Noticed an interesting potential interplay between Charger feat and multi-target attacks, depending on how you interpret the rules:
Charger feat - "If you move at least 10 feet in a straight line immediately before hitting with an attack as part of the Attack Action on your turn, choose one of the following effects: gain a +1d8 bonus to the attack’s damage roll"
Dragonborn breath weapon - "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"...and so on
Would the Charger feat apply if you ran 10 feet and then did a breath weapon as part of the Attack Action? Could you get a +1d8 on the damage for everyone hit in a 15-foot cone (or 30-foot line)?
Obviously spells aren't affected because they use the magic action. I assume this combo wouldn't/shouldn't work, but it seems like it comes down to how you interpret the breath weapon "replacing" one of your attacks. You're still taking the Attack Action and doing an attack against an enemy, just not a weapon attack or unarmed strike (which Charger doesn't specify or require).
I would say no, since Dragonborn breath weapon does not say it is an attack, it simply replaces an attack, critically a Dragonborn's breath weapon does not even have an attack roll, it has a saving throwing instead.
First off, dragon breath replaces your attack. Second, charger requires you to hit with an attack, which means rolling a d20 to attack and hitting, which does not happen with AoE abilities and spells.
I'm also on the side of it shouldn't apply, but I'm just not sure if that's strictly true with the rules as written. I think the strongest argument is saying no based on what is meant strictly by an "attack". But I'm not aware of any strict definition of that. There is one for the Attack Action; "When you take the Attack Action, you can make one attack with a Weapon or an Unarmed Strike". But there's no strict definition for an attack itself (as in the individual attacks made as part of the action).
And the word "replaces" in breath weapon doesn't necessarily imply the breath weapon is not a type of attack. I can replace an apple on a table with a different apple. They're both apples.
Finally, nothing in Charge requires an attack roll. Abilities and effects that are specifically meant for attack rolls will say so;
Rogue, Sneak Attack - "you can deal extra damage to one creature you hit with an Attack Roll"
Fighting Style: Protection - "Immediately after a creature you can see makes an Attack Roll and hits a target"
Heavy Armour Master feat, Damage Reduction - "When you’re hit by an attack while you’re wearing Heavy Armor"
If just the word "hit" inherently meant attack rolls only, then spells and traits wouldn't need to differentiate between hits and hits with Attack Rolls. I would judge that the damage you can reduce with Heavy Armour Master would include any bludgeoning/piercing/slashing damage caused by a spell, even if it came from a failed saving throw.
I'm also on the side of it shouldn't apply, but I'm just not sure if that's strictly true with the rules as written. I think the strongest argument is saying no based on what is meant strictly by an "attack". But I'm not aware of any strict definition of that. There is one for the Attack Action; "When you take the Attack Action, you can make one attack with a Weapon or an Unarmed Strike". But there's no strict definition for an attack itself (as in the individual attacks made as part of the action).
And the word "replaces" in breath weapon doesn't necessarily imply the breath weapon is not a type of attack. I can replace an apple on a table with a different apple. They're both apples.
Since it's not covered in UA, I'd refer back to 5E which actually does say what an attack is
Making an Attack
Whether you’re striking with a melee weapon, firing a weapon at range, or making an attack roll as part of a spell, an attack has a simple structure.
Choose a target. Pick a target within your attack’s range: a creature, an object, or a location.
Determine modifiers. The DM determines whether the target has cover and whether you have advantage or disadvantage against the target. In addition, spells, special abilities, and other effects can apply penalties or bonuses to your attack roll.
Resolve the attack. You make the attack roll. On a hit, you roll damage, unless the particular attack has rules that specify otherwise. Some attacks cause special effects in addition to or instead of damage.
If there’s ever any question whether something you’re doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you’re making an attack roll, you’re making an attack.
Part 3, does in fact say an attack has an attack roll. Breath Weapon does not have an attack roll and so having to refer back to 5E, Breath Weapon is not an attack.
That's great. I did look for something explicitly stating what an attack is but never came across that. Glad to know there is something in the RAW that stops this weird interaction between Charger and these weird edge-cases. Thanks for your help.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Noticed an interesting potential interplay between Charger feat and multi-target attacks, depending on how you interpret the rules:
Charger feat - "If you move at least 10 feet in a straight line immediately before hitting with an attack as part of the Attack Action on your turn, choose one of the following effects: gain a +1d8 bonus to the attack’s damage roll"
Dragonborn breath weapon - "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"...and so on
Would the Charger feat apply if you ran 10 feet and then did a breath weapon as part of the Attack Action? Could you get a +1d8 on the damage for everyone hit in a 15-foot cone (or 30-foot line)?
Obviously spells aren't affected because they use the magic action. I assume this combo wouldn't/shouldn't work, but it seems like it comes down to how you interpret the breath weapon "replacing" one of your attacks. You're still taking the Attack Action and doing an attack against an enemy, just not a weapon attack or unarmed strike (which Charger doesn't specify or require).
I would say no, since Dragonborn breath weapon does not say it is an attack, it simply replaces an attack, critically a Dragonborn's breath weapon does not even have an attack roll, it has a saving throwing instead.
Breath weapon is not an attack. It replaces an attack. Charger won't apply.
First off, dragon breath replaces your attack. Second, charger requires you to hit with an attack, which means rolling a d20 to attack and hitting, which does not happen with AoE abilities and spells.
I'm also on the side of it shouldn't apply, but I'm just not sure if that's strictly true with the rules as written. I think the strongest argument is saying no based on what is meant strictly by an "attack". But I'm not aware of any strict definition of that. There is one for the Attack Action; "When you take the Attack Action, you can make one attack with a Weapon or an Unarmed Strike". But there's no strict definition for an attack itself (as in the individual attacks made as part of the action).
And the word "replaces" in breath weapon doesn't necessarily imply the breath weapon is not a type of attack. I can replace an apple on a table with a different apple. They're both apples.
Finally, nothing in Charge requires an attack roll. Abilities and effects that are specifically meant for attack rolls will say so;
Rogue, Sneak Attack - "you can deal extra damage to one creature you hit with an Attack Roll"
Fighting Style: Protection - "Immediately after a creature you can see makes an Attack Roll and hits a target"
Heavy Armour Master feat, Damage Reduction - "When you’re hit by an attack while you’re wearing Heavy Armor"
If just the word "hit" inherently meant attack rolls only, then spells and traits wouldn't need to differentiate between hits and hits with Attack Rolls. I would judge that the damage you can reduce with Heavy Armour Master would include any bludgeoning/piercing/slashing damage caused by a spell, even if it came from a failed saving throw.
Since it's not covered in UA, I'd refer back to 5E which actually does say what an attack is
Part 3, does in fact say an attack has an attack roll. Breath Weapon does not have an attack roll and so having to refer back to 5E, Breath Weapon is not an attack.
That's great. I did look for something explicitly stating what an attack is but never came across that. Glad to know there is something in the RAW that stops this weird interaction between Charger and these weird edge-cases. Thanks for your help.