If it's their intent, it could explain why the reference to "1/turn" is found in the Nick mastery property instead of the Light property as well as why with this weapon is lacking.
Another reason for my initial reading is the present tense in which Nick is worded, implying when you make the extra attack, you're wielding it but i'm not english native aso may be why.
It's still seems very counterintuitive to me, though.
That's probably because up2 ignores the fact that all Nick weapons are also Light weapons and tries (unsuccessfully) to treat them as completely separate things
If you make your initial attack with the Scimitar, then per the current rules you have met the conditions for both the Light property extra attack, and the Nick mastery shift of that attack from your Bonus Action to the Attack action
WOTC certainly could have worded it to make it explicit that the weapon making the extra attack must be one with the Nick mastery. But they didn't
What do you mean? I'm not ignoring this at all. I went through the trouble of pointing out that the first weapon (used in the initial attack) must have the Light property in order to be allowed to attack again, but that weapon might also have the Nick property. Although it is true that all Nick weapons are also Light weapons, the reverse of that is not true -- not all Light weapons are Nick weapons. You need to "only" have the Light property on your first weapon (that makes the initial attack) in order to be granted an extra attack. The Nick property has nothing at all to do with whether or not you are granted an extra attack because it has no interaction whatsoever with your initial attack. The Nick property ONLY pertains to "the extra attack of the Light property" as per the text in the Nick property's description. That extra attack (the second attack, made with the second weapon) is what the Nick property cares about. The Nick property gives you the option of making that second attack as part of the Attack action instead of as a Bonus Action. The second attack is all that matter here. The first attack gives you the extra attack -- you need to make that first attack with a Light weapon to gain that benefit. The second attack is required to be "at least" a Light weapon. What exactly that Light weapon actually is determines whether or not you can make this attack as part of the Attack action. A Light weapon is not good enough for that -- only a Light weapon that is also a Nick weapon will allow this attack to function in this way. Whether or not the first weapon that is used for the first attack is a Nick weapon or not is irrelevant.
If you make your initial attack with the Scimitar, then per the current rules you have met the conditions for both the Light property extra attack, and the Nick mastery shift of that attack from your Bonus Action to the Attack action
This is not true. You have not met the conditions for the Nick mastery shift because the text for the Nick mastery doesn't care at all about your initial attack. Instead, the Nick mastery text says: "When you make the extra attack of the Light property . . .". Not the initial attack. The extra attack.
To explain the Nick property, we should briefly cover that being able to attack twice while dual-wielding Light weapons has subtly changed in the 2024 Player’s Handbook. Instead of being covered under Melee Attacks, the rules for dual-wielding Light weapons are covered under the Light weapon property.
It still functions the same way: When you make an attack with a weapon that has the Light property, you can use a Bonus Action to make one attack with a different Light weapon you’re wielding.
The Nick mastery property allows you to make the additional attack you receive from wielding two Light weapons as part of the initial attack action.
Keep in mind that this doesn’t mean you can make a third attack as a Bonus Action, as the Light property specifies you only get one extra attack. But, while it may not pump your damage, this frees up your Bonus Action to use class/species abilities, such as the Rogue’s Cunning Action, while still getting an additional attack in.
Partially this one is my fault at least, since I should have worded it as:
Obviously the intention with Nick is that the Weapon could be used for either the initial attack, or the light weapon property attack
However, I feel the latter part of the statement already clarifies that this was in reference to the weapon anyway, "either should be considered valid for the weapon with the Nick Property"
Ok, as I read and interpret Nick - the weapon ( say a scimitar) carries the property so when you use the weapon it activates the property. If your initial attack is with the scimitar then having activated Nick you can make a second attack with another light weapon ( say a short sword) as part of the same attack action. If you attack first with the short sword then try to use the scimitar activates Nick allowing you to make a second attack with it as part of the attack action. Either order is fine as long as one of them is with the Nick action and both are with light weapons. . . .
Yeah, too many people are saying things like this in these threads. This is not how the Nick property works. The Nick property has nothing to do with the initial attack. The initial attack cannot "activate" the Nick property. These things are unrelated. If the initial attack is made with a weapon that happens to have the Nick property, it doesn't do you any good. In order for the Nick property to actually do anything you need to use that weapon for your extra attack:
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.
When you make your initial attack, you "activate" the Light property (not the Nick property) as long as certain prerequisites are met -- the attack must be made as part of the Attack action and it must be made with a weapon that has the "Light" property. Whether or not this weapon also has the Nick property is irrelevant. You are able to make an extra attack due to the Light property, NOT due to the Nick property.
Now we fast forward ahead to some moment in time when we are getting ready to make that extra (second) attack that was given to us from that first weapon (with the Light property) that was used in that first attack which was made as part of an Attack action. When making this extra (second) attack . . . if we are wielding a Nick weapon for this (second) attack then we now have a choice about whether we want to use the Bonus Action for this attack or just make this extra (second) attack as part of the Attack action instead. The reason why we have this choice about WHEN to make this extra attack is due to the Nick property of the second weapon (NOT the Light property). But the fact that we can make this attack at all is due to the Light property of the first weapon.
This is irrelevant to the points that were being argued and just adding more confusion to a topic that already has a lot of people confused.
The argument, to clarify yet again, since people can't seem to get it is simply this.
There are some people whom were arguing that the Nick weapon must be used on an initial attack BEFORE Nick is used. Nick is used on the Extra Attack of the light property yes, but nobody is arguing against that part. I have stated the point repeatedly, the Nick weapon does not need to be used on the initial attack required to activate the extra attack from the light property, nor does it need to be used on the extra attack coming from the light property, rather it must be used for one or the other.
If you still don't get it, I already explained it previous in the thread too.
1. Nick is valid for either the initial attack or the light property extra attack
2. Nick is valid for only the initial attack
3. Nick is valid for only the light property extra attack
As nick neither says it is limited to either 2 or 3, it is madness to assume that 2 or 3 are correct. 1 is the only one that makes logical sense by rules as written.
People are arguing that Nick is only valid when the weapon with the Nick Mastery is being used on the initial attack, some people have also in other threads claimed Nick is only valid when the weapon with the Nick Mastery is used for the light property extra attack. Nothing in RAW supports either interpretation.
To explain the Nick property, we should briefly cover that being able to attack twice while dual-wielding Light weapons has subtly changed in the 2024 Player’s Handbook. Instead of being covered under Melee Attacks, the rules for dual-wielding Light weapons are covered under the Light weapon property.
It still functions the same way: When you make an attack with a weapon that has the Light property, you can use a Bonus Action to make one attack with a different Light weapon you’re wielding.
The Nick mastery property allows you to make the additional attack you receive from wielding two Light weapons as part of the initial attack action.
Keep in mind that this doesn’t mean you can make a third attack as a Bonus Action, as the Light property specifies you only get one extra attack. But, while it may not pump your damage, this frees up your Bonus Action to use class/species abilities, such as the Rogue’s Cunning Action, while still getting an additional attack in.
This demonstrates intent, but actually does nothing to clarify the question that is currently at hand: Does the Nick property require that the initial Light weapon used to trigger the Light Weapon property also have the Nick Property? RAW I do not think so, but it is unclear.
I can see a few different natural language interpretations: 1) You must attack with the Nick weapon because every other weapon property basically requires this. RAW doesn't seem to require this. 2) You must make the extra attack with the Nick weapon. This seems like a reasonable interpretation to at least involve the weapon in question even if RAW doesn't seem to require this because otherwise .. 3) You may use the Nick Property simply by holding or .. having the weapon on your person? This seems like a pretty unreasonable interpretation even if RAW doesn't require that you use the Nick weapon at all.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
1. Nick is valid for either the initial attack or the light property extra attack
2. Nick is valid for only the initial attack
3. Nick is valid for only the light property extra attack
As nick neither says it is limited to either 2 or 3, it is madness to assume that 2 or 3 are correct. 1 is the only one that makes logical sense by rules as written.
Ahh yes that makes sense. I just wish the wording were clearer.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
1. Nick is valid for either the initial attack or the light property extra attack
2. Nick is valid for only the initial attack
3. Nick is valid for only the light property extra attack
As nick neither says it is limited to either 2 or 3, it is madness to assume that 2 or 3 are correct. 1 is the only one that makes logical sense by rules as written.
Ahh yes that makes sense. I just wish the wording were clearer.
you'll have to blame my Dyspraxia for that unfortunately, causes me to constantly be editing things and realizing later that I didn't put things down as cleared as I had hoped.
you'll have to blame my Dyspraxia for that unfortunately, causes me to constantly be editing things and realizing later that I didn't put things down as cleared as I had hoped.
No no, I totally meant the wording of the PHB.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
you'll have to blame my Dyspraxia for that unfortunately, causes me to constantly be editing things and realizing later that I didn't put things down as cleared as I had hoped.
No no, I totally meant the wording of the PHB.
Ah apologies :D, The 2024 PHB really could have used another 3 iterations with proof reading and play testing between each iteration.
Thanks TarodNet According to this article, you use the weapon mastery property when you make an attack with the weapon, meaning you use Nick mastery property when you make the extra attack of the Light property..
How to Use Weapon Mastery Properties
If you’re wielding a weapon and have learned its mastery property, you’ll be able to use that mastery property every turn when you make an attack with the weapon.
Thanks TarodNet According to this article, you use the weapon mastery property when you make an attack with the weapon, meaning you use Nick mastery property when you make the extra attack of the Light property..
How to Use Weapon Mastery Properties
If you’re wielding a weapon and have learned its mastery property, you’ll be able to use that mastery property every turn when you make an attack with the weapon.
Thanks TarodNet According to this article, you use the weapon mastery property when you make an attack with the weapon, meaning you use Nick mastery property when you make the extra attack of the Light property..
How to Use Weapon Mastery Properties
If you’re wielding a weapon and have learned its mastery property, you’ll be able to use that mastery property every turn when you make an attack with the weapon.
Always welcome!
IMHO, it's also the intuitive way of ruling it.
I don't mind going a long with this, the other way around is the most odd way too me, but if to benefit from Nick you use it on the extra attack itself, then that is how I would assume 99% of people would want to play it begin with. Rogues more so, get an attack with a VEX weapon, then NICK weapon, so you give yourself advantage for Sneak Attack ~60% of the time, potentially more so if you also get Dual Wielder for a BA attack after (going back to the VEX weapon).
Ntil we get a rewrite from WotC I stand by my interpretation. I will grant that it desperately needs a rewrite . But it just might be : When you make an attack with a light weapon with this property (Nick) it can be either the first or second and the attack or any second light attack occurs in the attack action, not as a bonus action.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If it's their intent, it could explain why the reference to "1/turn" is found in the Nick mastery property instead of the Light property as well as why with this weapon is lacking.
Another reason for my initial reading is the present tense in which Nick is worded, implying when you make the extra attack, you're wielding it but i'm not english native aso may be why.
What do you mean? I'm not ignoring this at all. I went through the trouble of pointing out that the first weapon (used in the initial attack) must have the Light property in order to be allowed to attack again, but that weapon might also have the Nick property. Although it is true that all Nick weapons are also Light weapons, the reverse of that is not true -- not all Light weapons are Nick weapons. You need to "only" have the Light property on your first weapon (that makes the initial attack) in order to be granted an extra attack. The Nick property has nothing at all to do with whether or not you are granted an extra attack because it has no interaction whatsoever with your initial attack. The Nick property ONLY pertains to "the extra attack of the Light property" as per the text in the Nick property's description. That extra attack (the second attack, made with the second weapon) is what the Nick property cares about. The Nick property gives you the option of making that second attack as part of the Attack action instead of as a Bonus Action. The second attack is all that matter here. The first attack gives you the extra attack -- you need to make that first attack with a Light weapon to gain that benefit. The second attack is required to be "at least" a Light weapon. What exactly that Light weapon actually is determines whether or not you can make this attack as part of the Attack action. A Light weapon is not good enough for that -- only a Light weapon that is also a Nick weapon will allow this attack to function in this way. Whether or not the first weapon that is used for the first attack is a Nick weapon or not is irrelevant.
This is not true. You have not met the conditions for the Nick mastery shift because the text for the Nick mastery doesn't care at all about your initial attack. Instead, the Nick mastery text says: "When you make the extra attack of the Light property . . .". Not the initial attack. The extra attack.
We don’t have an updated SAC yet, but we do have this article pre-release that clearly spells out the intention: Your Guide to Weapon Mastery in the 2024 Player's Handbook:
---
Nick
Example Weapon: Dagger
To explain the Nick property, we should briefly cover that being able to attack twice while dual-wielding Light weapons has subtly changed in the 2024 Player’s Handbook. Instead of being covered under Melee Attacks, the rules for dual-wielding Light weapons are covered under the Light weapon property.
It still functions the same way: When you make an attack with a weapon that has the Light property, you can use a Bonus Action to make one attack with a different Light weapon you’re wielding.
The Nick mastery property allows you to make the additional attack you receive from wielding two Light weapons as part of the initial attack action.
Keep in mind that this doesn’t mean you can make a third attack as a Bonus Action, as the Light property specifies you only get one extra attack. But, while it may not pump your damage, this frees up your Bonus Action to use class/species abilities, such as the Rogue’s Cunning Action, while still getting an additional attack in.
---
This is irrelevant to the points that were being argued and just adding more confusion to a topic that already has a lot of people confused.
The argument, to clarify yet again, since people can't seem to get it is simply this.
There are some people whom were arguing that the Nick weapon must be used on an initial attack BEFORE Nick is used. Nick is used on the Extra Attack of the light property yes, but nobody is arguing against that part. I have stated the point repeatedly, the Nick weapon does not need to be used on the initial attack required to activate the extra attack from the light property, nor does it need to be used on the extra attack coming from the light property, rather it must be used for one or the other.
If you still don't get it, I already explained it previous in the thread too.
People are arguing that Nick is only valid when the weapon with the Nick Mastery is being used on the initial attack, some people have also in other threads claimed Nick is only valid when the weapon with the Nick Mastery is used for the light property extra attack. Nothing in RAW supports either interpretation.
This demonstrates intent, but actually does nothing to clarify the question that is currently at hand: Does the Nick property require that the initial Light weapon used to trigger the Light Weapon property also have the Nick Property? RAW I do not think so, but it is unclear.
I can see a few different natural language interpretations:
1) You must attack with the Nick weapon because every other weapon property basically requires this. RAW doesn't seem to require this.
2) You must make the extra attack with the Nick weapon. This seems like a reasonable interpretation to at least involve the weapon in question even if RAW doesn't seem to require this because otherwise ..
3) You may use the Nick Property simply by holding or .. having the weapon on your person? This seems like a pretty unreasonable interpretation even if RAW doesn't require that you use the Nick weapon at all.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Ahh yes that makes sense. I just wish the wording were clearer.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
you'll have to blame my Dyspraxia for that unfortunately, causes me to constantly be editing things and realizing later that I didn't put things down as cleared as I had hoped.
No no, I totally meant the wording of the PHB.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Ah apologies :D, The 2024 PHB really could have used another 3 iterations with proof reading and play testing between each iteration.
Thanks TarodNet According to this article, you use the weapon mastery property when you make an attack with the weapon, meaning you use Nick mastery property when you make the extra attack of the Light property..
Always welcome!
IMHO, it's also the intuitive way of ruling it.
I don't mind going a long with this, the other way around is the most odd way too me, but if to benefit from Nick you use it on the extra attack itself, then that is how I would assume 99% of people would want to play it begin with. Rogues more so, get an attack with a VEX weapon, then NICK weapon, so you give yourself advantage for Sneak Attack ~60% of the time, potentially more so if you also get Dual Wielder for a BA attack after (going back to the VEX weapon).
Ntil we get a rewrite from WotC I stand by my interpretation. I will grant that it desperately needs a rewrite . But it just might be :
When you make an attack with a light weapon with this property (Nick) it can be either the first or second and the attack or any second light attack occurs in the attack action, not as a bonus action.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.