So the wording is a bit weird, its says on one attack. So it could mean, one an attack, or just one. If they meant one, it would be clearer if they used the normal wording "once per turn". Like usual. This has been reason for many arguements. Would just love to know if anyone has got somethign we could reference to clear that specific thing up with clearer wording.
So the wording is a bit weird, its says on one attack. So it could mean, one an attack, or just one. If they meant one, it would be clearer if they used the normal wording "once per turn". Like usual. This has been reason for many arguements. Would just love to know if anyone has got somethign we could reference to clear that specific thing up with clearer wording.
The actual wording is "on one Strength-based attack roll of your choice on your turn". That seems very clear to me.
I don't understand what you mean by "one an attack, or just one". It's on one attack per turn.
So the wording is a bit weird, its says on one attack. So it could mean, one an attack, or just one. If they meant one, it would be clearer if they used the normal wording "once per turn". Like usual. This has been reason for many arguements. Would just love to know if anyone has got somethign we could reference to clear that specific thing up with clearer wording.
The actual wording is "on one Strength-based attack roll of your choice on your turn". That seems very clear to me.
I don't understand what you mean by "one an attack, or just one". It's on one attack per turn. It says it right there.
I'm guessing Claymorefan4 is asking whether it's allowed for every attack roll or just one.
Well, the answers were given, but just to try it myself: It's a free choice to forgo one Strength-based attack roll of your choice on your turn.
Thanks, english isn't my first language, so i wasn't sure if it was a multiple "on one of your" as in, you choose for each, or as in only a single one, as i would have expected something with the usual "once per turn" wording. Thanks for the help all! o/
I agree. You must decide on your first attack if you will attack recklessly, but after that, you can choose any of the subsequent attacks for the brutal strike. It doesn’t even have to be an attack action attack. You could brutal strike on a bonus action attack, even if it is the third attack you make, as long as on the first attack you decided to reckless attack.
Agreed. Though I’m hard pressed to think of many times that would come up.
Legendary actions to move, though most legendary movement actions don't provoke opportunity attacks. Readied actions to move, though that's a pretty rare situation.
Consider the phrasing of Cleric Divine Strikes, Druid Wild Resurgence, Druid Primal Strike, Monk Stunning Strike, Rogue Sneak Attack, Warlock Eldritch Smite, and Warlock Lifedrinker. All 7 abilities use the specific phrasing at the start of the ability's description, "once per turn" or "once on each of your turns." Brutal Strike doesn't.
Now consider the phrasing of the Sundering Blow option for Brutal Strike, specifically the final sentence. "Before the start of your next turn, the next attack roll made by another creature against the target gains a +5 bonus to the roll. An attack roll can gain only one Sundering Blow bonus." This is a situation that would be completely impossible to ever arise UNLESS a Barbarian is able to Brutal Strike more than once in their turn. Even if multiple barbarians exist in the party, the first applies a sundering blow and then the second, in attempting to also apply a sundering blow to the same target, would already use up the first sundering blow bonus, making it completely impossible to even try to stack sundering blow bonuses except by the hands of a single barbarian doing multiple brutal strikes in a single turn against the same target before any other creature has had an opportunity to attack that target.
I can only conclude that the phrasing of Brutal Strike's "one Strength-based attack roll of your choice on your turn" is meant to be linked to "The chosen attack roll mustn't have Disadvantage" and "If the chosen attack roll hits," to clarify that A) you're not giving up advantage on all attacks during your reckless attack period which lasts all the way until the start of your next turn (though brutal strikes can still only be taken on your attacks that are during your own turn), and B) the potential benefits and additional restriction of a Brutal Strike only apply to a reckless attack in which you've chosen to forgo advantage, not some other later attack in your turn.
As the seven examples in other classes show, if Brutal Strike was meant to be usable only "once on each of your turns" then that is the exact phrasing that would have been used.
EDIT: I did used to think the same as most of yall clearly do in this thread until I read Sundering Blow. No matter which side of this argument is actually correct RAI, the ability could definitely be more clearly and consistently worded.
Now consider the phrasing of the Sundering Blow option for Brutal Strike, specifically the final sentence. "Before the start of your next turn, the next attack roll made by another creature against the target gains a +5 bonus to the roll. An attack roll can gain only one Sundering Blow bonus." This is a situation that would be completely impossible to ever arise UNLESS a Barbarian is able to Brutal Strike more than once in their turn.
At Level 17, you can choose two different Brutal Strike effects. This may just be reinforcing that you can't pick it twice. Finally, not being able to use it twice currently does not mean that it can't be used twice in the future. In any case, the wording is pretty clear.
If you use Reckless Attack, you can forgo any Advantageon one Strength-based attack roll of your choice on your turn. The chosen attack roll mustn’t have Disadvantage. If the chosen attack roll hits, the target takes an extra 1d10 damage of the same type dealt by the weapon or Unarmed Strike, and you can cause one Brutal Strike effect of your choice. You have the following effect options.
You can use Brutal Strike on one Strength-based attack roll and that's it.
I can only conclude that the phrasing of Brutal Strike's "one Strength-based attack roll of your choice on your turn" is meant to be linked to "The chosen attack roll mustn't have Disadvantage" and "If the chosen attack roll hits," to clarify that A) you're not giving up advantage on all attacks during your reckless attack period which lasts all the way until the start of your next turn (though brutal strikes can still only be taken on your attacks that are during your own turn), and B) the potential benefits and additional restriction of a Brutal Strike only apply to a reckless attack in which you've chosen to forgo advantage, not some other later attack in your turn.
It is linked. That doesn't change the fact that it is restricted to one attack on your turn. "An attack" could be debated. "One attack" is explicit.
EDIT: I did used to think the same as most of yall clearly do in this thread until I read Sundering Blow. No matter which side of this argument is actually correct RAI, the ability could definitely be more clearly and consistently worded.
Sundering Blow doesn't affect Brutal Strike. Brutal Strike only affects one attack roll on your turn.
So the wording is a bit weird, its says on one attack. So it could mean, one an attack, or just one. If they meant one, it would be clearer if they used the normal wording "once per turn". Like usual. This has been reason for many arguements. Would just love to know if anyone has got somethign we could reference to clear that specific thing up with clearer wording.
I don't understand what is unclear about it. Could you clarify where you need clarification?
It says you can attempt something on one attack on your turn. It's clear enough for me. What was the argument?
The actual wording is "on one Strength-based attack roll of your choice on your turn". That seems very clear to me.
I don't understand what you mean by "one an attack, or just one". It's on one attack per turn.
pronouns: he/she/they
The “your” I bet is the important part here, as that means you can’t use it on an OA.
I'm guessing Claymorefan4 is asking whether it's allowed for every attack roll or just one.
Well, the answers were given, but just to try it myself: It's a free choice to forgo one Strength-based attack roll of your choice on your turn.
PS. A free decision isn't a bad thing.
Thanks, english isn't my first language, so i wasn't sure if it was a multiple "on one of your" as in, you choose for each, or as in only a single one, as i would have expected something with the usual "once per turn" wording. Thanks for the help all! o/
You can use Brutal Strike on an Opportunity Attack that would be triggered on your turn.
Not only it's usable once but it must be your first attack roll on your turn per Reckless Attack
If you activate Reckless Attack, but you also have Extra Attacks (at level 5), could Brutal Strike not be used for the second attack roll?
I agree. You must decide on your first attack if you will attack recklessly, but after that, you can choose any of the subsequent attacks for the brutal strike. It doesn’t even have to be an attack action attack. You could brutal strike on a bonus action attack, even if it is the third attack you make, as long as on the first attack you decided to reckless attack.
I believe it can.
Agreed. Though I’m hard pressed to think of many times that would come up.
Legendary actions to move, though most legendary movement actions don't provoke opportunity attacks. Readied actions to move, though that's a pretty rare situation.
Consider the phrasing of Cleric Divine Strikes, Druid Wild Resurgence, Druid Primal Strike, Monk Stunning Strike, Rogue Sneak Attack, Warlock Eldritch Smite, and Warlock Lifedrinker. All 7 abilities use the specific phrasing at the start of the ability's description, "once per turn" or "once on each of your turns." Brutal Strike doesn't.
Now consider the phrasing of the Sundering Blow option for Brutal Strike, specifically the final sentence. "Before the start of your next turn, the next attack roll made by another creature against the target gains a +5 bonus to the roll. An attack roll can gain only one Sundering Blow bonus." This is a situation that would be completely impossible to ever arise UNLESS a Barbarian is able to Brutal Strike more than once in their turn. Even if multiple barbarians exist in the party, the first applies a sundering blow and then the second, in attempting to also apply a sundering blow to the same target, would already use up the first sundering blow bonus, making it completely impossible to even try to stack sundering blow bonuses except by the hands of a single barbarian doing multiple brutal strikes in a single turn against the same target before any other creature has had an opportunity to attack that target.
I can only conclude that the phrasing of Brutal Strike's "one Strength-based attack roll of your choice on your turn" is meant to be linked to "The chosen attack roll mustn't have Disadvantage" and "If the chosen attack roll hits," to clarify that A) you're not giving up advantage on all attacks during your reckless attack period which lasts all the way until the start of your next turn (though brutal strikes can still only be taken on your attacks that are during your own turn), and B) the potential benefits and additional restriction of a Brutal Strike only apply to a reckless attack in which you've chosen to forgo advantage, not some other later attack in your turn.
As the seven examples in other classes show, if Brutal Strike was meant to be usable only "once on each of your turns" then that is the exact phrasing that would have been used.
EDIT: I did used to think the same as most of yall clearly do in this thread until I read Sundering Blow. No matter which side of this argument is actually correct RAI, the ability could definitely be more clearly and consistently worded.
At Level 17, you can choose two different Brutal Strike effects. This may just be reinforcing that you can't pick it twice. Finally, not being able to use it twice currently does not mean that it can't be used twice in the future. In any case, the wording is pretty clear.
You can use Brutal Strike on one Strength-based attack roll and that's it.
It is linked. That doesn't change the fact that it is restricted to one attack on your turn. "An attack" could be debated. "One attack" is explicit.
Sundering Blow doesn't affect Brutal Strike. Brutal Strike only affects one attack roll on your turn.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.