so likely a necro but need clarification. As a monk with a dart in one hand and fist/kick/knee/elbow/headbut/etc available in the other, I was told by my gm i need to specify between ranged or melee. It seems my interpretation of the ready action was wrong. I move my full movement, then ready action, trigger:"the monster moves into range."Response to trigger: "attack action". I thought i would be able to throw a dart (at end of my full non dash movement i was not in throwing range) if it moves to attack one of my comrades that were within throwing range, or if it charges at me, melee once it gets there (it had enough movement to reach me and other people in the party who would have been in range of the throw). The attack action says it can be either/or so i feel i shouldn't need to specify. Am i wrong and ranged/melee needs to specified first even though both are available (of course if we are talking two handed ranged or melee that would require equiping a different weapon this would not be the case) at any given time or do others agree with me?
My main feeling is that the lack of a delay action and limiting ready action too hard results in rolling high inititive and going first to often actually be a disadvantage where the high roll should be the opposite. I cbf doing quotes but i saw someone earlier in thread giving example of all chars and (maybe, the poster was a bit unclear) goblins delayed, then turn in original order. Just my humble opinion but sounds like an oppositional DM to me (meaning a dm who wants his encounters to kill or nearly kill the players rather than rewarding tactical thinking). Even if not, a mexican standoff for a bit when both sides realise that the first to charge in will face the full brunt of their enemies attack before they can reach them is actually natural and realisitc not rediculous as stated.
so likely a necro but need clarification. As a monk with a dart in one hand and fist/kick/knee/elbow/headbut/etc available in the other, I was told by my gm i need to specify between ranged or melee. It seems my interpretation of the ready action was wrong. I move my full movement, then ready action, trigger:"the monster moves into range."Response to trigger: "attack action". I thought i would be able to throw a dart (at end of my full non dash movement i was not in throwing range) if it moves to attack one of my comrades that were within throwing range, or if it charges at me, melee once it gets there (it had enough movement to reach me and other people in the party who would have been in range of the throw). The attack action says it can be either/or so i feel i shouldn't need to specify. Am i wrong and ranged/melee needs to specified first even though both are available (of course if we are talking two handed ranged or melee that would require equiping a different weapon this would not be the case) at any given time or do others agree with me?
Personally I would agree with your interpretation, though the Ready action description is a bit vague. Since the action you're readying is simply the Attack action, then you don't choose what specific attack you actually make until it becomes time to resolve it.
This differs from readying Cast a Spell which is specifically referenced in the Ready description, since you kind of cast the spell immediately, but delay resolving its effects until your trigger is met (meaning you can potentially waste the spell). But this is a specific case that requires the spell to be chosen in advance (so correct spell slot can be spent etc.).
It is however tough to say that your DM is "wrong" in their interpretation; the Ready description gives some weird examples (pull a lever or run away, it doesn't mention attacking at all so we have no concrete example), so we don't know for certain that it's okay to just say "I ready the Attack action for when…". I think the main issue is how you phrase the request, i.e- what you want is something like "if the enemy moves to within 5-feet of me or an ally, I will attack", this way you have a single trigger, cause the Attack action to occur, and can choose the appropriate weapon if it's available.
Personally I'd be fine with that, but the rule's not super well defined. That said, I should say I'm generally very permissive with readying actions if it avoids first round initiative order weirdness; for example I'll allow bonus actions if players can justify why they should be allowed to do it from the context.
so likely a necro but need clarification. As a monk with a dart in one hand and fist/kick/knee/elbow/headbut/etc available in the other, I was told by my gm i need to specify between ranged or melee. It seems my interpretation of the ready action was wrong. I move my full movement, then ready action, trigger:"the monster moves into range."Response to trigger: "attack action". I thought i would be able to throw a dart (at end of my full non dash movement i was not in throwing range) if it moves to attack one of my comrades that were within throwing range, or if it charges at me, melee once it gets there (it had enough movement to reach me and other people in the party who would have been in range of the throw). The attack action says it can be either/or so i feel i shouldn't need to specify. Am i wrong and ranged/melee needs to specified first even though both are available (of course if we are talking two handed ranged or melee that would require equiping a different weapon this would not be the case) at any given time or do others agree with me?
My main feeling is that the lack of a delay action and limiting ready action too hard results in rolling high inititive and going first to often actually be a disadvantage where the high roll should be the opposite. I cbf doing quotes but i saw someone earlier in thread giving example of all chars and (maybe, the poster was a bit unclear) goblins delayed, then turn in original order. Just my humble opinion but sounds like an oppositional DM to me (meaning a dm who wants his encounters to kill or nearly kill the players rather than rewarding tactical thinking). Even if not, a mexican standoff for a bit when both sides realise that the first to charge in will face the full brunt of their enemies attack before they can reach them is actually natural and realisitc not rediculous as stated.
I honestly don't blame your DM for asking you to clarify what weapon you are readying to attack with. The reason is because your trigger was "the monster moves into range." In order to determine if the monster has moved into range we need to know what that range is. You had multiple attack options available to you with different ranges and without knowing which one you were planning to use the DM can't know when your trigger condition is satisfied.
so likely a necro but need clarification. As a monk with a dart in one hand and fist/kick/knee/elbow/headbut/etc available in the other, I was told by my gm i need to specify between ranged or melee. It seems my interpretation of the ready action was wrong. I move my full movement, then ready action, trigger:"the monster moves into range."Response to trigger: "attack action". I thought i would be able to throw a dart (at end of my full non dash movement i was not in throwing range) if it moves to attack one of my comrades that were within throwing range, or if it charges at me, melee once it gets there (it had enough movement to reach me and other people in the party who would have been in range of the throw). The attack action says it can be either/or so i feel i shouldn't need to specify. Am i wrong and ranged/melee needs to specified first even though both are available (of course if we are talking two handed ranged or melee that would require equiping a different weapon this would not be the case) at any given time or do others agree with me?
My main feeling is that the lack of a delay action and limiting ready action too hard results in rolling high inititive and going first to often actually be a disadvantage where the high roll should be the opposite. I cbf doing quotes but i saw someone earlier in thread giving example of all chars and (maybe, the poster was a bit unclear) goblins delayed, then turn in original order. Just my humble opinion but sounds like an oppositional DM to me (meaning a dm who wants his encounters to kill or nearly kill the players rather than rewarding tactical thinking). Even if not, a mexican standoff for a bit when both sides realise that the first to charge in will face the full brunt of their enemies attack before they can reach them is actually natural and realisitc not rediculous as stated.
The problem is your trigger - your DM was trying to help you, not hinder you. Any creature moving into range of your dart would satisfy "moves into range" and proc your reaction, denying you any real ability to punch the creature. If you genuinely wanted to be able to punch it, you'd need to specify melee range. Remember, you don't get to refuse a Ready trigger that gets satisfied in the hopes that it gets satisfied again later.
Have you entered the cave to kill the goblins? It's only natural for them to try kill you, you have no respect for propert laws :)
I don't require my monks to have a free hand for unarmed attack or head but though, dual wielding kensei with kicking with flurry of blows is staple for my fantasy.
Anyway i understand your feelings, but as others said it's kinda complicated. You might try saying, when goblin's try to attack "x" target i'll intervene, if dms seems to specifically avoid that target(which should be the closest ones to goblins, or the most thinner looking one in your group, as goblins tend to attack to closest or weakest target they see) then you might be right.
DMs, roleplay too, Goblins are not too smart but they are not stupid either, it is not unnatural for them to ignore the tanky warrior and attack the weak looking priestess or sorceress behind... And they probably will ignore, run away from a barbarian with 6 packs anyway, common sense.
So the problem with readying attacks versus spells (based off the spell being used it is a little easier to determine the exact course of action) is just what previous posters have stated: vagnuess abounds,
It's one of those things that you would have to work with your DM to truly understand how specific you're going to have to be because some might allow more leniency but it's understandable if they wouldn't. I know that when I DM I am a little bit more lenient with ready actions because I understand what is being given up (reading an action costs use of a reaction) but again that is a personal call.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
TBH if your DM find issue with Ready action's timing, there may be other issues down the game with other "start of your next turn" timing mechanic.
so likely a necro but need clarification. As a monk with a dart in one hand and fist/kick/knee/elbow/headbut/etc available in the other, I was told by my gm i need to specify between ranged or melee. It seems my interpretation of the ready action was wrong. I move my full movement, then ready action, trigger: "the monster moves into range." Response to trigger: "attack action". I thought i would be able to throw a dart (at end of my full non dash movement i was not in throwing range) if it moves to attack one of my comrades that were within throwing range, or if it charges at me, melee once it gets there (it had enough movement to reach me and other people in the party who would have been in range of the throw). The attack action says it can be either/or so i feel i shouldn't need to specify. Am i wrong and ranged/melee needs to specified first even though both are available (of course if we are talking two handed ranged or melee that would require equiping a different weapon this would not be the case) at any given time or do others agree with me?
My main feeling is that the lack of a delay action and limiting ready action too hard results in rolling high inititive and going first to often actually be a disadvantage where the high roll should be the opposite. I cbf doing quotes but i saw someone earlier in thread giving example of all chars and (maybe, the poster was a bit unclear) goblins delayed, then turn in original order. Just my humble opinion but sounds like an oppositional DM to me (meaning a dm who wants his encounters to kill or nearly kill the players rather than rewarding tactical thinking). Even if not, a mexican standoff for a bit when both sides realise that the first to charge in will face the full brunt of their enemies attack before they can reach them is actually natural and realisitc not rediculous as stated.
Personally I would agree with your interpretation, though the Ready action description is a bit vague. Since the action you're readying is simply the Attack action, then you don't choose what specific attack you actually make until it becomes time to resolve it.
This differs from readying Cast a Spell which is specifically referenced in the Ready description, since you kind of cast the spell immediately, but delay resolving its effects until your trigger is met (meaning you can potentially waste the spell). But this is a specific case that requires the spell to be chosen in advance (so correct spell slot can be spent etc.).
It is however tough to say that your DM is "wrong" in their interpretation; the Ready description gives some weird examples (pull a lever or run away, it doesn't mention attacking at all so we have no concrete example), so we don't know for certain that it's okay to just say "I ready the Attack action for when…". I think the main issue is how you phrase the request, i.e- what you want is something like "if the enemy moves to within 5-feet of me or an ally, I will attack", this way you have a single trigger, cause the Attack action to occur, and can choose the appropriate weapon if it's available.
Personally I'd be fine with that, but the rule's not super well defined. That said, I should say I'm generally very permissive with readying actions if it avoids first round initiative order weirdness; for example I'll allow bonus actions if players can justify why they should be allowed to do it from the context.
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
I honestly don't blame your DM for asking you to clarify what weapon you are readying to attack with. The reason is because your trigger was "the monster moves into range." In order to determine if the monster has moved into range we need to know what that range is. You had multiple attack options available to you with different ranges and without knowing which one you were planning to use the DM can't know when your trigger condition is satisfied.
The problem is your trigger - your DM was trying to help you, not hinder you. Any creature moving into range of your dart would satisfy "moves into range" and proc your reaction, denying you any real ability to punch the creature. If you genuinely wanted to be able to punch it, you'd need to specify melee range. Remember, you don't get to refuse a Ready trigger that gets satisfied in the hopes that it gets satisfied again later.
Have you entered the cave to kill the goblins? It's only natural for them to try kill you, you have no respect for propert laws :)
I don't require my monks to have a free hand for unarmed attack or head but though, dual wielding kensei with kicking with flurry of blows is staple for my fantasy.
Anyway i understand your feelings, but as others said it's kinda complicated. You might try saying, when goblin's try to attack "x" target i'll intervene, if dms seems to specifically avoid that target(which should be the closest ones to goblins, or the most thinner looking one in your group, as goblins tend to attack to closest or weakest target they see) then you might be right.
DMs, roleplay too, Goblins are not too smart but they are not stupid either, it is not unnatural for them to ignore the tanky warrior and attack the weak looking priestess or sorceress behind... And they probably will ignore, run away from a barbarian with 6 packs anyway, common sense.
So the problem with readying attacks versus spells (based off the spell being used it is a little easier to determine the exact course of action) is just what previous posters have stated: vagnuess abounds,
It's one of those things that you would have to work with your DM to truly understand how specific you're going to have to be because some might allow more leniency but it's understandable if they wouldn't. I know that when I DM I am a little bit more lenient with ready actions because I understand what is being given up (reading an action costs use of a reaction) but again that is a personal call.