IamSposta and Saga Tympana, if you look back up on the comment chain, that is what I stated I believe the rules state.
However, as both a player where other's GM and as a GM myself, the way the rules read sound like it would be incredibly powerful.
I've had two other GMs state they think that while it reads that way, what is really meant is just gaining 1 extra attack, like a bonus action.
But, I think the rules clearly state it is a full action, thus a fighter at 11th level normally gets 3 attacks, which can be very powerful. Using a second weapon an 11th level fighter can get 4 attacks. With action surge, as I read the rules, an 11th level fighter can get 7 attacks in the round they used their action surge.
That can be very powerful and as such, a GM needs to keep it in mind and decide whether to allow the rule to stand or alter it as a house rule because they feel it might be too powerful.
An 11th-level wizard can do 40d8 damage in one turn with chain lightning. All 11th-level characters are powerful. No DM should be trying to unfairly hamstring one of the only ways fighters have to compete with full casters.
So. I will take the heat, but the bottom line is: it is up to each DM how they want to interpret the rules. This is my interpretation, and I can cite instances, especially in the new content, that leads me to think this is the right way to interpret it, regardless of "historical" interpretations.
Each player turn you can choose one action, one bonus action (if available), and one reaction (if available). You can use these same actions as often as they are triggered until your next turn. For the attack action, it is triggered more than once by having extra attacks, but it is still one action. If you use an offhand weapon, then the use of the offhand weapon is triggered with each main hand attack. It is still the same bonus action, triggered multiple times. If you have a reaction to do a warding maneuver or special dodge, or opportunity attack, then you continue to do that reaction until your next turn, as often as it is triggered. If you use an off-hand weapon and used it as your bonus action, and you have an opportunity attack triggered, then you use your offhand weapon in the opportunity attack as well. It is still the same selection for your bonus action slot for that turn.
Most people will agree that if your action is to dodge, then you continue to dodge every attack until your next turn. The same is true with the Rogue's Uncanny Dodge, and reactions that provide warding maneuvers. This is just an extension of that method of thinking for the other actions selected. Everyone who wants to play two weapon fighting style is disappointed by the traditional interpretation, which is that your fighter gets four attacks per round, but only one little stabby stabby with the off-hand weapon. This is not the way that anyone wants to interpret that rule, except for the rules nazis who continue to insist on doing it that way. People always complain that the great weapons masters are SO overpowered, but they don't stop to think that it's only because they nerf every other ability. If you think of your action as being one continuous action (whatever is selected) for the remainder of your turn, then all of these issues easily resolve themselves. The answer that doesn't make sense is having four attacks per round, but somehow your off-hand is lame for 3 of the 4 attacks... even though your fighting style is TWO WEAPON fighting. Another example is the monk using Flurry of Blows. You make an attack with your monk weapon, and as a bonus action you can SPEND A KI to do flurry of blows. So, if you spend a Ki to do flurry of blows as your bonus action, you continue to FLURRY for the rest of that round. If you have a second attack, you flurry with your bonus action with each attack, without having to spend another Ki, and if they get an opportunity attack, they continue to flurry as often as that is triggered. This means that they can't use their reaction to catch a missile, because that would be another DIFFERENT reaction, and you can only have one reaction in the same round. If you think of it this way, then monks are suddenly not so lame anymore.
The special reaction of the Cavalier, as mentioned previously, is one of the prime examples why this method seems to be the correct method to use. Not only does it allow other fighting styles besides Great Weapons to be effective, but in the case of the Cavalier, when the special reaction is evoked, he gains an opportunity attack for every other creature on the battlefield (by definition), regardless of where they are or what they do in their turn, which takes place at the end of every creature's turn (similar to a Legendary Action). This includes the other players' turns as well. Since there is nothing that causes an opportunity attack from another player's turn, logic dictates that it is an opportunity that is triggered by the mere fact that they are present. Since it is clearly defined this way, it smacks in the face of people who insist that "you only get one opportunity per round."
I certainly agree it is by far the most OP ability in the game, since it means that an attack by (let's say) thirty gnolls with one big bad against your party of 6 would give your cavalier the opportunity to make 39 bow shots in the first round (if you have 4 attacks, and assuming the cavalier has an ever-full quiver) against the "Big Bad," and when that one goes down in the first round, continue to peel off the remaining attackers with however many shots remain. The Boss is virtually killed by his own minions in the first round, and most of the minions will be dead by the end of round 2. I will allow cavaliers in my campaign, since they don't get this ability until level 18, but if they actually play long enough to gain it, then it really changes high level encounters.
The reason that people have come up with abilities like this, and why it has been sanctioned by WotC in their core compendia, is that few players really liked the way actions were being defined (especially bonus actions and reactions), which made certain classes OP and nerfed other classes into near extinction. People had to come up with new classes and new definitions in order to make them playable again. Ergo, the NEW definition is: one action SLOT, one bonus action SLOT, one reaction SLOT... but what fills that slot is active and triggers whenever it is allowed until the next round.
If you are a DM and you want to continue to nerf everything, feel free. I think the more you allow people flexibility, the more they enjoy the game. I personally like having a Ranger with Whirlwind Attack and Two Weapon Fighting, making upwards 20 attacks per round with his "2 attacks" as a 13th level ranger (basically limited by his movement allowance). That is what Whirlwind attack is supposed to look like, IMO, and makes them every bit as "S" class as the other fighter types.
So. I will take the heat, but the bottom line is: it is up to each DM how they want to interpret the rules. This is my interpretation, and I can cite instances, especially in the new content, that leads me to think this is the right way to interpret it, regardless of "historical" interpretations.
Each player turn you can choose one action, one bonus action (if available), and one reaction (if available). You can use these same actions as often as they are triggered until your next turn. For the attack action, it is triggered more than once by having extra attacks, but it is still one action. If you use an offhand weapon, then the use of the offhand weapon is triggered with each main hand attack. It is still the same bonus action, triggered multiple times. If you have a reaction to do a warding maneuver or special dodge, or opportunity attack, then you continue to do that reaction until your next turn, as often as it is triggered. If you use an off-hand weapon and used it as your bonus action, and you have an opportunity attack triggered, then you use your offhand weapon in the opportunity attack as well. It is still the same selection for your bonus action slot for that turn.
Most people will agree that if your action is to dodge, then you continue to dodge every attack until your next turn. The same is true with the Rogue's Uncanny Dodge, and reactions that provide warding maneuvers. This is just an extension of that method of thinking for the other actions selected. Everyone who wants to play two weapon fighting style is disappointed by the traditional interpretation, which is that your fighter gets four attacks per round, but only one little stabby stabby with the off-hand weapon. This is not the way that anyone wants to interpret that rule, except for the rules nazis who continue to insist on doing it that way. People always complain that the great weapons masters are SO overpowered, but they don't stop to think that it's only because they nerf every other ability. If you think of your action as being one continuous action (whatever is selected) for the remainder of your turn, then all of these issues easily resolve themselves. The answer that doesn't make sense is having four attacks per round, but somehow your off-hand is lame for 3 of the 4 attacks... even though your fighting style is TWO WEAPON fighting. Another example is the monk using Flurry of Blows. You make an attack with your monk weapon, and as a bonus action you can SPEND A KI to do flurry of blows. So, if you spend a Ki to do flurry of blows as your bonus action, you continue to FLURRY for the rest of that round. If you have a second attack, you flurry with your bonus action with each attack, without having to spend another Ki, and if they get an opportunity attack, they continue to flurry as often as that is triggered. This means that they can't use their reaction to catch a missile, because that would be another DIFFERENT reaction, and you can only have one reaction in the same round. If you think of it this way, then monks are suddenly not so lame anymore.
The special reaction of the Cavalier, as mentioned previously, is one of the prime examples why this method seems to be the correct method to use. Not only does it allow other fighting styles besides Great Weapons to be effective, but in the case of the Cavalier, when the special reaction is evoked, he gains an opportunity attack for every other creature on the battlefield (by definition), regardless of where they are or what they do in their turn, which takes place at the end of every creature's turn (similar to a Legendary Action). This includes the other players' turns as well. Since there is nothing that causes an opportunity attack from another player's turn, logic dictates that it is an opportunity that is triggered by the mere fact that they are present. Since it is clearly defined this way, it smacks in the face of people who insist that "you only get one opportunity per round."
I certainly agree it is by far the most OP ability in the game, since it means that an attack by (let's say) thirty gnolls with one big bad against your party of 6 would give your cavalier the opportunity to make 39 bow shots in the first round (if you have 4 attacks, and assuming the cavalier has an ever-full quiver) against the "Big Bad," and when that one goes down in the first round, continue to peel off the remaining attackers with however many shots remain. The Boss is virtually killed by his own minions in the first round, and most of the minions will be dead by the end of round 2. I will allow cavaliers in my campaign, since they don't get this ability until level 18, but if they actually play long enough to gain it, then it really changes high level encounters.
The reason that people have come up with abilities like this, and why it has been sanctioned by WotC in their core compendia, is that few players really liked the way actions were being defined (especially bonus actions and reactions), which made certain classes OP and nerfed other classes into near extinction. People had to come up with new classes and new definitions in order to make them playable again. Ergo, the NEW definition is: one action SLOT, one bonus action SLOT, one reaction SLOT... but what fills that slot is active and triggers whenever it is allowed until the next round.
If you are a DM and you want to continue to nerf everything, feel free. I think the more you allow people flexibility, the more they enjoy the game. I personally like having a Ranger with Whirlwind Attack and Two Weapon Fighting, making upwards 20 attacks per round with his "2 attacks" as a 13th level ranger (basically limited by his movement allowance). That is what Whirlwind attack is supposed to look like, IMO, and makes them every bit as "S" class as the other fighter types.
No.
Allow me to elaborate: you are incorrect.
There is literally no reason to interpret the rules like this. At all. You said you would cite reasons, but you just didn't. I'd also like to add that calling everybody that doesn't share the same stance as you (so, literally everybody but you, since nobody has ever interpreted the rules in this way) a "Rules Nazi" is gross for a number of reasons.
However, I would say, if you want somebody to play a game like this with, I think I know of somebody who probably agrees with everything that you've said.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Yes, they get a "special reaction" on each other creature's turn, but only to perform an Opportunity Attack. An Opportunity Attack can only occur if the target moves out of your reach - so in your example, all 30+ creatures must be trying to run past the Cavalier in order for the cavalier to be able to actually make all 30+ opportunity attacks.
An Attack Action (capitalised) can consist of one or more attacks (lower case). The distinction of capitalised words is in the rulebook.
That wasn't how it was defined... literally. No opportunity attack occurs when a party member runs past you. It isn't activated by an action of another, but simply by their presence on the field and the fact that they ended their turn. I am not misreading it. The opportunity is their presence... not anything that they do. It is a prime example of people (a vast majority, I think) wanting to re-define the game so they can play the way they actually want. You are free to limit them in your campaign, however. I agree that the way it is presented is too OP. I would definitely only give them the number of shots in their quiver. Also, the fact that it can be range or melee again defies your definition of "having to run past you." That is not at all the way it is defined. Sorry. Look again.
That is in fact, the prime example, but the fact that it has been introduced as a "canon" character class shows that there is a lot more flexibility than people are willing to credit the game with, and the fact that so many more classes and races have been introduced shows that people are not satisfied with the limitations of the basic game (and the way things were defined). Also, if you don't nerf every other activity that isn't a fighter "extra attack" then the other character classes become a lot more playable. I like my definition better, and that is all that counts.
I use the term "rules nazi" because you are so indoctrinated into thinking one way, that you can't imagine that someone else might be justified in interpreting it differently. I don't deny that is the way it has been defined from the beginning... but it hampers gameplay, unduly nerfs many classes and abilities, and has caused so much re-write of the classes and races to accommodate what people actually want to do, that anyone with an open mind can easily see that people simply don't like the original definition. I will play with my modification. You can play however you like.
That wasn't how it was defined... literally. No opportunity attack occurs when a party member runs past you. It isn't activated by an action of another, but simply by their presence on the field and the fact that they ended their turn. I am not misreading it. The opportunity is their presence... not anything that they do. It is a prime example of people (a vast majority, I think) wanting to re-define the game so they can play the way the actually want. You are free to limit them in your campaign, however. I agree that the way it is presented is too OP. I would definitely only give them the number of shots in their quiver. Also, the fact that it can be range or melee again defies your definition of "having to run past you." That is not at all the way it is defined. Sorry. Look again.
In a fight, everyone is constantly watching for a chance to strike an enemy who is fleeing or passing by. Such a strike is called an opportunity attack.
You can make an opportunity attack when a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach. To make the opportunity attack, you use your reaction to make one melee attack against the provoking creature. The attack occurs right before the creature leaves your reach.
You can avoid provoking an opportunity attack by taking the Disengage action. You also don't provoke an opportunity attack when you teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction. For example, you don't provoke an opportunity attack if an explosion hurls you out of a foe's reach or if gravity causes you to fall past an enemy.
LoL. I think you are missing the point. Everything is being re-defined. Open your eyes. Read the Cavalier. Opportunity is no longer limited to that definition. Party members have never had to disengage to move past you, and even if they do move past you it doesn't trigger an opportunity attack in the way it was defined, but you still get an opportunity attack at the end of their turns. I'm not going to bother copy and pasting it.
The point that I am trying to make is that the Players, and more specifically YOU as the DM/GM are the one who makes the rules. If you don't like something about the game, feel free to change/interpret it however you think it works best. I think the old definitions are broken with the new material. In order to "repair" the damage, you have to think outside the box and re-define the way you look at it. My way of looking at it fixes most of the problems. You can go with it or not... that's up to you.
LoL. I think you are missing the point. Everything is being re-defined. Open your eyes. Read the Cavalier. Opportunity is no longer limited to that definition. Party members have never had to disengage to move past you, and even if they do move past you it doesn't trigger an opportunity attack in the way it was defined, but you still get an opportunity attack at the end of their turns. I'm not going to bother copy and pasting it.
The point that I am trying to make is that the Players, and more specifically YOU as the DM/GM are the one who makes the rules. If you don't like something about the game, feel free to change/interpret it however you think it works best. I think the old definitions are broken with the new material. In order to "repair" the damage, you have to think outside the box and re-define the way you look at it. My way of looking at it fixes most of the problems. You can go with it or not... that's up to you.
🤦♂️
Not “party members,” you don’t make Opportunity Attacks against party members (unless you’re a team-killing ****tard). It’s hostile creatures you make opportunity attacks against, and they need to Disengage to avoid the Opportunity Attack.
And this forum is entirely about RAW, so no, here we don’t “think outside the box and re-define” the rules, we discuss the rules as they are written.
Exactly. However, party members trigger the opportunity attack, which gives the cavalier another opportunity to hit anything close to them (or within range, if they are equipped with a bow). You still are not saying anything that I don't already know. You do not have to attack the trigger. That is exactly what I am saying. People have allowed something like this to become canon because it is what the WANT to do with their characters. If you relax your thinking and give them what they want in the first place, you don't have all of this OP crap destroying the game.
Give the guy attacking with two weapons an attack with both weapons. Then you don't have things like Cavaliers making 40 attacks per round.
Exactly. However, party members trigger the opportunity attack, which gives the cavalier another opportunity to hit anything close to them (or within range, if they are equipped with a bow). You still are not saying anything that I don't already know. You do not have to attack the trigger. That is exactly what I am saying. People have allowed something like this to become canon because it is what the WANT to do with their characters. If you relax your thinking and give them what they want in the first place, you don't have all of this OP crap destroying the game.
Give the guy attacking with two weapons an attack with both weapons. Then you don't have things like Cavaliers making 40 attacks per round.
You can homebrew things however you like but this is NOT what the rules say. The rules make it quite clear.
Cavalier level 18 ability:
"Vigilant Defender
Starting at 18th level, you respond to danger with extraordinary vigilance. In combat, you get a special reaction that you can take once on every creature’s turn, except your turn. You can use this special reaction only to make an opportunity attack, and you can’t use it on the same turn that you take your normal reaction."
You can use this reaction ONLY to make an opportunity attack. NOTHING here changes how an opportunity attack is defined.
Iamsposta cited the rules defining an opportunity attack above. The key line is:
"You can make an opportunity attack when a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach."
Opportunity attacks are ONLY triggered by a HOSTILE creature that you can see moving out of your reach. That's all. Party members unless mind controlled are NOT considered HOSTILE so they do NOT trigger opportunity attacks.
In addition, "to make one melee attackagainst the provoking creature. " The character MUST attack the creature who triggered the opportunity attack since only the provoking creature is a valid target. So even if someone considered party members hostile (which they are NOT), the only creatures that the cavalier could attack when the opportunity attack is triggered would be the party member. In addition, it MUST be a melee attack - ranged attacks aren't allowed.
From a RAW perspective, your comments are completely incorrect.
P.S. Your original post had so many rules errors ...
"OP: Most people will agree that if your action is to dodge, then you continue to dodge every attack until your next turn. The same is true with the Rogue's Uncanny Dodge, and reactions that provide warding maneuvers. "
No. Uncanny Dodge is a REACTION. It applies only to the one attack when it is used and nothing else.
"Rule: Starting at 5th level, when an attacker that you can see hits you with an attack, you can use your reaction to halve the attack’s damage against you."
It is only "the" attack's damage - not every attack after that.
"OP: If you use an offhand weapon, then the use of the offhand weapon is triggered with each main hand attack."
"When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand."
"Beginning at 5th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn."
You get a bonus action off-hand attack when you take the attack ACTION (not make an attack). At higher levels the extra attack feature lets a character make more than one attack as part of the attack ACTION. None of this gives you more than one bonus action and none of this allows you to attack more than once with the offhand.
As before, you are welcome to run your game however you want to run it, homebrew to your hearts content but "rules nazis" does not describe the 99% of folks who read the rules, play the game more or less as written and would never end up at your "interpretation"/homebrew.
You still have not addressed the most salient point. How do you get an opportunity attack EVER at the end of another player's turn. Since there is no way this can happen using the normal definition (I am not arguing that yours is the normal definition), then the only interpretation is that the definition has changed. Tacitly, but clearly. In order to allow an opportunity attack at the end of another player's turn, the only way to interpret this is that an opportunity attack has been redefined to include something not included before. Since the only thing that allows this is the fact that they are present and have taken a turn, then that is what triggers the opportunity for the cavalier. It has nothing to do with movement or proximity, they simply get to attack at the end of every creature's turn. How else can you explain it?
Since that rule has been re-written, how can you be so sure that any of the other rules are not similarly out of date, or out of grace? People are writing what they want to see in the game. The more you resist, the more outlandish the new things will be in order to get around the rules. You are correct. I have successfully run home-brew editions of every version of D&D (except 4, which I never played). Unanimously players have enjoyed it... but then everyone likes a change of pace now and then.
To be fair, it does say creatures... but then it goes on to say "except at the end of your turn." So clearly it is defining the characters as creatures as well... otherwise why would they feel the need to say this?
I don't follow a few of your points. First, you just said the rule has been rewritten, but the rule quoted from current RaW doesn't allow your interpretation.
How does an OA occur on someone else's turn? Well, any hostile creatures within your melee range that willingly leaves it triggers an OA regardless of whose turn it is. While most can take ONE OA per round, your character can do so each turn, so each time i's a new creature's turn in combat you get a CHANCE to deliver an OA, if it presents, like another enemy trying to run by you to get at your caster. You ask "How else can you explain it?" Well, there's no real explaining "it" because the ability says you get a free reaction for every creature's turn but your own, and it MUST BE used for an OA. If no OA opportunity presents, you don't get to use it. You can't simply put a bunch of things you WANT to trigger OA to MAKE you able to use it every single turn. That's homebrew at it's finest.
Sposta said i, this area is for RaW only, not re-defining or homebrewing.
You still have not addressed the most salient point. How do you get an opportunity attack EVER at the end of another player's turn.
The Cavalier rule is:
...In combat, you get a special reaction that you can take once on every creature’s turn, except your turn. ...
So you aren't gaining the opportunity attack at the END of another player's turn - you are getting it ON every creature's turn. (It just isn't relevant on another player's turn, unless an enemy creature uses their reaction to move out of YOUR reach on that player's turn.)
You still have not addressed the most salient point. How do you get an opportunity attack EVER at the end of another player's turn. Since there is no way this can happen using the normal definition (I am not arguing that yours is the normal definition), then the only interpretation is that the definition has changed. Tacitly, but clearly. In order to allow an opportunity attack at the end of another player's turn, the only way to interpret this is that an opportunity attack has been redefined to include something not included before. Since the only thing that allows this is the fact that they are present and have taken a turn, then that is what triggers the opportunity for the cavalier. It has nothing to do with movement or proximity, they simply get to attack at the end of every creature's turn. How else can you explain it?
The Cavalier ability doesn't let you take a reaction at the end of other people's turns. It lets you take a reaction DURING their turns. In addition to your logic being grossly inaccurate, the foundation for it is based on a misreading of the rules.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Not so grossly inaccurate, because it still defines the reaction as being as often as it occurs... so again not just one instance per turn. Redefining the rule. BTW, what does RaW mean?
Rules as Written, so literal understandings of the rules without regard for how they were meant to work. It is what this forum is for discussing, despite many people having a tendency to ignore it here. It's different than RaI (Rules as Intended, less literal understandings of rules) and RaR (Rules as Ravnodaus, which nobody but one man understands).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Oh, okay... I just linked to it from the general forum listing. I didn't realize it was part of a specific thread. Yeah, my post is definitely not the RaW... just what I think plays better. That said, keep in mind that every edition of DnD after Chainmail has come about because of Homebrew content. The exception becomes the rule, when enough people realize it plays better that way. Today's homebrew will be tomorrow's 7e. Don't discount the validity of the argument, even if it goes against the current rule.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
An 11th-level wizard can do 40d8 damage in one turn with chain lightning. All 11th-level characters are powerful. No DM should be trying to unfairly hamstring one of the only ways fighters have to compete with full casters.
If it only meant one extra attack - it would say so - like the Haste spell does.
Plus - a Fighter can only use Action surge once (or twice at level 17+) per
longrest. Let them have their moment.Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
Small correction, Action Surge is regained on short or long rest, not just long rest.
So. I will take the heat, but the bottom line is: it is up to each DM how they want to interpret the rules. This is my interpretation, and I can cite instances, especially in the new content, that leads me to think this is the right way to interpret it, regardless of "historical" interpretations.
Each player turn you can choose one action, one bonus action (if available), and one reaction (if available). You can use these same actions as often as they are triggered until your next turn. For the attack action, it is triggered more than once by having extra attacks, but it is still one action. If you use an offhand weapon, then the use of the offhand weapon is triggered with each main hand attack. It is still the same bonus action, triggered multiple times. If you have a reaction to do a warding maneuver or special dodge, or opportunity attack, then you continue to do that reaction until your next turn, as often as it is triggered. If you use an off-hand weapon and used it as your bonus action, and you have an opportunity attack triggered, then you use your offhand weapon in the opportunity attack as well. It is still the same selection for your bonus action slot for that turn.
Most people will agree that if your action is to dodge, then you continue to dodge every attack until your next turn. The same is true with the Rogue's Uncanny Dodge, and reactions that provide warding maneuvers. This is just an extension of that method of thinking for the other actions selected. Everyone who wants to play two weapon fighting style is disappointed by the traditional interpretation, which is that your fighter gets four attacks per round, but only one little stabby stabby with the off-hand weapon. This is not the way that anyone wants to interpret that rule, except for the rules nazis who continue to insist on doing it that way. People always complain that the great weapons masters are SO overpowered, but they don't stop to think that it's only because they nerf every other ability. If you think of your action as being one continuous action (whatever is selected) for the remainder of your turn, then all of these issues easily resolve themselves. The answer that doesn't make sense is having four attacks per round, but somehow your off-hand is lame for 3 of the 4 attacks... even though your fighting style is TWO WEAPON fighting. Another example is the monk using Flurry of Blows. You make an attack with your monk weapon, and as a bonus action you can SPEND A KI to do flurry of blows. So, if you spend a Ki to do flurry of blows as your bonus action, you continue to FLURRY for the rest of that round. If you have a second attack, you flurry with your bonus action with each attack, without having to spend another Ki, and if they get an opportunity attack, they continue to flurry as often as that is triggered. This means that they can't use their reaction to catch a missile, because that would be another DIFFERENT reaction, and you can only have one reaction in the same round. If you think of it this way, then monks are suddenly not so lame anymore.
The special reaction of the Cavalier, as mentioned previously, is one of the prime examples why this method seems to be the correct method to use. Not only does it allow other fighting styles besides Great Weapons to be effective, but in the case of the Cavalier, when the special reaction is evoked, he gains an opportunity attack for every other creature on the battlefield (by definition), regardless of where they are or what they do in their turn, which takes place at the end of every creature's turn (similar to a Legendary Action). This includes the other players' turns as well. Since there is nothing that causes an opportunity attack from another player's turn, logic dictates that it is an opportunity that is triggered by the mere fact that they are present. Since it is clearly defined this way, it smacks in the face of people who insist that "you only get one opportunity per round."
I certainly agree it is by far the most OP ability in the game, since it means that an attack by (let's say) thirty gnolls with one big bad against your party of 6 would give your cavalier the opportunity to make 39 bow shots in the first round (if you have 4 attacks, and assuming the cavalier has an ever-full quiver) against the "Big Bad," and when that one goes down in the first round, continue to peel off the remaining attackers with however many shots remain. The Boss is virtually killed by his own minions in the first round, and most of the minions will be dead by the end of round 2. I will allow cavaliers in my campaign, since they don't get this ability until level 18, but if they actually play long enough to gain it, then it really changes high level encounters.
The reason that people have come up with abilities like this, and why it has been sanctioned by WotC in their core compendia, is that few players really liked the way actions were being defined (especially bonus actions and reactions), which made certain classes OP and nerfed other classes into near extinction. People had to come up with new classes and new definitions in order to make them playable again. Ergo, the NEW definition is: one action SLOT, one bonus action SLOT, one reaction SLOT... but what fills that slot is active and triggers whenever it is allowed until the next round.
If you are a DM and you want to continue to nerf everything, feel free. I think the more you allow people flexibility, the more they enjoy the game. I personally like having a Ranger with Whirlwind Attack and Two Weapon Fighting, making upwards 20 attacks per round with his "2 attacks" as a 13th level ranger (basically limited by his movement allowance). That is what Whirlwind attack is supposed to look like, IMO, and makes them every bit as "S" class as the other fighter types.
No.
Allow me to elaborate: you are incorrect.
There is literally no reason to interpret the rules like this. At all. You said you would cite reasons, but you just didn't. I'd also like to add that calling everybody that doesn't share the same stance as you (so, literally everybody but you, since nobody has ever interpreted the rules in this way) a "Rules Nazi" is gross for a number of reasons.
However, I would say, if you want somebody to play a game like this with, I think I know of somebody who probably agrees with everything that you've said.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Godwin's Law
You are misreading the Cavalier level 18 ability.
Yes, they get a "special reaction" on each other creature's turn, but only to perform an Opportunity Attack. An Opportunity Attack can only occur if the target moves out of your reach - so in your example, all 30+ creatures must be trying to run past the Cavalier in order for the cavalier to be able to actually make all 30+ opportunity attacks.
An Attack Action (capitalised) can consist of one or more attacks (lower case). The distinction of capitalised words is in the rulebook.
That wasn't how it was defined... literally. No opportunity attack occurs when a party member runs past you. It isn't activated by an action of another, but simply by their presence on the field and the fact that they ended their turn. I am not misreading it. The opportunity is their presence... not anything that they do. It is a prime example of people (a vast majority, I think) wanting to re-define the game so they can play the way they actually want. You are free to limit them in your campaign, however. I agree that the way it is presented is too OP. I would definitely only give them the number of shots in their quiver. Also, the fact that it can be range or melee again defies your definition of "having to run past you." That is not at all the way it is defined. Sorry. Look again.
That is in fact, the prime example, but the fact that it has been introduced as a "canon" character class shows that there is a lot more flexibility than people are willing to credit the game with, and the fact that so many more classes and races have been introduced shows that people are not satisfied with the limitations of the basic game (and the way things were defined). Also, if you don't nerf every other activity that isn't a fighter "extra attack" then the other character classes become a lot more playable. I like my definition better, and that is all that counts.
I use the term "rules nazi" because you are so indoctrinated into thinking one way, that you can't imagine that someone else might be justified in interpreting it differently. I don't deny that is the way it has been defined from the beginning... but it hampers gameplay, unduly nerfs many classes and abilities, and has caused so much re-write of the classes and races to accommodate what people actually want to do, that anyone with an open mind can easily see that people simply don't like the original definition. I will play with my modification. You can play however you like.
Ahem….👇
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
LoL. I think you are missing the point. Everything is being re-defined. Open your eyes. Read the Cavalier. Opportunity is no longer limited to that definition. Party members have never had to disengage to move past you, and even if they do move past you it doesn't trigger an opportunity attack in the way it was defined, but you still get an opportunity attack at the end of their turns. I'm not going to bother copy and pasting it.
The point that I am trying to make is that the Players, and more specifically YOU as the DM/GM are the one who makes the rules. If you don't like something about the game, feel free to change/interpret it however you think it works best. I think the old definitions are broken with the new material. In order to "repair" the damage, you have to think outside the box and re-define the way you look at it. My way of looking at it fixes most of the problems. You can go with it or not... that's up to you.
🤦♂️
Not “party members,” you don’t make Opportunity Attacks against party members (unless you’re a team-killing ****tard). It’s hostile creatures you make opportunity attacks against, and they need to Disengage to avoid the Opportunity Attack.
And this forum is entirely about RAW, so no, here we don’t “think outside the box and re-define” the rules, we discuss the rules as they are written.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Exactly. However, party members trigger the opportunity attack, which gives the cavalier another opportunity to hit anything close to them (or within range, if they are equipped with a bow). You still are not saying anything that I don't already know. You do not have to attack the trigger. That is exactly what I am saying. People have allowed something like this to become canon because it is what the WANT to do with their characters. If you relax your thinking and give them what they want in the first place, you don't have all of this OP crap destroying the game.
Give the guy attacking with two weapons an attack with both weapons. Then you don't have things like Cavaliers making 40 attacks per round.
You can homebrew things however you like but this is NOT what the rules say. The rules make it quite clear.
Cavalier level 18 ability:
"Vigilant Defender
Starting at 18th level, you respond to danger with extraordinary vigilance. In combat, you get a special reaction that you can take once on every creature’s turn, except your turn. You can use this special reaction only to make an opportunity attack, and you can’t use it on the same turn that you take your normal reaction."
You can use this reaction ONLY to make an opportunity attack. NOTHING here changes how an opportunity attack is defined.
Iamsposta cited the rules defining an opportunity attack above. The key line is:
"You can make an opportunity attack when a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach."
Opportunity attacks are ONLY triggered by a HOSTILE creature that you can see moving out of your reach. That's all. Party members unless mind controlled are NOT considered HOSTILE so they do NOT trigger opportunity attacks.
In addition, "to make one melee attack against the provoking creature. " The character MUST attack the creature who triggered the opportunity attack since only the provoking creature is a valid target. So even if someone considered party members hostile (which they are NOT), the only creatures that the cavalier could attack when the opportunity attack is triggered would be the party member. In addition, it MUST be a melee attack - ranged attacks aren't allowed.
From a RAW perspective, your comments are completely incorrect.
P.S. Your original post had so many rules errors ...
"OP: Most people will agree that if your action is to dodge, then you continue to dodge every attack until your next turn. The same is true with the Rogue's Uncanny Dodge, and reactions that provide warding maneuvers. "
No. Uncanny Dodge is a REACTION. It applies only to the one attack when it is used and nothing else.
"Rule: Starting at 5th level, when an attacker that you can see hits you with an attack, you can use your reaction to halve the attack’s damage against you."
It is only "the" attack's damage - not every attack after that.
"OP: If you use an offhand weapon, then the use of the offhand weapon is triggered with each main hand attack."
"When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand."
"Beginning at 5th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn."
You get a bonus action off-hand attack when you take the attack ACTION (not make an attack). At higher levels the extra attack feature lets a character make more than one attack as part of the attack ACTION. None of this gives you more than one bonus action and none of this allows you to attack more than once with the offhand.
As before, you are welcome to run your game however you want to run it, homebrew to your hearts content but "rules nazis" does not describe the 99% of folks who read the rules, play the game more or less as written and would never end up at your "interpretation"/homebrew.
You still have not addressed the most salient point. How do you get an opportunity attack EVER at the end of another player's turn. Since there is no way this can happen using the normal definition (I am not arguing that yours is the normal definition), then the only interpretation is that the definition has changed. Tacitly, but clearly. In order to allow an opportunity attack at the end of another player's turn, the only way to interpret this is that an opportunity attack has been redefined to include something not included before. Since the only thing that allows this is the fact that they are present and have taken a turn, then that is what triggers the opportunity for the cavalier. It has nothing to do with movement or proximity, they simply get to attack at the end of every creature's turn. How else can you explain it?
Since that rule has been re-written, how can you be so sure that any of the other rules are not similarly out of date, or out of grace? People are writing what they want to see in the game. The more you resist, the more outlandish the new things will be in order to get around the rules. You are correct. I have successfully run home-brew editions of every version of D&D (except 4, which I never played). Unanimously players have enjoyed it... but then everyone likes a change of pace now and then.
To be fair, it does say creatures... but then it goes on to say "except at the end of your turn." So clearly it is defining the characters as creatures as well... otherwise why would they feel the need to say this?
I don't follow a few of your points. First, you just said the rule has been rewritten, but the rule quoted from current RaW doesn't allow your interpretation.
How does an OA occur on someone else's turn? Well, any hostile creatures within your melee range that willingly leaves it triggers an OA regardless of whose turn it is. While most can take ONE OA per round, your character can do so each turn, so each time i's a new creature's turn in combat you get a CHANCE to deliver an OA, if it presents, like another enemy trying to run by you to get at your caster. You ask "How else can you explain it?" Well, there's no real explaining "it" because the ability says you get a free reaction for every creature's turn but your own, and it MUST BE used for an OA. If no OA opportunity presents, you don't get to use it. You can't simply put a bunch of things you WANT to trigger OA to MAKE you able to use it every single turn. That's homebrew at it's finest.
Sposta said i, this area is for RaW only, not re-defining or homebrewing.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
The Cavalier rule is:
So you aren't gaining the opportunity attack at the END of another player's turn - you are getting it ON every creature's turn. (It just isn't relevant on another player's turn, unless an enemy creature uses their reaction to move out of YOUR reach on that player's turn.)
The Cavalier ability doesn't let you take a reaction at the end of other people's turns. It lets you take a reaction DURING their turns. In addition to your logic being grossly inaccurate, the foundation for it is based on a misreading of the rules.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Not so grossly inaccurate, because it still defines the reaction as being as often as it occurs... so again not just one instance per turn. Redefining the rule. BTW, what does RaW mean?
Rules as Written, so literal understandings of the rules without regard for how they were meant to work. It is what this forum is for discussing, despite many people having a tendency to ignore it here. It's different than RaI (Rules as Intended, less literal understandings of rules) and RaR (Rules as Ravnodaus, which nobody but one man understands).
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Oh, okay... I just linked to it from the general forum listing. I didn't realize it was part of a specific thread. Yeah, my post is definitely not the RaW... just what I think plays better. That said, keep in mind that every edition of DnD after Chainmail has come about because of Homebrew content. The exception becomes the rule, when enough people realize it plays better that way. Today's homebrew will be tomorrow's 7e. Don't discount the validity of the argument, even if it goes against the current rule.