Can you use multiattack with spells. Could I have multiattack and use it to cast firebolt 2 times. Or any other spell that says make a spell attack roll. What spells count as attacks and can be used with multiattack.
First off, PC's don't get multiattack; that's exclusive to NPC creatures and is itself a type of action.
Players that get the Extra Attack ability can take extra attacks when they take the Attack action.
Casting spells uses the [Tooltip Not Found] action, not the Attack action.
The only way to cast two spells that require Actions per turn is with the Fighter's Action Surge, or with the Sorcerer's Quicken spell metamagic - though the later can only allow you to cast a leveled spell as a Bonus Action and a Cantrip as your Action.
And just further to this, I’d advise against home brewing it in to allow the feats Jaysburn mentioned like Extra Attack to cover spells.
It will throw everything out of whack - including making metamagic for Sorcerers very tricky to balance at best - and completely making it redundant at worse.
Before you get disappointed though, just remember that spells are powerful - being able to cast two easily would be overkill. Which is why there’s rules around limiting that, such as only being able to cast a cantrip if you’ve already cast a spell that turn.
The Casting a Spell section says that it is not necessarily an action because it could vary casting time. Since those spells say "make a ranged/melee spell attack" I rule it as taking the attack action. So I allow my players to make one of their two attacks as a spell.
The Casting a Spell section says that it is not necessarily an action because it could vary casting time. Since those spells say "make a ranged/melee spell attack" I rule it as taking the attack action. So I allow my players to make one of their two attacks as a spell.
That's not a "ruling," it's homebrew. There's a different forum section for that.
The Casting a Spell section says that it is not necessarily an action because it could vary casting time. Since those spells say "make a ranged/melee spell attack" I rule it as taking the attack action. So I allow my players to make one of their two attacks as a spell.
In case you think that is not homebrew, The phb make it clear that a spell involving a spell attack is using the casting a spell action not the attack action. Sage advice compendium also answers this specific question.
The bladesong wizard is an exception, their extra attack feature specifically says they can replace one of their attacks with a cantrip using their extra attack feature. Note even they can only do a cantrip as one of there attacks not a levelled spell.
Sorry for the necro, but I believe this belongs here, and I was wondering what other DMs would rule...
So what about extra attack and concentration spells that allows you to use melee/ranged spell attack on subsequent turns?
In this case you're not casting, so your EK could cast Vampric Touch, take the one attack that's included with the casting, and on subsequent turns replace one of the weapon attacks with a melee spell attack.
Sorry for the necro, but I believe this belongs here, and I was wondering what other DMs would rule...
So what about extra attack and concentration spells that allows you to use melee/ranged spell attack on subsequent turns?
In this case you're not casting, so your EK could cast Vampric Touch, take the one attack that's included with the casting, and on subsequent turns replace one of the weapon attacks with a melee spell attack.
Opinions on that?
Depends on the spell, but usually, as is the case with Vampiric Touch, DMs tend to assume the action the spell grants you is bespoke, i.e. not the Attack action. If your DM is willing to agree that Vampiric Touch's action is the Attack action, then Extra Attack would apply to it.
Unfortunately this decision lies with me... and I'm allowing my players this, and the NPCs too. ;)
The reason I was looking for an answer on the forum is that melee spell attack is not really specified anywhere (or at least I didn't find it). It's clear that Casting a Spell is an Action itself, and the spell attack roll is part of that action, but remaining at the previous example, it seems like all you need is a touch when you're concentrating, the effect is already in place. Some might argue that extra attack could be used for all Vampiric Touch attacks, and the only counterargument I have is that it's OP.
When a spell grants an action like Vampiric Touch it is it's own action, not one of the general actions listed in the Actions in Combat section of the PHB, and the action the spell grants is an effect of the spell.
For an example of a spell that relies on the Attack Action look at Magic Stone, Shillelagh, or Shadow Blade. All of these spells empower or provide a weapon to attack with. The description for the effect of these spells explains how the weapons they modify or create work mechanically, they do not go into detail about the action cost to use these weapons. In fact, you might even attack with these weapons with your bonus action or reaction, rather than your action.
I feel that the action granted as an effect of the spell is particularly clear with Wall of Light which also shortens the length of the wall when you use your Action to launch a beam of radiance at an enemy from the wall. And even clearer is Spiritual Weapon where not only is the attack not originating from you but it also uses your Bonus Action, rather than your Action.
Unfortunately this decision lies with me... and I'm allowing my players this, and the NPCs too. ;)
The reason I was looking for an answer on the forum is that melee spell attack is not really specified anywhere (or at least I didn't find it).
That is because there is no general spell attack rule, they're all part of something that should ideally give you the information that you need on them. If you've read through the attack action rules, it mentions what you can do, including weapon attacks and a few special attacks. That's it, and anything else that uses the attack action beyond those is a special rule as well. The vampiric touch spell doesn't mention that you're using the attack action or give you an ability that changes your normal attacks, so it doesn't meet the criteria for being part of the attack action.
It's clear that Casting a Spell is an Action itself, and the spell attack roll is part of that action, but remaining at the previous example, it seems like all you need is a touch when you're concentrating, the effect is already in place. Some might argue that extra attack could be used for all Vampiric Touch attacks, and the only counterargument I have is that it's OP.
The counter argument isn't that, it's that nothing allows you to make the attack as part of your attack action. No one is making the argument that it's OP here (I think), but rather that it isn't allowed within the rules.
"Until the spell ends, you can make the attack again on each of your turns as an action."
You can make the attack again on each of your turns as an action. It isn't an Attack action, it isn't a Cast a Spell Action, it IS the "vampiric touch" action. It is an action made available to the character because they cast the spell "vampiric touch" and so they can use an action on any subsequent turn to use the effect again.
"On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed and take one action. You decide whether to move first or take your action first."
"When you take your action on your turn, you can take one of the actions presented here, an action you gained from your class or a special feature, or an action that you improvise."
The action gained from vampiric touch would be a special feature that provides the character with another action option on their turn.
Unless a qualifier is applied to a specific action type - eg Attack action, Cast a Spell action, Dodge action - then something that is described as an action is just that - it is another option for the character to take when taking their action on their turn. There is no "generic" action option to cover all the other cases, the rules just use the term action.
Can you use multiattack with spells. Could I have multiattack and use it to cast firebolt 2 times. Or any other spell that says make a spell attack roll. What spells count as attacks and can be used with multiattack.
No, you can't.
First off, PC's don't get multiattack; that's exclusive to NPC creatures and is itself a type of action.
Players that get the Extra Attack ability can take extra attacks when they take the Attack action.
Casting spells uses the [Tooltip Not Found] action, not the Attack action.
The only way to cast two spells that require Actions per turn is with the Fighter's Action Surge, or with the Sorcerer's Quicken spell metamagic - though the later can only allow you to cast a leveled spell as a Bonus Action and a Cantrip as your Action.
Yeah, all the things Jaysburn said.
And just further to this, I’d advise against home brewing it in to allow the feats Jaysburn mentioned like Extra Attack to cover spells.
It will throw everything out of whack - including making metamagic for Sorcerers very tricky to balance at best - and completely making it redundant at worse.
Before you get disappointed though, just remember that spells are powerful - being able to cast two easily would be overkill. Which is why there’s rules around limiting that, such as only being able to cast a cantrip if you’ve already cast a spell that turn.
Also cantrips are balanced to improve over levels. At lvl 5 a fighter gets two attacks, for casters cantrips get an extra dice of damage.
I was just wondering because I am going to make an eldritch knight soon. And thanks for the help.
The Casting a Spell section says that it is not necessarily an action because it could vary casting time. Since those spells say "make a ranged/melee spell attack" I rule it as taking the attack action. So I allow my players to make one of their two attacks as a spell.
That's not a "ruling," it's homebrew. There's a different forum section for that.
It is possible to cast a spell and a cantrip in the same turn without the use of metamagic Quicken.
As long as the spell itself uses a bonus action, then you can cast a cantrip as an action.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/phb/spellcasting#BonusAction
So, a Misty Step in the middle of a goblin huddle, and a thunder step out of the huddle is a viable turn.
Thunder step is not a cantrip though?
You can thunderclap. Doesn't get you out though.
Yeah, I realized that after it was posted and was distracted before I could correct it.
a misty step out of trouble and a fire bolt would viable.
In case you think that is not homebrew, The phb make it clear that a spell involving a spell attack is using the casting a spell action not the attack action. Sage advice compendium also answers this specific question.
The bladesong wizard is an exception, their extra attack feature specifically says they can replace one of their attacks with a cantrip using their extra attack feature. Note even they can only do a cantrip as one of there attacks not a levelled spell.
Sorry for the necro, but I believe this belongs here, and I was wondering what other DMs would rule...
So what about extra attack and concentration spells that allows you to use melee/ranged spell attack on subsequent turns?
In this case you're not casting, so your EK could cast Vampric Touch, take the one attack that's included with the casting, and on subsequent turns replace one of the weapon attacks with a melee spell attack.
Opinions on that?
Depends on the spell, but usually, as is the case with Vampiric Touch, DMs tend to assume the action the spell grants you is bespoke, i.e. not the Attack action. If your DM is willing to agree that Vampiric Touch's action is the Attack action, then Extra Attack would apply to it.
Unfortunately this decision lies with me... and I'm allowing my players this, and the NPCs too. ;)
The reason I was looking for an answer on the forum is that melee spell attack is not really specified anywhere (or at least I didn't find it). It's clear that Casting a Spell is an Action itself, and the spell attack roll is part of that action, but remaining at the previous example, it seems like all you need is a touch when you're concentrating, the effect is already in place. Some might argue that extra attack could be used for all Vampiric Touch attacks, and the only counterargument I have is that it's OP.
When a spell grants an action like Vampiric Touch it is it's own action, not one of the general actions listed in the Actions in Combat section of the PHB, and the action the spell grants is an effect of the spell.
For an example of a spell that relies on the Attack Action look at Magic Stone, Shillelagh, or Shadow Blade. All of these spells empower or provide a weapon to attack with. The description for the effect of these spells explains how the weapons they modify or create work mechanically, they do not go into detail about the action cost to use these weapons. In fact, you might even attack with these weapons with your bonus action or reaction, rather than your action.
I feel that the action granted as an effect of the spell is particularly clear with Wall of Light which also shortens the length of the wall when you use your Action to launch a beam of radiance at an enemy from the wall. And even clearer is Spiritual Weapon where not only is the attack not originating from you but it also uses your Bonus Action, rather than your Action.
That is because there is no general spell attack rule, they're all part of something that should ideally give you the information that you need on them. If you've read through the attack action rules, it mentions what you can do, including weapon attacks and a few special attacks. That's it, and anything else that uses the attack action beyond those is a special rule as well. The vampiric touch spell doesn't mention that you're using the attack action or give you an ability that changes your normal attacks, so it doesn't meet the criteria for being part of the attack action.
The counter argument isn't that, it's that nothing allows you to make the attack as part of your attack action. No one is making the argument that it's OP here (I think), but rather that it isn't allowed within the rules.
The wording of vampiric touch is pretty clear.
"Until the spell ends, you can make the attack again on each of your turns as an action."
You can make the attack again on each of your turns as an action. It isn't an Attack action, it isn't a Cast a Spell Action, it IS the "vampiric touch" action. It is an action made available to the character because they cast the spell "vampiric touch" and so they can use an action on any subsequent turn to use the effect again.
"On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed and take one action. You decide whether to move first or take your action first."
"When you take your action on your turn, you can take one of the actions presented here, an action you gained from your class or a special feature, or an action that you improvise."
The action gained from vampiric touch would be a special feature that provides the character with another action option on their turn.
Unless a qualifier is applied to a specific action type - eg Attack action, Cast a Spell action, Dodge action - then something that is described as an action is just that - it is another option for the character to take when taking their action on their turn. There is no "generic" action option to cover all the other cases, the rules just use the term action.
"First off, PC's don't get multiattack" That is incorrect
"Anyone can smith at the cosmic anvil, yet only I can forge a weapon as good as thee."
My Homebrew Please click it, they have my family.
No actually it is correct. Extra Attack and Multiattack are separate and exclusive of each other.
Edit: It occurs to me that Druids can get multiattack by way of Wildshape.
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!