So are you saying you can perform your bonus action after the to-hit roll and before the damage roll?
I don’t see anything that would necessarily prevent it, other than logic and common sense (in fact, doing as you say might be detrimental to your combat effectiveness).
So are you saying you can perform your bonus action after the to-hit roll and before the damage roll?
If you could, Why would anyone ever bother? You are only going to mess yourself up. And if the creature dies before you resolve the first attack’s damage, then you just wasted an attack for no reason. Or if the first attacks damage would’ve been enough to down the creature, same thing. There are easier ways to be ineffective in combat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Check out my Disabled & Dragons Youtube Channel for 5e Monster and Player Tactics. Helping the Disabled Community and Players and DM’s (both new and experienced) get into D&D. Plus there is a talking Dragon named Quill.
If you take the Attack action on your turn, you can use a bonus action to try to shove a creature within 5 feet of you with your shield.
If/then conditional centered explicitly on the Attack action, and nothing else. Many people continue to disagree about whether this can be interrupted or not, but it does have a specific logical structure. The clause references the Attack action itself, in a future tense, as the requirement. This is something that has yet to occur, so it (begrudgingly) makes sense that you haven't fulfilled the requirement until you've completed taking the Attack action.
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.
This is still technically an if/then conditional, but the structure and requirements are not analogous to Shield Master.
Having taken the Attack action itself is not the main requirement; making an attack with a light, one-handed melee weapon with the Attack action is.
The Attack action is being referenced in a progressive tense (not entirely sure whether it's past or present progressive) because it's something that either has occurred, or is occurring, at the time another event (the actual trigger) occurred/occurs--making an attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand.
Now if the Attack action itself isn't the real trigger, why include it at all? It's still a requirement; just not the triggering requirement. It's only possible for the trigger to occur when that action has occurred/is occurring. We all know there are ways to make melee attacks as an action (not bonus) that don't use the Attack action. SCAG cantrips are a prime example; you make one melee weapon attack with the action, but--even if the weapon would qualify--the attack did not occur as a result of the Attack action. It's a background requirement. Once a creature has made one (or more) attacks with a light melee weapon that they're holding in one hand (and holding another light melee weapon in their other hand), via the Attack action, they have fulfilled all of the applicable requirements to take their bonus action.
Two-Weapon Fighting basically follows the same structure as Great Weapon Master; you can take the BA immediately. GWM just doesn't care how you made the attack while TWF does.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I don’t see anything that would necessarily prevent it, other than logic and common sense (in fact, doing as you say might be detrimental to your combat effectiveness).
If you could, Why would anyone ever bother? You are only going to mess yourself up. And if the creature dies before you resolve the first attack’s damage, then you just wasted an attack for no reason. Or if the first attacks damage would’ve been enough to down the creature, same thing. There are easier ways to be ineffective in combat.
Check out my Disabled & Dragons Youtube Channel for 5e Monster and Player Tactics. Helping the Disabled Community and Players and DM’s (both new and experienced) get into D&D. Plus there is a talking Dragon named Quill.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPPmyTI0tZ6nM-bzY0IG3ww
I don't understand why this thread is still going... IC summed it up back on post #27
Shield Master says:
If/then conditional centered explicitly on the Attack action, and nothing else. Many people continue to disagree about whether this can be interrupted or not, but it does have a specific logical structure. The clause references the Attack action itself, in a future tense, as the requirement. This is something that has yet to occur, so it (begrudgingly) makes sense that you haven't fulfilled the requirement until you've completed taking the Attack action.
Two-Weapon Fighting says:
This is still technically an if/then conditional, but the structure and requirements are not analogous to Shield Master.
Having taken the Attack action itself is not the main requirement; making an attack with a light, one-handed melee weapon with the Attack action is.
The Attack action is being referenced in a progressive tense (not entirely sure whether it's past or present progressive) because it's something that either has occurred, or is occurring, at the time another event (the actual trigger) occurred/occurs--making an attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand.
Now if the Attack action itself isn't the real trigger, why include it at all? It's still a requirement; just not the triggering requirement. It's only possible for the trigger to occur when that action has occurred/is occurring. We all know there are ways to make melee attacks as an action (not bonus) that don't use the Attack action. SCAG cantrips are a prime example; you make one melee weapon attack with the action, but--even if the weapon would qualify--the attack did not occur as a result of the Attack action. It's a background requirement. Once a creature has made one (or more) attacks with a light melee weapon that they're holding in one hand (and holding another light melee weapon in their other hand), via the Attack action, they have fulfilled all of the applicable requirements to take their bonus action.
Two-Weapon Fighting basically follows the same structure as Great Weapon Master; you can take the BA immediately. GWM just doesn't care how you made the attack while TWF does.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.