agreed, Nick doesn’t give you a second bonus’s action it moves the attack that would normally be a bonus action attack into the the attack action freeing your bonus action for something else. This something else could be a spell like the ranger’s hunters mark or it could be a bonus action attack from something else like the bonus action attack granted by the dual wielding feat. Your attack action (s) used light weapons so you have met the starting qualification for this. Assuming you can use the draw/stow benefit of the feat to draw a non light, non two handed weapon then you can take your one bonus action attack with that weapon ( or just with one of the light weapons you’re already holding from the the light weapon TWF). It’s not two bonus actions in a round it’s one because Nick moved what would otherwise have been a bonus actions in into the attack action freeing the bonus action for other uses. That is the whole point of Nick.
As a side note, Plaguescarred and I differ in our readings of when the Nick attack can be made. That is something not clearly defined in the description and I can see valid arguments either way. I don’t know about him ( and others) but I know I’m content to follow his table’s reading if I’m ever playing there and I hope he ( and others) are content to play by my table’s reading if they ever play with us.
FWIW, it's not just the "this", it's the "it" in the second clause of the first sentence. "It" refers to the "extra attack of the Light property". Nick, in no way, gives you an additional attack ON TOP of the extra attack of the Light property.
On a side note, I can't believe we are reduced to parsing "it" and "this"...
But thats the thing, that very last sentence with “this” in it does make the feature give you an extra attack and the cost for it is the ability to not be able to use Nick Mastery in the same turn again and it lets you keep your Bonus Action.
It’s like a computer program that uses classes and you are using the this*( or this=> pointer) to talk about the object you are currently dealing with.
Using a nick weapon when fighting with two weapons gives you an additional attack during your Attack Action and leaves your BA still available to make the extra attack as a bonus action later of the light property. ( remember that bonus action extra attack has to be made by A different weapon. Light before DWF, non two-handed with DWF.)
I mean if people want to short themselves fine by me, but don’t keep telling me I’m incorrect in the interpretation of the feature when it’s brought up as being you gain an extra attack for using a nick weapon when two light weapon fighting and get to keep the bonus action, but you can not use that bonus action to make the extra attack of the light property as a bonus action later. Why? Because the word “it” has greater weight than a word that means self?
( if ever a bug there was … )
semantics, the nick that cuts deepest.
First level fighter two weapon fighting with a dagger and a shortsword gets three attacks. Dagger, Sword, Sword. With the two weapon fighting style all three attacks get mod damage bonus. Change that dagger into a scimitar and the same thing happens: Scimitar, Sword, Sword. No need for a feat to get a bonus action for that third attack, you got one free attack for using the nick weapon first, the free attack is made before you bonus action, and you have your third attack if you want to use it to attack.
But Short the run, I know I’m correct.
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.
FWIW, it's not just the "this", it's the "it" in the second clause of the first sentence. "It" refers to the "extra attack of the Light property". Nick, in no way, gives you an additional attack ON TOP of the extra attack of the Light property.
On a side note, I can't believe we are reduced to parsing "it" and "this"...
But thats the thing, that very last sentence with “this” in it does make the feature give you an extra attack and the cost for it is the ability to not be able to use Nick Mastery in the same turn again and it lets you keep your Bonus Action.
It’s like a computer program that uses classes and you are using the this*( or this=> pointer) to talk about the object you are currently dealing with.
Using a nick weapon when fighting with two weapons gives you an additional attack during your Attack Action and leaves your BA still available to make the extra attack as a bonus action later of the light property. ( remember that bonus action extra attack has to be made by A different weapon. Light before DWF, non two-handed with DWF.)
I mean if people want to short themselves fine by me, but don’t keep telling me I’m incorrect in the interpretation of the feature when it’s brought up as being you gain an extra attack for using a nick weapon when two light weapon fighting and get to keep the bonus action, but you can not use that bonus action to make the extra attack of the light property as a bonus action later. Why? Because the word “it” has greater weight than a word that means self?
( if ever a bug there was … )
semantics, the nick that cuts deepest.
First level fighter two weapon fighting with a dagger and a shortsword gets three attacks. Dagger, Sword, Sword. With the two weapon fighting style all three attacks get mod damage bonus. Change that dagger into a scimitar and the same thing happens: Scimitar, Sword, Sword. No need for a feat to get a bonus action for that third attack, you got one free attack for using the nick weapon first, the free attack is made before you bonus action, and you have your third attack if you want to use it to attack.
But Short the run, I know I’m correct.
The point people are making is that if you referenced this.extraAttack, you would get a null reference exception (pretty sure that's the term), as the only extra attack here is the one from the light property.
FWIW, it's not just the "this", it's the "it" in the second clause of the first sentence. "It" refers to the "extra attack of the Light property". Nick, in no way, gives you an additional attack ON TOP of the extra attack of the Light property.
On a side note, I can't believe we are reduced to parsing "it" and "this"...
But thats the thing, that very last sentence with “this” in it does make the feature give you an extra attack and the cost for it is the ability to not be able to use Nick Mastery in the same turn again and it lets you keep your Bonus Action.
It’s like a computer program that uses classes and you are using the this*( or this=> pointer) to talk about the object you are currently dealing with.
Using a nick weapon when fighting with two weapons gives you an additional attack during your Attack Action and leaves your BA still available to make the extra attack as a bonus action later of the light property. ( remember that bonus action extra attack has to be made by A different weapon. Light before DWF, non two-handed with DWF.)
I mean if people want to short themselves fine by me, but don’t keep telling me I’m incorrect in the interpretation of the feature when it’s brought up as being you gain an extra attack for using a nick weapon when two light weapon fighting and get to keep the bonus action, but you can not use that bonus action to make the extra attack of the light property as a bonus action later. Why? Because the word “it” has greater weight than a word that means self?
( if ever a bug there was … )
semantics, the nick that cuts deepest.
First level fighter two weapon fighting with a dagger and a shortsword gets three attacks. Dagger, Sword, Sword. With the two weapon fighting style all three attacks get mod damage bonus. Change that dagger into a scimitar and the same thing happens: Scimitar, Sword, Sword. No need for a feat to get a bonus action for that third attack, you got one free attack for using the nick weapon first, the free attack is made before you bonus action, and you have your third attack if you want to use it to attack.
But Short the run, I know I’m correct.
The point people are making is that if you referenced this.extraAttack, you would get a null reference exception (pretty sure that's the term), as the only extra attack here is the one from the light property.
The way they tried wording it is what makes it difficult to see how they tried to blend in into the light property.
“This” would refer to the nick mastery. The feature refers to itself. The actions taken within “this = using the nick mastery” action does not change the timing of one action, but does not remove it. it just adds an attack to the Attack Action. “This = Nick Mastery” is Then used until next turn, and it’s wash and repeat as needed.
The things needed to be sure you can do it are not that complex, just …. Specific and one , the light property, is tied to a number of other features that share a number of similar characteristics: DWF and FS:2W. That additional attack from Nick and a bonus action attack while wielding two weapons goes a long way when used properly. You don’t master a weapon by half-heartedly using the damn thing.
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.
Nick: In addition to the extra attack gained by using the Light property of a light weapon, you may also gain another extra attack that can be used as part of the attack action.
...except it doesn't say that.
The extra attack from Nick is the extra attack gained by using the Light property. Full stop. There is literally no other way to parse the language of the first sentence. I'll admit that you got me to reply a second time, but this trolling won't have me for a third.
Nick: In addition to the extra attack gained by using the Light property of a light weapon, you may also gain another extra attack that can be used as part of the attack action.
...except it doesn't say that.
The extra attack from Nick is the extra attack gained by using the Light property. Full stop. There is literally no other way to parse the language of the first sentence. I'll admit that you got me to reply a second time, but this trolling won't have me for a third.
Add to the end of your Nick the words, “This Mastery can’t be used again until the beginning of your next turn.” And you got the same thing, but better defined.
Cutting word count to fit a space and calling it the Nick weapon mastery; forcing unnecessary debate to the point that when a single individual can hold a view that’s completely valid and it is called “trolling”.
Maybe if they had said this from the get-go, and not been so cheap, then we wouldn’t agree 2 disagree:
Nick: In addition to the extra attack gained by using the Light property of a light weapon, you may also gain another extra attack that can be used as part of the attack action.
If anyone that wants to say otherwise, they can think whatever, I stand by my logic and understanding of what the RAW is, three attacks if you only dual wield two light weapons, no DWF and the two-weapon fighting style as a fighter at first level.
And the nick weapon has to trigger the light weapon property of an extra attack, which is made by a different weapon in a different hand.
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.
As a reminder the Nick / Two Weapon Fighting / Light/ Dual Wielder Bonus action has already been discussed extensively in multiple threads. There is no need to continue that again in here:
And many more, including already in this thread. As such, that is not going to be a constructive conversation to reopen. Users can read over this thread and the others if they wish and form their own understanding. As such, which this one and others having reached multiple pages and being debated ad nauseum, I'm locking this thread. At this point it may be best for some of the regular partakers of this discussion simply to link back to a previous thread instead of rehashing the debate and wait for new information to come (such as Sage Advice or eratta).
agreed, Nick doesn’t give you a second bonus’s action it moves the attack that would normally be a bonus action attack into the the attack action freeing your bonus action for something else. This something else could be a spell like the ranger’s hunters mark or it could be a bonus action attack from something else like the bonus action attack granted by the dual wielding feat. Your attack action (s) used light weapons so you have met the starting qualification for this. Assuming you can use the draw/stow benefit of the feat to draw a non light, non two handed weapon then you can take your one bonus action attack with that weapon ( or just with one of the light weapons you’re already holding from the the light weapon TWF). It’s not two bonus actions in a round it’s one because Nick moved what would otherwise have been a bonus actions in into the attack action freeing the bonus action for other uses. That is the whole point of Nick.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
As a side note, Plaguescarred and I differ in our readings of when the Nick attack can be made. That is something not clearly defined in the description and I can see valid arguments either way. I don’t know about him ( and others) but I know I’m content to follow his table’s reading if I’m ever playing there and I hope he ( and others) are content to play by my table’s reading if they ever play with us.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
But thats the thing, that very last sentence with “this” in it does make the feature give you an extra attack and the cost for it is the ability to not be able to use Nick Mastery in the same turn again and it lets you keep your Bonus Action.
It’s like a computer program that uses classes and you are using the this*( or this=> pointer) to talk about the object you are currently dealing with.
Using a nick weapon when fighting with two weapons gives you an additional attack during your Attack Action and leaves your BA still available to make the extra attack as a bonus action later of the light property. ( remember that bonus action extra attack has to be made by A different weapon. Light before DWF, non two-handed with DWF.)
I mean if people want to short themselves fine by me, but don’t keep telling me I’m incorrect in the interpretation of the feature when it’s brought up as being you gain an extra attack for using a nick weapon when two light weapon fighting and get to keep the bonus action, but you can not use that bonus action to make the extra attack of the light property as a bonus action later. Why? Because the word “it” has greater weight than a word that means self?
( if ever a bug there was … )
semantics, the nick that cuts deepest.
First level fighter two weapon fighting with a dagger and a shortsword gets three attacks. Dagger, Sword, Sword. With the two weapon fighting style all three attacks get mod damage bonus. Change that dagger into a scimitar and the same thing happens: Scimitar, Sword, Sword. No need for a feat to get a bonus action for that third attack, you got one free attack for using the nick weapon first, the free attack is made before you bonus action, and you have your third attack if you want to use it to attack.
But Short the run, I know I’m correct.
" 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.
The point people are making is that if you referenced this.extraAttack, you would get a null reference exception (pretty sure that's the term), as the only extra attack here is the one from the light property.
The way they tried wording it is what makes it difficult to see how they tried to blend in into the light property.
“This” would refer to the nick mastery. The feature refers to itself. The actions taken within “this = using the nick mastery” action does not change the timing of one action, but does not remove it. it just adds an attack to the Attack Action. “This = Nick Mastery” is Then used until next turn, and it’s wash and repeat as needed.
The things needed to be sure you can do it are not that complex, just …. Specific and one , the light property, is tied to a number of other features that share a number of similar characteristics: DWF and FS:2W.
That additional attack from Nick and a bonus action attack while wielding two weapons goes a long way when used properly. You don’t master a weapon by half-heartedly using the damn thing.
" 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.
Nick: In addition to the extra attack gained by using the Light property of a light weapon, you may also gain another extra attack that can be used as part of the attack action.
...except it doesn't say that.
The extra attack from Nick is the extra attack gained by using the Light property. Full stop. There is literally no other way to parse the language of the first sentence. I'll admit that you got me to reply a second time, but this trolling won't have me for a third.
Add to the end of your Nick the words, “This Mastery can’t be used again until the beginning of your next turn.” And you got the same thing, but better defined.
Cutting word count to fit a space and calling it the Nick weapon mastery; forcing unnecessary debate to the point that when a single individual can hold a view that’s completely valid and it is called “trolling”.
Maybe if they had said this from the get-go, and not been so cheap, then we wouldn’t agree 2 disagree:
Nick: In addition to the extra attack gained by using the Light property of a light weapon, you may also gain another extra attack that can be used as part of the attack action.
If anyone that wants to say otherwise, they can think whatever, I stand by my logic and understanding of what the RAW is, three attacks if you only dual wield two light weapons, no DWF and the two-weapon fighting style as a fighter at first level.
And the nick weapon has to trigger the light weapon property of an extra attack, which is made by a different weapon in a different hand.
" 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.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
ModeratorAs a reminder the Nick / Two Weapon Fighting / Light/ Dual Wielder Bonus action has already been discussed extensively in multiple threads. There is no need to continue that again in here:
1. Two weapon fighting questions
2.2024 PH Confusion with Light Property and Nick
3. Nick Debate Solved
4. Someone explain Nick
And many more, including already in this thread. As such, that is not going to be a constructive conversation to reopen. Users can read over this thread and the others if they wish and form their own understanding. As such, which this one and others having reached multiple pages and being debated ad nauseum, I'm locking this thread. At this point it may be best for some of the regular partakers of this discussion simply to link back to a previous thread instead of rehashing the debate and wait for new information to come (such as Sage Advice or eratta).
D&D Beyond ToS || D&D Beyond Support