So Dragonborn in the first UA were definitely underpowered, in this UA we get a much better Dragonborn but I'd be amiss to point out a potential interesting usage.
When you take the attack action on your turn, you can replace one of the attacks with Breath Weapon. The Light property, when using two weapons that have it, it allows you to make an additional attack as part of the Attack Action, the attack with your off-hand weapon does not get to add your modifier to the damage. It seems to me that you can, while using two light weapons, use the off-hand attack to Dragon Breath instead. This now makes Dragonborn Rangers, Rogues, Fighters or any other build that uses two light weapons have very interesting usage out of the new form of Breath Weapon.
They already have cleaned up the wording. Take a look at the new definition of light in the latest playtest packet. "When you take the Attack Action on your turn and attack with a Light weapon in one hand and have a Light weapon in the other hand, you can make one extra attack as part of the same Action. That extra attack must be made with the Light weapon in the other hand."
They already have cleaned up the wording. Take a look at the new definition of light in the latest playtest packet. "When you take the Attack Action on your turn and attack with a Light weapon in one hand and have a Light weapon in the other hand, you can make one extra attack as part of the same Action. That extra attack must be made with the Light weapon in the other hand."
kinda sounds like as long as you have two light weapons you can still use the breath attack and hit with the off-hand. but, at least it's not hitting with the main-hand weapon plus a "free" breath attack.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
"When you take the Attack Action on your turn and attack with a Light weapon in one hand and have a Light weapon in the other hand, you can make one extra attack as part of the same Action. That extra attack must be made with the Light weapon in the other hand."
To make it easier to break down, I bolded the parts that can be read as a single sentence. When you attack with a light weapons in one hand you can make one extra attack with the light weapon in the other hand.
I'm pretty sure this means you have to attack with one weapon to attack with the other weapon. I suppose you could really try to bend it and say the first attack doesn't have to be with the weapon, only holding it while you make the attack, but that's surely not the intent. Maybe they should make it extra clear by saying -
"When you take the Attack Action on your turn and attack using a Light weapon in one hand and have a Light weapon in the other hand, you can make one extra attack as part of the same Action. That extra attack must be made with the Light weapon in the other hand."
Just to point out, the part where you need to use the other weapon technically doesn't matter since the Breath Weapon itself isn't an attack, rather it replaces an attack, so the way I read it, it is still an attack and thus can be replaced.
"When you take the Attack Action on your turn, you can replace one of your attacks with an exhalation of magical energy in either a 15-foot cone or a 30-foot line that is 5 feet wide."
Ok, so we know you can't use the breath weapon in place of the first attack because the breath weapon is not at attack (it's a replacement) and therefore will not trigger the additional attack from the light weapon property. As for using a light weapon attack to trigger the additional attack then replacing it with the breath weapon, we have a contradiction because if you replace it, you are no longer making an attack with the Light weapon in the other hand--the breath weapon happens in lieu of that attack. Without that qualifying line on the light weapon property, I think it would have worked.
Ok, so we know you can't use the breath weapon in place of the first attack because the breath weapon is not at attack (it's a replacement) and therefore will not trigger the additional attack from the light weapon property. As for using a light weapon attack to trigger the additional attack then replacing it with the breath weapon, we have a contradiction because if you replace it, you are no longer making an attack with the Light weapon in the other hand--the breath weapon happens in lieu of that attack. Without that qualifying line on the light weapon property, I think it would have worked.
To be more precise, it says when you have a light weapon in both hands, you can make an extra attack. It then says when making this extra attack you must use the other hand, however breath weapon says you can substitute an attack, since it is substituting an attack, rather than making an attack, I do not believe that qualifying line actually repeals the additional attack.
RAI is probably that you can't do this but as I read it, strictly, I don't see that RAW actually does prevent this substitution since RAW only states what you do when you make that extra attack and has nothing to prohibit that extra attack actually being replaced by another action such as in the case of Dragon's Breath.
So Dragonborn in the first UA were definitely underpowered, in this UA we get a much better Dragonborn but I'd be amiss to point out a potential interesting usage.
When you take the attack action on your turn, you can replace one of the attacks with Breath Weapon. The Light property, when using two weapons that have it, it allows you to make an additional attack as part of the Attack Action, the attack with your off-hand weapon does not get to add your modifier to the damage. It seems to me that you can, while using two light weapons, use the off-hand attack to Dragon Breath instead. This now makes Dragonborn Rangers, Rogues, Fighters or any other build that uses two light weapons have very interesting usage out of the new form of Breath Weapon.
Huh. Nice catch. Guess they gotta clean up the wording, though it's not a biggie.
They already have cleaned up the wording. Take a look at the new definition of light in the latest playtest packet. "When you take the Attack Action on your turn and attack with a Light weapon in one hand and have a Light weapon in the other hand, you can make one extra attack as part of the same Action. That extra attack must be made with the Light weapon in the other hand."
kinda sounds like as long as you have two light weapons you can still use the breath attack and hit with the off-hand. but, at least it's not hitting with the main-hand weapon plus a "free" breath attack.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
"When you take the Attack Action on your turn and attack with a Light weapon in one hand and have a Light weapon in the other hand, you can make one extra attack as part of the same Action. That extra attack must be made with the Light weapon in the other hand."
To make it easier to break down, I bolded the parts that can be read as a single sentence. When you attack with a light weapons in one hand you can make one extra attack with the light weapon in the other hand.
I'm pretty sure this means you have to attack with one weapon to attack with the other weapon. I suppose you could really try to bend it and say the first attack doesn't have to be with the weapon, only holding it while you make the attack, but that's surely not the intent. Maybe they should make it extra clear by saying -
"When you take the Attack Action on your turn and attack using a Light weapon in one hand and have a Light weapon in the other hand, you can make one extra attack as part of the same Action. That extra attack must be made with the Light weapon in the other hand."
while i agree with you, Stegodorkus, it shouldn't have to be picked apart. change the first "and" into "to" and my argument is flushed. shrug.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
There you go, even better, good catch.
Just to point out, the part where you need to use the other weapon technically doesn't matter since the Breath Weapon itself isn't an attack, rather it replaces an attack, so the way I read it, it is still an attack and thus can be replaced.
"When you take the Attack Action on your turn, you can replace one of your attacks with an exhalation of magical energy in either a 15-foot cone or a 30-foot line that is 5 feet wide."
I get what you are saying but the two weapon rules using the words must be made with I think wold over ride that.
Ok, so we know you can't use the breath weapon in place of the first attack because the breath weapon is not at attack (it's a replacement) and therefore will not trigger the additional attack from the light weapon property. As for using a light weapon attack to trigger the additional attack then replacing it with the breath weapon, we have a contradiction because if you replace it, you are no longer making an attack with the Light weapon in the other hand--the breath weapon happens in lieu of that attack. Without that qualifying line on the light weapon property, I think it would have worked.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
The interaction works fine with Extra Attack. Two attacks are made with one light weapon each, and there's a breath weapon.
To be more precise, it says when you have a light weapon in both hands, you can make an extra attack. It then says when making this extra attack you must use the other hand, however breath weapon says you can substitute an attack, since it is substituting an attack, rather than making an attack, I do not believe that qualifying line actually repeals the additional attack.
RAI is probably that you can't do this but as I read it, strictly, I don't see that RAW actually does prevent this substitution since RAW only states what you do when you make that extra attack and has nothing to prohibit that extra attack actually being replaced by another action such as in the case of Dragon's Breath.
This would be the way it's intended to be used, in my opinion.