Okay so we know that the Errata is one of the only things that can supplant the rules, and the Sage thing is no longer in service, I guess.
Monk's Deflect Energy, for those that don't know is the upgraded Deflect Attacks (3rd level) Monks get 10 levels later. Deflect Attacks only deflects Bludgeon, Slashing and Piercing attacks, from attack rolls.
Deflect Energy is: You can now use your Deflect Attacks feature against attacks that deal any damage type, not just Bludgeoning, Piercing, or Slashing.
So we can presume this also means attack rolls right? Well not so fast, because when introducing the new Monk, Jeremy described that this feature would go as far as deflecting spells like "Thunderwave"(https://youtu.be/HsiIgMutKKU?t=963).
I understand its not official, but do you think it's RAI?
He does not say "..deflect Thunderwave..." He says "...deflect that wave of thunder..." at the timestamp you linked. It's an odd choice of phrase, but he's not saying that the effect deflects the effects of the Spell.
It's not an interview, it's a scripted promotional video. If I had to guess about what happened, someone looking through the script shortly before filming (Or reviewing things in editing) said "Wait, Thunderwave isn't an Attack, it won't work with the new Deflect Attacks or Deflect Energy" and the phrasing was altered to not specifically reference the spell.
(Also, Deflect Attacks works with any attack that includes BPS damage, not just attacks that are BPS damage.)
He does not say "..deflect Thunderwave..." He says "...deflect that wave of thunder..." at the timestamp you linked. It's an odd choice of phrase, but he's not saying that the effect deflects the effects of the Spell.
It's not an interview, it's a scripted promotional video. If I had to guess about what happened, someone looking through the script shortly before filming (Or reviewing things in editing) said "Wait, Thunderwave isn't an Attack, it won't work with the new Deflect Attacks or Deflect Energy" and the phrasing was altered to not specifically reference the spell.
(Also, Deflect Attacks works with any attack that includes BPS damage, not just attacks that are BPS damage.)
You are making assumptions on what you think happened. I am just asking specifically on the facts above. I should also mention he also said "fire", just before "waves of thunder". Not fireball or firebolt.
You have made the assumption that a "wave of thunder" automatically meant the "Thunderwave spell" when no spells at all are actually mentioned when describing the feature in the video, at the point you linked. Just generalized effects without actual game mechanics.
So no. No to the Thunderwave spell being deflected with Deflect Energy. Not rules as written, not rules as intended, either. Not even rules as summarized in the video.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
🎵I'm on top of the world, looking down on creation, wreaking death and devastation with my mind.
As the power that I've found erupts freely from the ground, I will cackle from the top of the world.🎵
He did not say Thunderwave, he said "that Fire over there, deflect that wave of thunder..." We can try to make it something it isn't, but the feature literally says attacks, so it doesn't even matter what he said. The facts above are plain, no interpretation needed.
Well so far there's not enough people to build a consensus either wait, so I guess if the Leading Developer says so, it's good enough for RAI.
Thanks. Thread closed.
I mean he didn't say that you could use deflect attacks on non-attacks. He said wave of thunder because thunder is sound based damage and sound travels in waves. Deflects attacks and its upgrade deflect energy only work on attack rolls. Deflect attacks says, "When an attack roll hits you and its damage includes Bludgeoning, Piercing, or Slashing damage, you can take a Reaction to reduce the attack’s total damage against you." Deflect energy says, "You can now use your Deflect Attacks feature against attacks that deal any damage type" referring back to deflect attacks. There is definitely consensus that deflect attacks does not work as you propose.
Deflect Energy is: You can now use your Deflect Attacks feature against attacks that deal any damage type, not just Bludgeoning, Piercing, or Slashing.
So we can presume this also means attack rolls right? Well not so fast, because when introducing the new Monk, Jeremy described that this feature would go as far as deflecting spells like "Thunderwave"(https://youtu.be/HsiIgMutKKU?t=963).
Deflect Energy doesn't work on Thunderwave, because Thunderwave doesn't have an attack roll. MeatLuggin has already covered it but Deflect Attacks and Deflect Energy require there to be an attack roll.
When you take the Attack action, you make an attack. Some other actions, Bonus Actions, and Reactions also let you make an attack. Whether you strike with a Melee weapon, fire a Ranged weapon, or make an attack roll as part of a spell, an attack has the following structure:
No attack roll, not an attack. So spells that cause damage but include no attack roll, are not attacks, at least as defined within the rules. Deflect Energy specifies an attack and the rules specify that an attack roll is part of an attack, as such Thunderwave which has no attack roll, is not applicable to Deflect Energy.
An attack roll is a D20 Test that represents making an attack with a weapon, an Unarmed Strike, or a spell. See also “Playing the Game” (“D20 Tests”).
If something makes an attack roll, it's an attack. For something to be an attack, an attack roll must be made. If no attack roll is made, it's not an attack.
In addition, the Deflect Energy feature has explicitly been about attacks since it first appeared in Player's Handbook Playtest 6, from June 2023, fifteen months prior to the release of the 2024 PHB, though initially about ranged attacks:
13TH LEVEL: DEFLECT ENERGY
You can now use your Deflect Missiles feature against ranged attacks that deal any damage type, not just Bludgeoning, Piercing, or Slashing.
Well so far there's not enough people to build a consensus
It seems like there's very much a consensus on this. Just maybe not the one you were fishing for
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
In addition to everyone telling you the way it works, the head designer is not inherently authoritative. There is no official source of rulings other than the published Sage Advice. (And, of course, the rules.) Crawford would, as I understand it, sometimes make rulings on Twitter when people asked him questions, but he shot from the hip a lot, was sometimes wrong, and I have certainly seen contradictory tweets cited in the same thread.
Memory is fallible, and D&D is a complicated system with a lot of fuzzy edge cases. Crawford was never the source of Official Rulings. That was not part of his job.
In addition to everyone telling you the way it works, the head designer is not inherently authoritative. There is no official source of rulings other than the published Sage Advice. (And, of course, the rules.) Crawford would, as I understand it, sometimes make rulings on Twitter when people asked him questions, but he shot from the hip a lot, was sometimes wrong, and I have certainly seen contradictory tweets cited in the same thread.
Memory is fallible, and D&D is a complicated system with a lot of fuzzy edge cases. Crawford was never the source of Official Rulings. That was not part of his job.
Crawford's tweets also had the issue that he would pretty much always give a RAW answer even if you explicitly asked him for a RAI answer, unless it was something they had already made a decision to release errata on. Possibly he did this for legal reasons, I'm not sure, but it meant that despite him being one of the few people who could be considered an authority on the intentions behind the rules, you couldn't rely on those tweets as an indication of what those intentions were.
Well so far there's not enough people to build a consensus either wait, so I guess if the Leading Developer says so, it's good enough for RAI.
Thanks. Thread closed.
lol, pretty sure that's just you, Why not have him say "MPA gets to decide everythng no matter what the rules say" since you're putting words in his mouth?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Okay so we know that the Errata is one of the only things that can supplant the rules, and the Sage thing is no longer in service, I guess.
Monk's Deflect Energy, for those that don't know is the upgraded Deflect Attacks (3rd level) Monks get 10 levels later. Deflect Attacks only deflects Bludgeon, Slashing and Piercing attacks, from attack rolls.
Deflect Energy is: You can now use your Deflect Attacks feature against attacks that deal any damage type, not just Bludgeoning, Piercing, or Slashing.
So we can presume this also means attack rolls right? Well not so fast, because when introducing the new Monk, Jeremy described that this feature would go as far as deflecting spells like "Thunderwave"(https://youtu.be/HsiIgMutKKU?t=963).
I understand its not official, but do you think it's RAI?
He does not say "..deflect Thunderwave..." He says "...deflect that wave of thunder..." at the timestamp you linked. It's an odd choice of phrase, but he's not saying that the effect deflects the effects of the Spell.
It's not an interview, it's a scripted promotional video. If I had to guess about what happened, someone looking through the script shortly before filming (Or reviewing things in editing) said "Wait, Thunderwave isn't an Attack, it won't work with the new Deflect Attacks or Deflect Energy" and the phrasing was altered to not specifically reference the spell.
(Also, Deflect Attacks works with any attack that includes BPS damage, not just attacks that are BPS damage.)
🎵I'm on top of the world, looking down on creation, wreaking death and devastation with my mind.
As the power that I've found erupts freely from the ground, I will cackle from the top of the world.🎵
Charisma Saving Throw: DC 18, Failure: 20d6 Psychic Damage, Success: Half damage
You are making assumptions on what you think happened. I am just asking specifically on the facts above. I should also mention he also said "fire", just before "waves of thunder". Not fireball or firebolt.
You have made the assumption that a "wave of thunder" automatically meant the "Thunderwave spell" when no spells at all are actually mentioned when describing the feature in the video, at the point you linked. Just generalized effects without actual game mechanics.
So no. No to the Thunderwave spell being deflected with Deflect Energy. Not rules as written, not rules as intended, either. Not even rules as summarized in the video.
🎵I'm on top of the world, looking down on creation, wreaking death and devastation with my mind.
As the power that I've found erupts freely from the ground, I will cackle from the top of the world.🎵
Charisma Saving Throw: DC 18, Failure: 20d6 Psychic Damage, Success: Half damage
He did not say Thunderwave, he said "that Fire over there, deflect that wave of thunder..." We can try to make it something it isn't, but the feature literally says attacks, so it doesn't even matter what he said. The facts above are plain, no interpretation needed.
Well so far there's not enough people to build a consensus either wait, so I guess if the Leading Developer says so, it's good enough for RAI.
Thanks. Thread closed.
I mean he didn't say that you could use deflect attacks on non-attacks. He said wave of thunder because thunder is sound based damage and sound travels in waves. Deflects attacks and its upgrade deflect energy only work on attack rolls. Deflect attacks says, "When an attack roll hits you and its damage includes Bludgeoning, Piercing, or Slashing damage, you can take a Reaction to reduce the attack’s total damage against you." Deflect energy says, "You can now use your Deflect Attacks feature against attacks that deal any damage type" referring back to deflect attacks. There is definitely consensus that deflect attacks does not work as you propose.
Deflect Energy doesn't work on Thunderwave, because Thunderwave doesn't have an attack roll. MeatLuggin has already covered it but Deflect Attacks and Deflect Energy require there to be an attack roll.
Further too this, attacks are defined within the PHB already: https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/phb-2024/playing-the-game#MakinganAttack
No attack roll, not an attack. So spells that cause damage but include no attack roll, are not attacks, at least as defined within the rules. Deflect Energy specifies an attack and the rules specify that an attack roll is part of an attack, as such Thunderwave which has no attack roll, is not applicable to Deflect Energy.
If you mean the Sage Advice & Errata, that's very much "in service", there's literally a link to it on the sources menu
From the rules glossary on Attack Roll
If something makes an attack roll, it's an attack. For something to be an attack, an attack roll must be made. If no attack roll is made, it's not an attack.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
In addition, the Deflect Energy feature has explicitly been about attacks since it first appeared in Player's Handbook Playtest 6, from June 2023, fifteen months prior to the release of the 2024 PHB, though initially about ranged attacks:
The same wording appears in Player's Handbook Playtest 8 from November 2023.
🎵I'm on top of the world, looking down on creation, wreaking death and devastation with my mind.
As the power that I've found erupts freely from the ground, I will cackle from the top of the world.🎵
Charisma Saving Throw: DC 18, Failure: 20d6 Psychic Damage, Success: Half damage
It seems like there's very much a consensus on this. Just maybe not the one you were fishing for
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Its clear JC was discussing attack's damage type like fire and thunder being deflected by Deflect Energy, not specific spells.
In addition to everyone telling you the way it works, the head designer is not inherently authoritative. There is no official source of rulings other than the published Sage Advice. (And, of course, the rules.) Crawford would, as I understand it, sometimes make rulings on Twitter when people asked him questions, but he shot from the hip a lot, was sometimes wrong, and I have certainly seen contradictory tweets cited in the same thread.
Memory is fallible, and D&D is a complicated system with a lot of fuzzy edge cases. Crawford was never the source of Official Rulings. That was not part of his job.
Crawford's tweets also had the issue that he would pretty much always give a RAW answer even if you explicitly asked him for a RAI answer, unless it was something they had already made a decision to release errata on. Possibly he did this for legal reasons, I'm not sure, but it meant that despite him being one of the few people who could be considered an authority on the intentions behind the rules, you couldn't rely on those tweets as an indication of what those intentions were.
pronouns: he/she/they
lol, pretty sure that's just you, Why not have him say "MPA gets to decide everythng no matter what the rules say" since you're putting words in his mouth?