Light + Nick + Pact of the Chain (Waiving Light+Nick Additional Attack to let Familiar Attack).

Not trying to create a flame war or anything but I am not sure of the latest on this debate. I have read EXTENSIVE debates on Reddit and various forums about whether you can forgo the light weapon attack that is enabled via light weapon property and nick weapon mastery to allow your familiar to attack.

The most compelling argument made against is that you do not fulfill the requirements of the additional light weapon attack when you do this (since that light weapon attack with "a different light weapon" does not happen).

"That extra attack must be made with a different Light weapon"

The most compelling argument made in favor of this interpretation (i.e., you can forgo the 2nd light weapon attack to allow your pact of the chain familiar to attack) is that Thirsting Blade has very similar wording (also constrains the additional attack to be with a specific weapon) and almost no one would argue against forgoing the extra attack granted by Thirsting Blade to allow your POC familiar to attack.

"You gain the Extra Attack feature for your pact weapon only. With that feature, you can attack twice with the weapon instead of once when you take the Attack action on your turn."

I have not seen an argument against the Thirsting Blade argument. Nor have I seen anything official weighing in on this.

I don't see anything in the rules that would prevent that interaction.

To me you either make an attack or forgo it, so with Nick Mastery, when you make the extra attack of the Light property as part of the Attack action with a different Light weapon, you can't forgo it to do something else.

It's hard to pin down, since it depends on if the Light attack roll exists to be converted before you would go to attack with second weapon, and if not then if you can substitute that attack for something else after declaring it but before rolling it. Just a very fiddly timing question that 5e doesn't have rules for.

That said, unless there's some hidden OP combo to this, I'd say the investment of the multiclass to be able to pull this off- I don't believe there's a way to get Weapon Mastery without it- seems like enough for me to greenlight it in turn.

My reasoning is that until the moment when you make the extra attack of the Light property, before it it's not an attack part of the Attack action that you can forgo but a Bonus Action that the Light property let you take. I also require the extra attack to be made with the weapon having the Nick Mastery property i must say. It's how i adjudicate it in my game since it was published.

It reminds me of a Thread some time ago on the subject containing reference like ''I attack with my Dagger...just kidding''  that some might remember 😃

May i cast Summon Tarod_ to know where to find it ?

Quote from Plaguescarred >>

To me you either make an attack or forgo it, so with Nick Mastery, when you make the extra attack of the Light property as part of the Attack action with a different Light weapon, you can't forgo it to do something else. 

Wouldn't this interpretation also preclude forgoing one of your pact weapon attacks made with Thirsting Blade to allow the familiar to attack?

"You gain the Extra Attack feature for your pact weapon only. With that feature, you can attack twice with the weapon instead of once when you take the Attack action on your turn."

I think Thirsting Blade is more favorable to it while it require the pact weapon, it doesn't become part of the Attack action when you make the extra attack like Nick Mastery say, the two attacks are available to you the moment you take the Attack action before having made any of it as opposed to Nick & Light. But i could also see DM ruling against it because it require pact weapon.

I definitely think that you would need to use the Light w/ Nick mastery weapon as the first attack since otherwise the nick mastery property would never be applied.

"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."

I can see that if you want the Nick weapon attack to be the 2nd attack of a light-combo then this would not work.

Ok, maybe I see the argument that "When you make the extra attack..." implies that you are making that actual attack for that clause to apply.

"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. That extra attack must be made with a different Light weapon..."

However, the nick clause seems to make it a potential attack "you can make it" although it does still have a "when you make the extra attack".

"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."

On the other hand, the Thirsting Blade language implies you need to take the Attack action (which would still be satisfied if you replaced one attack with a familiar's attack).

"With that feature, you can attack twice with the weapon instead of once when you take the Attack action on your turn."