Long time reader, first time poster here. I've tried looking but having a bit of trouble finding the answer to this question.
If you have a character who has two attacks and is wielding two weapons can I choose the order of attacks? By this I mean does it have to be:
Main attack, main attack and then bonus action attack
Or can I do the following:
Main attack, bonus action attack and the main attack
The reason I ask is I'm going to be running a dual wielding hexblade warlock and get additional bonus damage from my pact weapon (life drinker) and not my off hand one. I also don't have two weapon fighting style.
I'm thinking of a situation where after I hit with my first main attack and the baddy is just barely standing. In this situation I would prefer to use my bonus action attack which does less damage to finish them off and then move to another one to use my final main attack.
Its a bit of a niche situation but I have a habit of over thinking things
I don’t agree that you need to complete both main action attacks, but given your reasons, it doesn’t matter.
There’s no such thing as “main hand” and “off hand.” Everyone is ambidextrous in 5e. You can make your first main action attack with your right hand weapon, your second main action attack with your left hand weapon, and then your bonus action two weapon fighting attack with either weapon.
So you can attack first with your life drinker weapon, then use the other weapon for the second attack of your main action, and then make the bonus action attack with the life drinker weapon.
Main attack, main attack and then bonus action attack
This is correct. You have to start and complete your regular Attack action before you can do your Bonus Action offhand attack.
I may just be ignorant, but is there a RAW declaration of this? plenty of bonus actions I'm aware of don't dictate that they have to follow main actions (in fact the rule on bonus action spells is written as if the bonus action precedes the main action, although it applies both ways). Ill admit though, that I'm not as familiar with martial character rules as I almost never play them
Main attack, main attack and then bonus action attack
This is correct. You have to start and complete your regular Attack action before you can do your Bonus Action offhand attack.
I may just be ignorant, but is there a RAW declaration of this? plenty of bonus actions I'm aware of don't dictate that they have to follow main actions (in fact the rule on bonus action spells is written as if the bonus action precedes the main action, although it applies both ways). Ill admit though, that I'm not as familiar with martial character rules as I almost never play them
As a matter of fact, there is. The rules use plain language and only allow you to do what they say you can do. There's no general rule saying you can split up Extra Attacks, so you can't. You can take the attack action, and if the conditions are right you can attack as many times as the feature allows. That said, there are some specific rules that allow for an interruption, such as moving between attacks.
So when you take the attack action, that's your action. And it must be resolved in its entirety before another action can be attempted. Unless, of course, something else carves out a specific exception. I can't think of any off the top of my head, but there might be. Until one presents itself, here are some other examples.
An Eldritch Knight Fighter cannot throw a handaxe, invoke their Weapon Bond, and throw the same weapon again as part of their attack action. Strictly speaking, they can't even throw it again as a bonus action.
Likewise, someone with the Shield Master feat cannot interrupt their attack action to shove the target of their first attack prone so they can have advantage on a second swing. But by the same token, they're not required to shove the same target, either. If they have remaining movement, they can use that and potentially shove another target.
Main attack, main attack and then bonus action attack
This is correct. You have to start and complete your regular Attack action before you can do your Bonus Action offhand attack.
I may just be ignorant, but is there a RAW declaration of this? plenty of bonus actions I'm aware of don't dictate that they have to follow main actions (in fact the rule on bonus action spells is written as if the bonus action precedes the main action, although it applies both ways). Ill admit though, that I'm not as familiar with martial character rules as I almost never play them
As a matter of fact, there is. The rules use plain language and only allow you to do what they say you can do. There's no general rule saying you can split up Extra Attacks, so you can't. You can take the attack action, and if the conditions are right you can attack as many times as the feature allows. That said, there are some specific rules that allow for an interruption, such as moving between attacks.
So when you take the attack action, that's your action. And it must be resolved in its entirety before another action can be attempted. Unless, of course, something else carves out a specific exception. I can't think of any off the top of my head, but there might be. Until one presents itself, here are some other examples.
An Eldritch Knight Fighter cannot throw a handaxe, invoke their Weapon Bond, and throw the same weapon again as part of their attack action. Strictly speaking, they can't even throw it again as a bonus action.
Likewise, someone with the Shield Master feat cannot interrupt their attack action to shove the target of their first attack prone so they can have advantage on a second swing. But by the same token, they're not required to shove the same target, either. If they have remaining movement, they can use that and potentially shove another target.
Main attack, main attack and then bonus action attack
This is correct. You have to start and complete your regular Attack action before you can do your Bonus Action offhand attack.
I may just be ignorant, but is there a RAW declaration of this? plenty of bonus actions I'm aware of don't dictate that they have to follow main actions (in fact the rule on bonus action spells is written as if the bonus action precedes the main action, although it applies both ways). Ill admit though, that I'm not as familiar with martial character rules as I almost never play them
As a matter of fact, there is. The rules use plain language and only allow you to do what they say you can do. There's no general rule saying you can split up Extra Attacks, so you can't. You can take the attack action, and if the conditions are right you can attack as many times as the feature allows. That said, there are some specific rules that allow for an interruption, such as moving between attacks.
So when you take the attack action, that's your action. And it must be resolved in its entirety before another action can be attempted. Unless, of course, something else carves out a specific exception. I can't think of any off the top of my head, but there might be. Until one presents itself, here are some other examples.
An Eldritch Knight Fighter cannot throw a handaxe, invoke their Weapon Bond, and throw the same weapon again as part of their attack action. Strictly speaking, they can't even throw it again as a bonus action.
Likewise, someone with the Shield Master feat cannot interrupt their attack action to shove the target of their first attack prone so they can have advantage on a second swing. But by the same token, they're not required to shove the same target, either. If they have remaining movement, they can use that and potentially shove another target.
That's not an exception. That's the general rule describe what a bonus action is. If you begin an action, you still have to resolve that action before starting your bonus action. This goes double for if the bonus action has a trigger.
Main attack, main attack and then bonus action attack
This is correct. You have to start and complete your regular Attack action before you can do your Bonus Action offhand attack.
I may just be ignorant, but is there a RAW declaration of this? plenty of bonus actions I'm aware of don't dictate that they have to follow main actions (in fact the rule on bonus action spells is written as if the bonus action precedes the main action, although it applies both ways). Ill admit though, that I'm not as familiar with martial character rules as I almost never play them
As a matter of fact, there is. The rules use plain language and only allow you to do what they say you can do. There's no general rule saying you can split up Extra Attacks, so you can't. You can take the attack action, and if the conditions are right you can attack as many times as the feature allows. That said, there are some specific rules that allow for an interruption, such as moving between attacks.
So when you take the attack action, that's your action. And it must be resolved in its entirety before another action can be attempted. Unless, of course, something else carves out a specific exception. I can't think of any off the top of my head, but there might be. Until one presents itself, here are some other examples.
An Eldritch Knight Fighter cannot throw a handaxe, invoke their Weapon Bond, and throw the same weapon again as part of their attack action. Strictly speaking, they can't even throw it again as a bonus action.
Likewise, someone with the Shield Master feat cannot interrupt their attack action to shove the target of their first attack prone so they can have advantage on a second swing. But by the same token, they're not required to shove the same target, either. If they have remaining movement, they can use that and potentially shove another target.
That's not an exception. That's the general rule describe what a bonus action is. If you begin an action, you still have to resolve that action before starting your bonus action. This goes double for if the bonus action has a trigger.
Can you cite a rule that says you have to complete a multi-stage action before doing other things?
It basically says you can't bonus action between attacks unless there is a specific trigger.
"There’s no such thing as “main hand” and “off hand.” Everyone is ambidextrous in 5e. You can make your first main action attack with your right hand weapon, your second main action attack with your left hand weapon, and then your bonus action two weapon fighting attack with either weapon."
This would be the easiest solution. I just lose my charisma bonus to damage on the third attack with the life drinker weapon. It would essentially even out the dame between attacks two and three
Main attack, main attack and then bonus action attack
This is correct. You have to start and complete your regular Attack action before you can do your Bonus Action offhand attack.
I may just be ignorant, but is there a RAW declaration of this? plenty of bonus actions I'm aware of don't dictate that they have to follow main actions (in fact the rule on bonus action spells is written as if the bonus action precedes the main action, although it applies both ways). Ill admit though, that I'm not as familiar with martial character rules as I almost never play them
As a matter of fact, there is. The rules use plain language and only allow you to do what they say you can do. There's no general rule saying you can split up Extra Attacks, so you can't. You can take the attack action, and if the conditions are right you can attack as many times as the feature allows. That said, there are some specific rules that allow for an interruption, such as moving between attacks.
So when you take the attack action, that's your action. And it must be resolved in its entirety before another action can be attempted. Unless, of course, something else carves out a specific exception. I can't think of any off the top of my head, but there might be. Until one presents itself, here are some other examples.
An Eldritch Knight Fighter cannot throw a handaxe, invoke their Weapon Bond, and throw the same weapon again as part of their attack action. Strictly speaking, they can't even throw it again as a bonus action.
Likewise, someone with the Shield Master feat cannot interrupt their attack action to shove the target of their first attack prone so they can have advantage on a second swing. But by the same token, they're not required to shove the same target, either. If they have remaining movement, they can use that and potentially shove another target.
That's not an exception. That's the general rule describe what a bonus action is. If you begin an action, you still have to resolve that action before starting your bonus action. This goes double for if the bonus action has a trigger.
Can you cite a rule that says you have to complete a multi-stage action before doing other things?
There are no multi-stage actions. What we're talking about is Extra Attack, a feature that specifically modifies an existing action, and how that interacts with Two-Weapon Fighting. But it's still part of the same action. If you stop attacking with that weapon, then you end your attack action. It doesn't matter if you've used them all yet or not.
There are no multi-stage actions. What we're talking about is Extra Attack, a feature that specifically modifies an existing action, and how that interacts with Two-Weapon Fighting. But it's still part of the same action. If you stop attacking with that weapon, then you end your attack action. It doesn't matter if you've used them all yet or not.
The fact that some classes can make multiple attacks with a single Attack action immediately disproves your first assertion.
For the rest, again, can you cite a rule that says that?
The linchpin of your argument is this statement that you made: "And [the action] must be resolved in its entirety before another action can be attempted." All I'm asking is that you cite a source.
The only rule as far as I can tell is the Bonus Action rule stating that you can take a Bonus Action whenever you like on your turn - unless it has a timing stipulation. The only stipulation in the Two-Weapon Fighting Bonus Action is that you "take" the Attack action - not that you must have completed the Attack action.
Because of that I would say you could absolutely use the Bonus Action mid-Attack Action if you have the Extra Attack feature.
There are no multi-stage actions. What we're talking about is Extra Attack, a feature that specifically modifies an existing action, and how that interacts with Two-Weapon Fighting. But it's still part of the same action. If you stop attacking with that weapon, then you end your attack action. It doesn't matter if you've used them all yet or not.
The fact that some classes can make multiple attacks with a single Attack action immediately disproves your first assertion.
For the rest, again, can you cite a rule that says that?
The linchpin of your argument is this statement that you made: "And [the action] must be resolved in its entirety before another action can be attempted." All I'm asking is that you cite a source.
Following your train of thought, the only possible multi-stage action is someone with the Extra Attack feature. Which is, quite frankly, ridiculous. Nowhere in any of the books is a "multi-stage action" described anywhere. That text simply doesn't exist. You're imposing your own brand of logic while disregarding the text as it exists.
You can only take a bonus action if you have a feature that allows it and/or a specific trigger is met. And because the rules as written rely on a plain text reading, you cannot do more than what the words say you can. If you stop attacking with your attack action, you don't get to start it up again because the rules don't say you can. The only exceptions are moving between attacks and anything which has a specific trigger. But that second one is what we call future-proofing. There may not be an exception yet, but there could be one in the future.
Let's look at the actual words at work.
Attack
The most common action to take in combat is the Attack action, whether you are swinging a sword, firing an arrow from a bow, or brawling with your fists.
With this action, you make one melee or ranged attack. See the "Making an Attack" section for the rules that govern attacks.
Certain features, such as the Extra Attack feature of the fighter, allow you to make more than one attack with this action.
So, you can attempt multiple attacks with this action. But this action can also end prematurely. You don't have to attempt additional attacks, and some other feature of in-game effect may prevent attempting additional attacks. Now, let's look at bonus actions.
Bonus Actions
Various class features, spells, and other abilities let you take an additional action on your turn called a bonus action. The Cunning Action feature, for example, allows a rogue to take a bonus action. You can take a bonus action only when a special ability, spell, or other feature of the game states that you can do something as a bonus action. You otherwise don't have a bonus action to take.
You can take only one bonus action on your turn, so you must choose which bonus action to use when you have more than one available.
You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn, unless the bonus action's timing is specified, and anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action.
So some bonus actions have specific timing requirements; like a conditional or If-Then statement. Two-Weapon Fighting is one such bonus action.
Two-Weapon Fighting
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. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
If either weapon has the thrown property, you can throw the weapon, instead of making a melee attack with it.
The bonus action is still its own action. It's not part of the attack action, so it cannot interrupt the attack action. And because it stands alone, it cannot be used until the attack action has ended. This is a basic, plain-text reading of the rules as presented.
Anything otherwise means the trigger doesn't matter. I suppose you think we should allow bonus action spells to interrupt the attack action as well.
So, the answer is "no," then? There is no rules text to support the assertion that "take" implicitly also means "complete"? You're arguing from your own assumptions about how things ought to work? Thank you for clarifying.
I'm not actually interested in arguing how things should operate; I was just curious if there was textual support for your position. Since there isn't, I'll leave it at that.
The only rule as far as I can tell is the Bonus Action rule stating that you can take a Bonus Action whenever you like on your turn - unless it has a timing stipulation. The only stipulation in the Two-Weapon Fighting Bonus Action is that you "take" the Attack action - not that you must have completed the Attack action.
Because of that I would say you could absolutely use the Bonus Action mid-Attack Action if you have the Extra Attack feature.
The attack action is completed after you attempt your first attack. Even if you have the Extra Attack feature, regardless of how many you might have, you don't have to make an additional attack to complete it.
So, the answer is "no," then? There is no rules text to support the assertion that "take" implicitly also means "complete"? You're arguing from your own assumptions about how things ought to work? Thank you for clarifying.
I'm not actually interested in arguing how things should operate; I was just curious if there was textual support for your position. Since there isn't, I'll leave it at that.
For crying out loud, you're asking for evidence of something not expressed in any book to prohibit an order of operations that no book says you can actually follow. And you're taking a lack of specific evidence as evidence. It's insanity.
I'm convinced this was all one giant troll. You've even admitted to the apathy. So I'm blocking you from now on. I don't need the headache.
So, the answer is "no," then? There is no rules text to support the assertion that "take" implicitly also means "complete"? You're arguing from your own assumptions about how things ought to work? Thank you for clarifying.
I'm not actually interested in arguing how things should operate; I was just curious if there was textual support for your position. Since there isn't, I'll leave it at that.
There is evidence. The books use natural language, and, except where specified otherwise, things means what they mean in natural language. The rules say you may attack more than once when you take the Attack action, if you have Extra Attack. The rules say that when you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon you're holding in one hand, you can use a Bonus Action to attack with another light melee weapon you're holding in the other hand. If you take the Attack action, you may attack multiple times. Until you're done with those times, you're still in the process of taking the Attack action. No general rule allows you to interrupt actions. There is a specific exception made for movement. There is no exception made for Bonus Actions. Either the exception for Bonus Actions is unnecessary, because it's somehow implicitly allowed, or it is not allowed. If the exception is unnecessary, then by that same logic, the exception for movement is unnecessary. While there may be other instances where strictly unnecessary clarifications are included, there is no evidence to support this is such a case, since there is no general rule allowing actions to be interrupted, there is no general rule explicitly allowing Bonus Actions to occur during other actions, and there is no specific rule allowing the Bonus Action attack from Two-Weapon Fighting to occur between attacks from the Attack action when modified by the Extra Attack feature.
This is how the rules actually work. I believe they should allow the Bonus Action attack to interrupt the Attack action, to have it be able to happen between Extra Attack attacks, similar to how I believe the Shield Master Bonus Action Shove should be able to occur between Extra Attack attacks... but this forum, like you pointed out, is not for discussions about how rules should work, but rather about how they actually do work.
I'd look less at the "take" in the rule and look more at the "if", "when", "after" etc that is also in the various rules and features:
JCs tweets linked in one of the posts above is a reference to the Shield Master feat, which uses "if". That clearly sets up an "If / Then" relationship with the bonus action affiliated with Shield Master and dictates that the bonus action occurs after the attack action. The Two-Weapon fighting bonus action starts with "When" which is less clear, as it could mean after, but it could also mean "at the same time" or "during". Think of the phrase "when i bring your drinks, I'll bring some napkins as well" which implies both actions happening at the same time.
Using "when" to mean "during" can mean that a bonus action off-hand attack from Two-Weapon fighting can take place at the same time as the attack action it references, which means that it can take place anytime immediately during or after (but probably not before) the attack action, so it could take place in-between attacks in an extra attack
Regarding the attack action and extra attack: Attack actions start with the first attack, and can end after that attack, or any subsequent attacks you are allowed using that action. So, regarding the following types of bonus action, and an extra attack:
Attack > Attack is valid
Attack > Attack > Shield Master BA is valid (any other combo with Shield Master BA is not)
Attack > Attack > Two Weapon BA is valid
Attack > Two Weapon BA > Attack is valid
Two Weapon BA > Attack > Attack is not valid (as you can't prove the attack action has started yet, so you don't technically meet the "when")
Any combination with an untimed bonus action is valid.
So, the answer is "no," then? There is no rules text to support the assertion that "take" implicitly also means "complete"? You're arguing from your own assumptions about how things ought to work? Thank you for clarifying.
I'm not actually interested in arguing how things should operate; I was just curious if there was textual support for your position. Since there isn't, I'll leave it at that.
There is evidence. The books use natural language, and, except where specified otherwise, things means what they mean in natural language.
I'm with you so far.
The rules say you may attack more than once when you take the Attack action, if you have Extra Attack. The rules say that when you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon you're holding in one hand, you can use a Bonus Action to attack with another light melee weapon you're holding in the other hand. If you take the Attack action, you may attack multiple times.
Yep, still with you.
Until you're done with those times, you're still in the process of taking the Attack action.
Sure.
No general rule allows you to interrupt actions.
I'm not sure what you think you mean by "general," but the rule for bonus actions does allow you to interrupt actions. Here's the thing: usually, actions are a one-and-done kind of thing. Extra Attack creates a situation where a single action involves multiple steps, so "action" is foundationally no longer atomic. The rule for bonus actions says that you choose when to take them on your turn and includes no language limiting that choice to "either before or after you've completed any other potential actions."
There is a specific exception made for movement. There is no exception made for Bonus Actions.
No one has yet cited any general rule that would require an exception. The rule for bonus actions very plainly states that you choose when it happens, with no further restrictions (don't worry, we'll get to bonus actions that have prerequisite triggers).
Either the exception for Bonus Actions is unnecessary, because it's somehow implicitly allowed, or it is not allowed. If the exception is unnecessary, then by that same logic, the exception for movement is unnecessary. While there may be other instances where strictly unnecessary clarifications are included, there is no evidence to support this is such a case, since there is no general rule allowing actions to be interrupted, there is no general rule explicitly allowing Bonus Actions to occur during other actions, and there is no specific rule allowing the Bonus Action attack from Two-Weapon Fighting to occur between attacks from the Attack action when modified by the Extra Attack feature.
Again, yes there is.
This is how the rules actually work. I believe they should allow the Bonus Action attack to interrupt the Attack action, to have it be able to happen between Extra Attack attacks, similar to how I believe the Shield Master Bonus Action Shove should be able to occur between Extra Attack attacks... but this forum, like you pointed out, is not for discussions about how rules should work, but rather about how they actually do work.
You've misinterpreted my point there. There's lots of room in this forum for arguments to be made about one thing or another; I'm just not currently interested in arguing anything but the text.
So now let me return to the issue of bonus actions that have explicit requirements, like two weapon fighting, because that's what this is actually all about. As established, there is no textual support for the idea that you cannot take a (non-specific) bonus action after starting but prior to finishing your action, and in fact this is explicitly allowed by the rule for when you take a bonus action. But, some bonus actions have requirements. Two-weapon fighting grants its bonus action only "When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand."
The argument that people are making here is that "take the Attack action" means "take and complete the Attack action." No one seems to be able to provide textual support for that position, though people do seem to be making long posts begging the question about it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Long time reader, first time poster here. I've tried looking but having a bit of trouble finding the answer to this question.
If you have a character who has two attacks and is wielding two weapons can I choose the order of attacks? By this I mean does it have to be:
Main attack, main attack and then bonus action attack
Or can I do the following:
Main attack, bonus action attack and the main attack
The reason I ask is I'm going to be running a dual wielding hexblade warlock and get additional bonus damage from my pact weapon (life drinker) and not my off hand one. I also don't have two weapon fighting style.
I'm thinking of a situation where after I hit with my first main attack and the baddy is just barely standing. In this situation I would prefer to use my bonus action attack which does less damage to finish them off and then move to another one to use my final main attack.
Its a bit of a niche situation but I have a habit of over thinking things
Thanks in advance!
This is correct. You have to start and complete your regular Attack action before you can do your Bonus Action offhand attack.
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!
I thought that might be the case!
Thank you for your quick response :)
I don’t agree that you need to complete both main action attacks, but given your reasons, it doesn’t matter.
There’s no such thing as “main hand” and “off hand.” Everyone is ambidextrous in 5e. You can make your first main action attack with your right hand weapon, your second main action attack with your left hand weapon, and then your bonus action two weapon fighting attack with either weapon.
So you can attack first with your life drinker weapon, then use the other weapon for the second attack of your main action, and then make the bonus action attack with the life drinker weapon.
I may just be ignorant, but is there a RAW declaration of this? plenty of bonus actions I'm aware of don't dictate that they have to follow main actions (in fact the rule on bonus action spells is written as if the bonus action precedes the main action, although it applies both ways). Ill admit though, that I'm not as familiar with martial character rules as I almost never play them
As a matter of fact, there is. The rules use plain language and only allow you to do what they say you can do. There's no general rule saying you can split up Extra Attacks, so you can't. You can take the attack action, and if the conditions are right you can attack as many times as the feature allows. That said, there are some specific rules that allow for an interruption, such as moving between attacks.
So when you take the attack action, that's your action. And it must be resolved in its entirety before another action can be attempted. Unless, of course, something else carves out a specific exception. I can't think of any off the top of my head, but there might be. Until one presents itself, here are some other examples.
An Eldritch Knight Fighter cannot throw a handaxe, invoke their Weapon Bond, and throw the same weapon again as part of their attack action. Strictly speaking, they can't even throw it again as a bonus action.
Likewise, someone with the Shield Master feat cannot interrupt their attack action to shove the target of their first attack prone so they can have advantage on a second swing. But by the same token, they're not required to shove the same target, either. If they have remaining movement, they can use that and potentially shove another target.
There is a specific exception for this, actually: "You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn." If you want to take that bonus action between the multiple attacks of your Attack action, that's your choice.
That's not an exception. That's the general rule describe what a bonus action is. If you begin an action, you still have to resolve that action before starting your bonus action. This goes double for if the bonus action has a trigger.
Can you cite a rule that says you have to complete a multi-stage action before doing other things?
Didn't mean to cause a debate but reading your replies have been helpful. It's made me realise I was googling the wrong terminology.
After doing a search on nesting bonus actions I found this sage advice:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sageadvice.eu/2018/05/23/clarification-about-bonus-actions/amp/
It basically says you can't bonus action between attacks unless there is a specific trigger.
"There’s no such thing as “main hand” and “off hand.” Everyone is ambidextrous in 5e. You can make your first main action attack with your right hand weapon, your second main action attack with your left hand weapon, and then your bonus action two weapon fighting attack with either weapon."
This would be the easiest solution. I just lose my charisma bonus to damage on the third attack with the life drinker weapon. It would essentially even out the dame between attacks two and three
There are no multi-stage actions. What we're talking about is Extra Attack, a feature that specifically modifies an existing action, and how that interacts with Two-Weapon Fighting. But it's still part of the same action. If you stop attacking with that weapon, then you end your attack action. It doesn't matter if you've used them all yet or not.
The fact that some classes can make multiple attacks with a single Attack action immediately disproves your first assertion.
For the rest, again, can you cite a rule that says that?
The linchpin of your argument is this statement that you made: "And [the action] must be resolved in its entirety before another action can be attempted." All I'm asking is that you cite a source.
The only rule as far as I can tell is the Bonus Action rule stating that you can take a Bonus Action whenever you like on your turn - unless it has a timing stipulation. The only stipulation in the Two-Weapon Fighting Bonus Action is that you "take" the Attack action - not that you must have completed the Attack action.
Because of that I would say you could absolutely use the Bonus Action mid-Attack Action if you have the Extra Attack feature.
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).
Following your train of thought, the only possible multi-stage action is someone with the Extra Attack feature. Which is, quite frankly, ridiculous. Nowhere in any of the books is a "multi-stage action" described anywhere. That text simply doesn't exist. You're imposing your own brand of logic while disregarding the text as it exists.
You can only take a bonus action if you have a feature that allows it and/or a specific trigger is met. And because the rules as written rely on a plain text reading, you cannot do more than what the words say you can. If you stop attacking with your attack action, you don't get to start it up again because the rules don't say you can. The only exceptions are moving between attacks and anything which has a specific trigger. But that second one is what we call future-proofing. There may not be an exception yet, but there could be one in the future.
Let's look at the actual words at work.
So, you can attempt multiple attacks with this action. But this action can also end prematurely. You don't have to attempt additional attacks, and some other feature of in-game effect may prevent attempting additional attacks. Now, let's look at bonus actions.
So some bonus actions have specific timing requirements; like a conditional or If-Then statement. Two-Weapon Fighting is one such bonus action.
The bonus action is still its own action. It's not part of the attack action, so it cannot interrupt the attack action. And because it stands alone, it cannot be used until the attack action has ended. This is a basic, plain-text reading of the rules as presented.
Anything otherwise means the trigger doesn't matter. I suppose you think we should allow bonus action spells to interrupt the attack action as well.
So, the answer is "no," then? There is no rules text to support the assertion that "take" implicitly also means "complete"? You're arguing from your own assumptions about how things ought to work? Thank you for clarifying.
I'm not actually interested in arguing how things should operate; I was just curious if there was textual support for your position. Since there isn't, I'll leave it at that.
The attack action is completed after you attempt your first attack. Even if you have the Extra Attack feature, regardless of how many you might have, you don't have to make an additional attack to complete it.
For crying out loud, you're asking for evidence of something not expressed in any book to prohibit an order of operations that no book says you can actually follow. And you're taking a lack of specific evidence as evidence. It's insanity.
I'm convinced this was all one giant troll. You've even admitted to the apathy. So I'm blocking you from now on. I don't need the headache.
There is evidence. The books use natural language, and, except where specified otherwise, things means what they mean in natural language. The rules say you may attack more than once when you take the Attack action, if you have Extra Attack. The rules say that when you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon you're holding in one hand, you can use a Bonus Action to attack with another light melee weapon you're holding in the other hand. If you take the Attack action, you may attack multiple times. Until you're done with those times, you're still in the process of taking the Attack action. No general rule allows you to interrupt actions. There is a specific exception made for movement. There is no exception made for Bonus Actions. Either the exception for Bonus Actions is unnecessary, because it's somehow implicitly allowed, or it is not allowed. If the exception is unnecessary, then by that same logic, the exception for movement is unnecessary. While there may be other instances where strictly unnecessary clarifications are included, there is no evidence to support this is such a case, since there is no general rule allowing actions to be interrupted, there is no general rule explicitly allowing Bonus Actions to occur during other actions, and there is no specific rule allowing the Bonus Action attack from Two-Weapon Fighting to occur between attacks from the Attack action when modified by the Extra Attack feature.
This is how the rules actually work. I believe they should allow the Bonus Action attack to interrupt the Attack action, to have it be able to happen between Extra Attack attacks, similar to how I believe the Shield Master Bonus Action Shove should be able to occur between Extra Attack attacks... but this forum, like you pointed out, is not for discussions about how rules should work, but rather about how they actually do work.
I'd look less at the "take" in the rule and look more at the "if", "when", "after" etc that is also in the various rules and features:
JCs tweets linked in one of the posts above is a reference to the Shield Master feat, which uses "if". That clearly sets up an "If / Then" relationship with the bonus action affiliated with Shield Master and dictates that the bonus action occurs after the attack action. The Two-Weapon fighting bonus action starts with "When" which is less clear, as it could mean after, but it could also mean "at the same time" or "during". Think of the phrase "when i bring your drinks, I'll bring some napkins as well" which implies both actions happening at the same time.
Using "when" to mean "during" can mean that a bonus action off-hand attack from Two-Weapon fighting can take place at the same time as the attack action it references, which means that it can take place anytime immediately during or after (but probably not before) the attack action, so it could take place in-between attacks in an extra attack
Regarding the attack action and extra attack: Attack actions start with the first attack, and can end after that attack, or any subsequent attacks you are allowed using that action. So, regarding the following types of bonus action, and an extra attack:
Attack > Attack is valid
Attack > Attack > Shield Master BA is valid (any other combo with Shield Master BA is not)
Attack > Attack > Two Weapon BA is valid
Attack > Two Weapon BA > Attack is valid
Two Weapon BA > Attack > Attack is not valid (as you can't prove the attack action has started yet, so you don't technically meet the "when")
Any combination with an untimed bonus action is valid.
I'm with you so far.
Yep, still with you.
Sure.
I'm not sure what you think you mean by "general," but the rule for bonus actions does allow you to interrupt actions. Here's the thing: usually, actions are a one-and-done kind of thing. Extra Attack creates a situation where a single action involves multiple steps, so "action" is foundationally no longer atomic. The rule for bonus actions says that you choose when to take them on your turn and includes no language limiting that choice to "either before or after you've completed any other potential actions."
No one has yet cited any general rule that would require an exception. The rule for bonus actions very plainly states that you choose when it happens, with no further restrictions (don't worry, we'll get to bonus actions that have prerequisite triggers).
Again, yes there is.
You've misinterpreted my point there. There's lots of room in this forum for arguments to be made about one thing or another; I'm just not currently interested in arguing anything but the text.
So now let me return to the issue of bonus actions that have explicit requirements, like two weapon fighting, because that's what this is actually all about. As established, there is no textual support for the idea that you cannot take a (non-specific) bonus action after starting but prior to finishing your action, and in fact this is explicitly allowed by the rule for when you take a bonus action. But, some bonus actions have requirements. Two-weapon fighting grants its bonus action only "When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand."
The argument that people are making here is that "take the Attack action" means "take and complete the Attack action." No one seems to be able to provide textual support for that position, though people do seem to be making long posts begging the question about it.