a Bonus Action.
Nick as you say just allows the BA extra attack to be made as part of the main Attack Action, but doesn’t actually use your BA in making that transfer, leaving your BA available to make a third attack with the offhand weapon and Nick can’t be used again.
The underlined portion of your statement is one of the places where you keep going wrong. There is nothing in the rule for the Nick Mastery property which says that "Nick can't be used again". It says that "You can make this extra attack only once per turn". It's not the switching that is restricted. It's the attack. That particular attack can only be made once per turn. Whether that attack is being made as part of the Attack action or as a Bonus Action -- it can only be made once per turn.
As a result of this restriction of how many times you can make that attack in a turn, you also can only use the Nick Mastery property once per turn as a consequence of that. In addition, this restriction also means that you actually can only use the overall rule for the Light property once per turn as well.
The Nick Mastery property never actually uses your Bonus Action. Your Bonus Action had to be available so that you can get to the moment "When you make the extra attack of the Light property".
No it didn't. You can absolutely have used your BA already. There is absolutely nothing in the rules or precedence that suggests that "you have to have a resource available in order to use an ability that doesn't require that resource" is a thing in any context.
I disagree extremely strongly with you on that. The Light property explicitly requires the Bonus Action to be used "later on the same turn". The Nick Mastery property explicitly refers to something that happens along the way while using the rule for the Light property. That's what triggers the use of the Nick Mastery property, and that's what the rule for the Nick Mastery property applies to. Very explicitly, the Nick Mastery property begins with "When you make the extra attack of the Light property, you can make it [ in a certain way ]".
You cannot do anything at all regarding the extra attack of the Light property if the Light property is not even available for you to use. In order to use the rule for the Light property, the Bonus Action MUST be available. If the Bonus Action is available then you can use the rule for the Light property to give yourself an opportunity to make an extra attack. When you are making that extra attack, you can then use the Nick Mastery property to avoid expending that Bonus Action with that attack. There isn't any way around this procedure.
From Dual Wielder Feat: “Enhanced Dual Wielding. When you take the Attack action on your turn and attack with a weapon that has the Light property,”.
That part brings Nick into the equation, and Nick: “
Nick
When you make the extra attack of the Light property, you can make it as part of the Attack Action instead of as a Bonus Action. You can make this extra attack only once per turn.”
Light property : “
Light
When you take the Attack action on your turn and attack with a Light weapon, you can make one extra attack as a Bonus Action later on the same turn.“
Both Light and Dual Wielder: DW -“ you can make one extra attack as a Bonus Action later on the same turn with a different weapon,” ; Light property - “That extra attack must be made with a different Light weapon,” DW - “a different weapon, which must be a Melee weapon that lacks the Two-Handed property.”
Both are one in the same, both functions with Nick in the same manner. Crawford confirmed how Nick and Light property interact, three attacks, DWF and Nick Three attacks.
If you burn your Bonus Action before using Nick, no second Bonus action extra attack can be made per general rule, nether Nick nor DWF nor Light property bonus action can be taken. You do not get a second bonus action in general, and no rule within the game gives a player a second bonus action. ( just the ability to use your bonus action to make another main action as is the case with rouges and the ability to bonus action Dash, Dodge, or whatever bonus actions that can be used. )
Crawford made a video on all this, Articles have been written, Rules as Written are for once Rules as Intended. Now the interpretation is left to the user, and how it’s used is however they wish.
Saying Crawford is wrong is the same as saying the rules don’t matter. Well we have to make do with what we have been given. People wanted SAC, I found it. Use it or not, IMHO play to win in whatever way you find fun.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
Then by logic the extra attack from the Dual Wielder Feat, based on using a light property weapon for the first attack would function the same way. Using nick to move the extra BA attack to the main Attack Action, and leaving the Light property extra BA attack for use.
This is incorrect. The Dual Wielder Feat is a totally separate rule which works in the way that is specified by that rule. The Nick Mastery property has absolutely no interaction with the Dual Wielder feat. It only interacts with the extra attack of the Light property, NOT the extra attack of the Dual Wielder Feat. The extra attack of the Dual Wielder Feat can never be made as part of your Attack Action. It always requires a Bonus Action.
Nick as you say just allows the BA extra attack to be made as part of the main Attack Action, but doesn’t actually use your BA in making that transfer, leaving your BA available to make a third attack with the offhand weapon and Nick can’t be used again.
The underlined portion of your statement is one of the places where you keep going wrong. There is nothing in the rule for the Nick Mastery property which says that "Nick can't be used again". It says that "You can make this extra attack only once per turn". It's not the switching that is restricted. It's the attack. That particular attack can only be made once per turn. Whether that attack is being made as part of the Attack action or as a Bonus Action -- it can only be made once per turn.
As a result of this restriction of how many times you can make that attack in a turn, you also can only use the Nick Mastery property once per turn as a consequence of that. In addition, this restriction also means that you actually can only use the overall rule for the Light property once per turn as well.
The Nick Mastery property never actually uses your Bonus Action. Your Bonus Action had to be available so that you can get to the moment "When you make the extra attack of the Light property".
No it didn't. You can absolutely have used your BA already. There is absolutely nothing in the rules or precedence that suggests that "you have to have a resource available in order to use an ability that doesn't require that resource" is a thing in any context.
I disagree extremely strongly with you on that. The Light property explicitly requires the Bonus Action to be used "later on the same turn". The Nick Mastery property explicitly refers to something that happens along the way while using the rule for the Light property. That's what triggers the use of the Nick Mastery property, and that's what the rule for the Nick Mastery property applies to. Very explicitly, the Nick Mastery property begins with "When you make the extra attack of the Light property, you can make it [ in a certain way ]".
Specifically, that certain way is "you can make it as part of the Attack action instead of as a Bonus Action."
If you're not making it as a Bonus Action, there is literally no reason for it to require an available Bonus Action. Nick modifies the conditions for use of the Light additional attack. If those conditions are changed, then the old conditions do not apply at all.
You cannot do anything at all regarding the extra attack of the Light property if the Light property is not even available for you to use.
But it is available for you to use, because you have a Nick weapon.
There's no reason to think it's not available for you to use even if you have neither a BA nor a Nick weapon. The Light property grants you the time-limited ability to make a BA attack. It does not say it does so only if you have the ability to use it. If you don't have a BA, or choose not to use the attack, the ability can just quietly expire, and everything still works.
In order to use the rule for the Light property, the Bonus Action MUST be available. If the Bonus Action is available then you can use the rule for the Light property to give yourself an opportunity to make an extra attack. When you are making that extra attack, you can then use the Nick Mastery property to avoid expending that Bonus Action with that attack. There isn't any way around this procedure.
Of course there is: don't adopt a timing and event model for the 5e rules that requires it. The books don't specify one, formally or informally, so we're all working with the ones we inferred. If your internal model has weird consequences like requiring a BA for an ability that doesn't use a BA, step back and poke at the fundamental assumptions.
And that video, in its final form, doesn't have the answer you're arguing from. They edited it out. The most likely reason for that is that it was wrong.
Saying Crawford is wrong is the same as saying the rules don’t matter.
No, it's saying the rules do matter. If Crawford says something about the rules that contradicts the text, Crawford is wrong.
He may be the head designer, but that doesn't make him actually or officially infallible.
I have been where he was, for a different game, except that I was the official source of rules answers. And I still made mistakes. (Not often, because I had both a solid rules model and reference files.) And if I did, I corrected them.
I even had to deal with the situation where somebody asked "Doesn't (interaction that had always been played one way, including by the original designer) contradict (basic principle of interpreting things, also articulated by the initial designer)?" And it did, and so the way everyone had been playing it was wrong. (Probably because the initial designer shot from the hip way more than Crawford does.)
Designer answers are useful for resolving actual ambiguity. They don't establish new facts. The whole point of having a rulebook is so that we can answer questions that arise without asking the designers.
“ When you make the extra attack of the Light property, instead of as a Bonus Action you can make it as part of the Attack Action . You can make this extra attack only once per turn.”
Better?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
There's no reason to think it's not available for you to use even if you have neither a BA nor a Nick weapon. The Light property grants you the time-limited ability to make a BA attack. It does not say it does so only if you have the ability to use it. If you don't have a BA, or choose not to use the attack, the ability can just quietly expire, and everything still works.
Ok, this is a good argument actually.
If you are always considered to be using the Light property no matter what every time you make an attack with a Light weapon during your Attack action, then it would make sense that it's possible to be using the Light property without access to a Bonus Action and in that case, you could trigger the Nick Mastery property.
I'll concede that point.
In my mind if you weren't actually using any benefit from the Light property then you were just making a regular old attack with a weapon and not using the Light property. But I suppose if we consider it to just be a property of the weapon that is "always active" instead of a rule that you are choosing to use like how you do with some class features or Feats, then this all does sort of work.
There's no reason to think it's not available for you to use even if you have neither a BA nor a Nick weapon. The Light property grants you the time-limited ability to make a BA attack. It does not say it does so only if you have the ability to use it. If you don't have a BA, or choose not to use the attack, the ability can just quietly expire, and everything still works.
That bonus action is granted only if you are wielding an offhand weapon, so there is a restriction on how the bonus action is granted. Nick directly addresses that weapon attack and simply says it can be made in the Attack Action. If you use your Bonus Action to summon a weapon, do you get an extra bonus action by just using a light property weapon? Remember one Bonus Action per turn Rule ( and try not to assume that different features allow Bonus Action resets, the BA Rules are the specific general rule for all Bonus Actions.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
From Dual Wielder Feat: “Enhanced Dual Wielding. When you take the Attack action on your turn and attack with a weapon that has the Light property,”.
That part brings Nick into the equation, and Nick: “
Nick
When you make the extra attack of the Light property, you can make it as part of the Attack Action instead of as a Bonus Action. You can make this extra attack only once per turn.”
Light property : “
Light
When you take the Attack action on your turn and attack with a Light weapon, you can make one extra attack as a Bonus Action later on the same turn.“
Both Light and Dual Wielder: DW -“ you can make one extra attack as a Bonus Action later on the same turn with a different weapon,” ; Light property - “That extra attack must be made with a different Light weapon,” DW - “a different weapon, which must be a Melee weapon that lacks the Two-Handed property.”
Both are one in the same, both functions with Nick in the same manner. Crawford confirmed how Nick and Light property interact, three attacks, DWF and Nick Three attacks.
If you burn your Bonus Action before using Nick, no second Bonus action extra attack can be made per general rule, nether Nick nor DWF nor Light property bonus action can be taken. You do not get a second bonus action in general, and no rule within the game gives a player a second bonus action. ( just the ability to use your bonus action to make another main action as is the case with rouges and the ability to bonus action Dash, Dodge, or whatever bonus actions that can be used. )
Crawford made a video on all this, Articles have been written, Rules as Written are for once Rules as Intended. Now the interpretation is left to the user, and how it’s used is however they wish.
Saying Crawford is wrong is the same as saying the rules don’t matter. Well we have to make do with what we have been given. People wanted SAC, I found it. Use it or not, IMHO play to win in whatever way you find fun.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
Specifically, that certain way is "you can make it as part of the Attack action instead of as a Bonus Action."
If you're not making it as a Bonus Action, there is literally no reason for it to require an available Bonus Action. Nick modifies the conditions for use of the Light additional attack. If those conditions are changed, then the old conditions do not apply at all.
But it is available for you to use, because you have a Nick weapon.
There's no reason to think it's not available for you to use even if you have neither a BA nor a Nick weapon. The Light property grants you the time-limited ability to make a BA attack. It does not say it does so only if you have the ability to use it. If you don't have a BA, or choose not to use the attack, the ability can just quietly expire, and everything still works.
Of course there is: don't adopt a timing and event model for the 5e rules that requires it. The books don't specify one, formally or informally, so we're all working with the ones we inferred. If your internal model has weird consequences like requiring a BA for an ability that doesn't use a BA, step back and poke at the fundamental assumptions.
And that video, in its final form, doesn't have the answer you're arguing from. They edited it out. The most likely reason for that is that it was wrong.
No, it's saying the rules do matter. If Crawford says something about the rules that contradicts the text, Crawford is wrong.
He may be the head designer, but that doesn't make him actually or officially infallible.
I have been where he was, for a different game, except that I was the official source of rules answers. And I still made mistakes. (Not often, because I had both a solid rules model and reference files.) And if I did, I corrected them.
I even had to deal with the situation where somebody asked "Doesn't (interaction that had always been played one way, including by the original designer) contradict (basic principle of interpreting things, also articulated by the initial designer)?" And it did, and so the way everyone had been playing it was wrong. (Probably because the initial designer shot from the hip way more than Crawford does.)
Designer answers are useful for resolving actual ambiguity. They don't establish new facts. The whole point of having a rulebook is so that we can answer questions that arise without asking the designers.
We had the same debate about how the Bonus Action and Nick work recently in two (now three with this one) different threads with the same people.
It works the way @jl8e is explaining.
A)
B) 5e 2024 "Nick" weapon + Shadow blade combo
Nick
“ When you make the extra attack of the Light property, instead of as a Bonus Action you can make it as part of the Attack Action . You can make this extra attack only once per turn.”
Better?
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
Ok, this is a good argument actually.
If you are always considered to be using the Light property no matter what every time you make an attack with a Light weapon during your Attack action, then it would make sense that it's possible to be using the Light property without access to a Bonus Action and in that case, you could trigger the Nick Mastery property.
I'll concede that point.
In my mind if you weren't actually using any benefit from the Light property then you were just making a regular old attack with a weapon and not using the Light property. But I suppose if we consider it to just be a property of the weapon that is "always active" instead of a rule that you are choosing to use like how you do with some class features or Feats, then this all does sort of work.
That bonus action is granted only if you are wielding an offhand weapon, so there is a restriction on how the bonus action is granted. Nick directly addresses that weapon attack and simply says it can be made in the Attack Action.
If you use your Bonus Action to summon a weapon, do you get an extra bonus action by just using a light property weapon? Remember one Bonus Action per turn Rule ( and try not to assume that different features allow Bonus Action resets, the BA Rules are the specific general rule for all Bonus Actions.)
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.