the rules for using manuvers states that "You can use only one maneuver per attack.", and i wonder if manuvers who creates an opportunity to make an attack are counted as being used in that attack, or in other words can i use another maneuver on the reaction attack granted by riposte (or the new "snipe" manuver from the UA)?
furthermore, can an attack that benefits from the feint manuver still be affected by other manuvers?
or in other words, is the rule "you can only use one manuver per attack" only meant to be applied to manuvers whom in some way change an otherwise normal attack like menacing attack, disarming strike and lunging attack or to all manuvers that affects attacks
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
When a creature misses you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction and expend one superiority die to make a melee weapon attack against the creature. If you hit, you add the superiority die to the attack’s damage roll.
Riposte is the maneuver, so no, you wouldn't be able to use another maneuver during that attack.
Feinting Attack
You can expend one superiority die and use a bonus action on your turn to feint, choosing one creature within 5 feet of you as your target. You have advantage on your next attack roll against that creature this turn. If that attack hits, add the superiority die to the attack’s damage roll.
You add the superiority die to the damage of the attack you gained advantage on, therefore the maneuver affects it. You wouldn't be able to use another one here either.
well then, i am not saying your interpretation of the rules are necessarily wrong, however it does present some strange issues, for instance
lets say we have an level 3 battle master fighter weilding an melee weapon, standing next to an opponent who is also using an melee weapon. The battle master starts his turn by using his bonus action to feint the opponent and then immedeatly moves 5ft away from his opponent, intentionally triggering an opportunity attack. Now, lets for the sake of argument say that the opponent misses the fighter with its opportunity attack.
This would, by all means, allow him to use an reaction to use the riposte manuver, and this reaction attack would of course benefit from feinting attack since between this theoretical fighter using an bonus action to use the feint manuver and him usinng an reaction to make an attack, he has made no other attacks, this is his first attack on this turn.
yes, riposte, snipe and feinting attack directly influence attacks, as do all the maneuvers provided in the battle master subclass, that is not why i asked, why i asked is becuase clearly, the intended purpose of this rule seems to be to prevent an fighter from hitting an opponent with each of the disarming strike, distracting strike, trip attack, menacing strike manuvers with an single attack so on and so fourth burning all their superiority dice on a single attack that deals a lot of damage akin to a paladin, not to prevent the playing from expressing themselves and using their maneuvers in creative ways.
Lets take an look at the wording in its entirety here:
"Maneuvers.You learn three maneuvers of your choice, which are detailed under “Maneuvers” below. Many maneuvers enhance an attack in some way. You can use only one maneuver per attack." notice how right before the sentence "you may only use one maneuver per attack" it mentions maneuvers that in some way directly enhance an attack, sort of implying that they are referring to such maneuvers, in that case feinting attack would of course still apply to this rule but notably riposte would not since well, the attack would never have been made if the fighter never choose to make the manuver, correct? the riposte manuver does indeed let you deal extra damage equal to you superiority dice but it is not improving an already existng attack, it is creating one,
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
The one maneuver per attack is still in play in this situation. As a DM I would rule that if you want to make the Riposte attack in that situation, it'd be a normal attack, and when you actually take your attack action you will gain the advantage you feinted for.
If I wanted to be cruel I'd say you lost the advantage because the moment the feint opened for your advantage was lost when you moved away.
Also, By adding a superiority die to the attack's damage roll, you're enchancing the attack. Just FYI.
While not the *exact* same situation, Jeremy Crawford has touched on this topic and doubled down on the intent of the maneuvers is to not have more than one maneuver associated with any attack.
If we want to get super technical, the Feinting Maneuver gives you advantage on an attack made the turn you use the maneuver. If you think about round actions stacking in a fashion similar to Magic the Gathering, by triggering an opponent's Opportunity attack, your turn is put on pause, while the opponent uses their reaction to attack. If they miss, triggering your reaction to Riposte, is you putting their turn on pause to make your attack. This action is not in the same turn as the initial Feint, therefore the effect is not in play.
Reactions
Certain special abilities, spells, and situations allow you to take a special action called a reaction. A reaction is an instant response to a trigger of some kind, which can occur on your turn or on someone else's. The opportunity attack, described later in this chapter, is the most common type of reaction.
When you take a reaction, you can't take another one until the start of your next turn. If the reaction interrupts another creature's turn, that creature can continue its turn right after the reaction.
Your turn
Bonus action-Feint maneuver
Move out of opponents reach
Opponent Reaction
Opponent attacks, misses
Your Reaction
Riposte attack, resolve as necessary
Your Reaction ends
Opponents Reaction Ends
Your turn continues
You move
Action - attack with advantage from Feint
Ultimately, This kind of question would depend on how lenient your DM is. I'm on the mindset that it's not possible.
i am 110% shure that when they say "If the reaction interrupts another creature's turn, that creature can continue its turn right after the reaction." they mean to say that the creatures turn never ended, the reaction happens on the players turn still, shurely what they intended with that line was to clarify that you can continue to act even after an creature has triggered an opportunity attack, your turn never ended, its just that you cannot quite act until we have resloved this persons reaction. With continue their turn they do not mean that the players turn was in effect interrupted, they just mean that the player can act as normal, as if nothing happened, buisness as usual
Also both riposte and the point at wich i can act are both described as right after the opponents reaction, meaning that by that same logic there is no favor towards ether riposte or the restarting of my turn happening first
"Also, By adding a superiority die to the attack's damage roll, you're enchancing the attack. Just FYI." well that depends on how you define the word enhance, i see it as to improve or alter something, to take something that already exists and making it better, yes it is better than most similar attacks but it is the base line for this reaction, there is no way for it to not have this bonus, for this particular attack/effect the extra superiority dice is completely standard, noting special or extraordinary about it
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
If you don't see adding a die of damage to your attack as enhancing the attack, then you've got a lot more research to do on the subject. By saying there's no way for this attack to not have this damage as it is baseline for the reaction is ignoring the fact that without the maneuver you wouldn't get the attack to begin with.
Battle maneuvers description AND Jeremy Crawford said an attack cannot benefit from more than one maneuver. Therefore a riposte attack cannot gain advantage from a feinting attack.
editing to correct things my phone messed up, thanks autocorrect.
And yes the rules state that an attack cannot benefit from multiple manuvers, but well what do you do in this situation, its ether not allowing the reaction to be made or ignoring the benefits of feinting attack, both of whom are just really interesting situations becuase they are like an little oversight in the rules, an place where there is no clear or obious solution and where the dungeon master is forced to intervene
Hello everyone! Thank you for your contributions and interpretations of the rules!
Just a reminder to please ensure that we keep discussions centered on this game we all love, and not on personal commentary, or evaluations of another user's intentions.
If you believe a post to be breaking our rules, please use the Report function and one of us moderators will come and take a look. Thanks all!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
the rules for using manuvers states that "You can use only one maneuver per attack.", and i wonder if manuvers who creates an opportunity to make an attack are counted as being used in that attack, or in other words can i use another maneuver on the reaction attack granted by riposte (or the new "snipe" manuver from the UA)?
furthermore, can an attack that benefits from the feint manuver still be affected by other manuvers?
or in other words, is the rule "you can only use one manuver per attack" only meant to be applied to manuvers whom in some way change an otherwise normal attack like menacing attack, disarming strike and lunging attack or to all manuvers that affects attacks
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
Riposte is the maneuver, so no, you wouldn't be able to use another maneuver during that attack.
You add the superiority die to the damage of the attack you gained advantage on, therefore the maneuver affects it. You wouldn't be able to use another one here either.
well then, i am not saying your interpretation of the rules are necessarily wrong, however it does present some strange issues, for instance
lets say we have an level 3 battle master fighter weilding an melee weapon, standing next to an opponent who is also using an melee weapon. The battle master starts his turn by using his bonus action to feint the opponent and then immedeatly moves 5ft away from his opponent, intentionally triggering an opportunity attack. Now, lets for the sake of argument say that the opponent misses the fighter with its opportunity attack.
This would, by all means, allow him to use an reaction to use the riposte manuver, and this reaction attack would of course benefit from feinting attack since between this theoretical fighter using an bonus action to use the feint manuver and him usinng an reaction to make an attack, he has made no other attacks, this is his first attack on this turn.
yes, riposte, snipe and feinting attack directly influence attacks, as do all the maneuvers provided in the battle master subclass, that is not why i asked, why i asked is becuase clearly, the intended purpose of this rule seems to be to prevent an fighter from hitting an opponent with each of the disarming strike, distracting strike, trip attack, menacing strike manuvers with an single attack so on and so fourth burning all their superiority dice on a single attack that deals a lot of damage akin to a paladin, not to prevent the playing from expressing themselves and using their maneuvers in creative ways.
Lets take an look at the wording in its entirety here:
"Maneuvers. You learn three maneuvers of your choice, which are detailed under “Maneuvers” below. Many maneuvers enhance an attack in some way. You can use only one maneuver per attack." notice how right before the sentence "you may only use one maneuver per attack" it mentions maneuvers that in some way directly enhance an attack, sort of implying that they are referring to such maneuvers, in that case feinting attack would of course still apply to this rule but notably riposte would not since well, the attack would never have been made if the fighter never choose to make the manuver, correct? the riposte manuver does indeed let you deal extra damage equal to you superiority dice but it is not improving an already existng attack, it is creating one,
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
The one maneuver per attack is still in play in this situation. As a DM I would rule that if you want to make the Riposte attack in that situation, it'd be a normal attack, and when you actually take your attack action you will gain the advantage you feinted for.
If I wanted to be cruel I'd say you lost the advantage because the moment the feint opened for your advantage was lost when you moved away.
Also, By adding a superiority die to the attack's damage roll, you're enchancing the attack. Just FYI.
While not the *exact* same situation, Jeremy Crawford has touched on this topic and doubled down on the intent of the maneuvers is to not have more than one maneuver associated with any attack.
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/09/25/fighter-1-maneuver/
If we want to get super technical, the Feinting Maneuver gives you advantage on an attack made the turn you use the maneuver. If you think about round actions stacking in a fashion similar to Magic the Gathering, by triggering an opponent's Opportunity attack, your turn is put on pause, while the opponent uses their reaction to attack. If they miss, triggering your reaction to Riposte, is you putting their turn on pause to make your attack. This action is not in the same turn as the initial Feint, therefore the effect is not in play.
Your turn
Ultimately, This kind of question would depend on how lenient your DM is. I'm on the mindset that it's not possible.
i am 110% shure that when they say "If the reaction interrupts another creature's turn, that creature can continue its turn right after the reaction." they mean to say that the creatures turn never ended, the reaction happens on the players turn still, shurely what they intended with that line was to clarify that you can continue to act even after an creature has triggered an opportunity attack, your turn never ended, its just that you cannot quite act until we have resloved this persons reaction. With continue their turn they do not mean that the players turn was in effect interrupted, they just mean that the player can act as normal, as if nothing happened, buisness as usual
Also both riposte and the point at wich i can act are both described as right after the opponents reaction, meaning that by that same logic there is no favor towards ether riposte or the restarting of my turn happening first
"Also, By adding a superiority die to the attack's damage roll, you're enchancing the attack. Just FYI." well that depends on how you define the word enhance, i see it as to improve or alter something, to take something that already exists and making it better, yes it is better than most similar attacks but it is the base line for this reaction, there is no way for it to not have this bonus, for this particular attack/effect the extra superiority dice is completely standard, noting special or extraordinary about it
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
[REDACTED]
If you don't see adding a die of damage to your attack as enhancing the attack, then you've got a lot more research to do on the subject. By saying there's no way for this attack to not have this damage as it is baseline for the reaction is ignoring the fact that without the maneuver you wouldn't get the attack to begin with.
Battle maneuvers description AND Jeremy Crawford said an attack cannot benefit from more than one maneuver. Therefore a riposte attack cannot gain advantage from a feinting attack.
editing to correct things my phone messed up, thanks autocorrect.
[REDACTED]
And yes the rules state that an attack cannot benefit from multiple manuvers, but well what do you do in this situation, its ether not allowing the reaction to be made or ignoring the benefits of feinting attack, both of whom are just really interesting situations becuase they are like an little oversight in the rules, an place where there is no clear or obious solution and where the dungeon master is forced to intervene
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
[REDACTED]
Ask your DM if they'd allow it. If they say sure, great. you get advantage on the reaction.
However, RAW and RAI, the answer is No.
So I’ll chime in.
the answer to the riposte benefitting from the front, is no.
however, you can throw an attack in, in between the hat benefits from the feint, then step back, and riposte.
you just need a fresh attack in between maneuvers is all.
a battlemaster with a Whip can still do quite a bit of damage.
Blank
Hello everyone! Thank you for your contributions and interpretations of the rules!
Just a reminder to please ensure that we keep discussions centered on this game we all love, and not on personal commentary, or evaluations of another user's intentions.
If you believe a post to be breaking our rules, please use the Report function and one of us moderators will come and take a look. Thanks all!