With the new Errata for scag, blade singers now have this wording attached to their extra attack feature;
“Moreover, you can cast one of your cantrips in place of one of those attacks.”
Making the entire thing
"Starting at 6th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn. Moreover, you can cast one of your cantrips in place of one of those attacks."
Haste has the wording
"it gains an additional action on each of its turns. That action can be used only to take the Attack (one weapon attack only), Dash, Disengage, Hide, or Use an Object action."
Leading me to believe that since you are taking an additional attack action, and you can replace one of your attacks in an attack action, that you can replace the attack, granted by the haste attack action, with a cantrip.
The main objection I've seen to this reading is that haste specifies " (one weapon attack only" but personally I don't see why that would prevent you from replacing that one weapon attack with a cantrip as the text is just preventing you from doing multiply attacks with the attack action.
I would love a Sage advice here, but I don't think you could replace attacks not mage with the Extra Attack Feature. the same thing would otherwise be true for opportunity attacks (without Warcaster).
You are correct that it does not say "any attack" to is restricted to attacks granted to you by the atack action. Haste grants you an attack action that can only give you one attack, I don't see why that should exclude you from replacing it with a cantrip, since the attack meets the requirement.
@Sutlo
The reason it doesn't work with Atack of oppertunity is that it requires an attack granted by the attack action. Haste grants you an attack action. Haste only says that you specfically can only gain one attack from the attack action. As I read it, there is no further restriction to it.
I don't see the feature requiring you to make an extra attack though? It says you can replace one of the attacks granted to you by the attack action with a cantrip. The Extra Attack feature is expanding your options when taking the attack action. Haste then caps it to one attack, but I see no reason to think the cantrip bit does not apply.
Come on indeed. That phrasing is there because it is following the previous sentence which is stating the normal conditions under which you are taking the attack action, which is why it is refering to several attacks. The cantrip section does not imply that it only triggers once you are able to successfully take both attacks granted by the attack action.
"Extra Attack" is simply the name of the feature as far as I'm aware. Normally that feature gives you two attacks instead of one when taking the attack action, those two attack function identically to the one attack normally gained by the attack action. In the case of the bladesinger they are also given the ability to replace one of the attacks given to them by the attack action with a cantrip. It does not say you are required to have more than one attack granted by the attack action for it to work.
Haste does not disable your extra attack feature, it just makes it so you cannot gain more than one attack from the attack action, the feature is still there.
1. That's an entirely subjectively reading. "One of those attacks" refers to the attacks granted by taking the attack action, which the the haste attack qualifies for. It does not refer to a special kind of attack called "Extra Attack" because that is not a thing in DND 5e.
2. "Extra attack" is not a type of attack in the rules. It is the name of a feature that grants you two instead of one attacks when taking then attack action. these attacks are the exact same mechanical attacks as the attack normally granted by the attack action. "“Moreover, you can cast one of your cantrips in place of one of those attacks." Says that you can replace one of the attacks granted to you by the attack action with a cantrip.
3. That's simply incorrect. The feature is not disabled, normally extra attack is simply cancelled out because of the cap on the number of attacks you can get. Had the phrasing been "This attack action cannot benefit from the extra attack feature" you would have been correct, but it only specifically limits the amount of attacks you can take with the attack action. It does not interact wiht the canptrip portion at all. Nor does it mention disabling the extra attack feature.
And as I've clarified to you before - the feature does not apply to all attacks, it applies to attacks granted to you when taking the attack action, which you do an additional time when under the effects of the haste spell. The cantrip portion does not rely on being able to actually take more than one attack, it relies on you taking the attack action.
You seem to think that the extra attack feature is something that is triggered by anything other than taking the attack action. That's not true. All you need to do is take the attack action and the Extra attack feature is triggered. You are then capped to only 1 attack, but the rest of the feature applies as always.
1. The first sentence says you gain two instead of one attack when taking the attack action, the second sentence says you can replace one of the attacks (from the attack action) with a cantrip. The name of the feature is entirely irrelevant since it is not referenced anywhere.
2. The second attack is cancelled out, the ability to replace an attack after taking the attack action is not, because feature tells you that you can replace one of the attacks after taking the attack actions with a cantrip. That still happens because the feature is triggered by taking the attack action.
3. Which is fine, I was explaining to you why the text in haste does nothing to prevent the ability to replace an attack with a cantrip when using the attack action. It only prevents you from taking more than one attack.
The feature says that when taking the attack action you gain two attacks instead of one, and that you can replace one of those attacks with a cantrip. Those Attacks refers to the attacks you can make when taking the attack action. That is quite clear.
4. I agree this is ridiculous, but I doubt we agree why...
"Starting at 6th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn. Moreover, you can cast one of your cantrips in place of one of those attacks"
It literally says one of "One of those attacks which you can make when taking the attack action can be replaced by an cantrip". How much clearer can it get?
5. The attacks you can make by taking the attack action.
6. Except it is happening. "Those Attacks" is refering to attacks from the attack action. It is the only thing it could possible refering to. The says it's "Attacks" is because you normall get two, the fact that something is making you only have one has no impact on that rest of the feature.
When you take the attack action, the full effect of the feature come into action. Part of that feature (The second attack) is then capped by the restrictions on haste,but the second part remain intact. Nowhere does it say that the ability to replace one of the attacks from the attack action relies on you being able to attack twice, and in no way does the haste spell prevent the feature from activating therefore you can replace your attack with a cantrip.
They apply to eachother in that they both tell you how you can use your attack action at level 6.
If they intended it to work as you seem think it does, all they had to do was write something akin to "When taking more than one attack with the attack action, you can replace one of them with a cantrip"
They did not, because that is not how the feature appears to work. All it says is that one attack can replaced by a cantrip when taking the attack action. It is that simple.
There's no need for personal attacks here. I also happen to find your attitude a tad frustrating but I dont think going after eachother in such a matter is very appropriate.
1. Yes the feature is called "Extra Attack"
2. The feature starts by saying that the attack action gives you two attacks instead of one.
3 The feature refers to "those attacks" you get from taking the attack action, which was previously mentioned in the feature.
I'm not extracting anything. I'm saying that "those attacks" clearly refers back to the attacks you can make when taking the attack action, which the is the only kind of attack the feature is ever talking about. The first part is merely telling you that you can take two instead of one.
1. Yes, the attacks from the attack action, which you normally get two of through extra attack feature.
2. What an odd thing to get hung up on...
It specifically refers to those attack you get when using the attack action, which are the only attacks ever mentioned in the extra attack feature. You are using the extra attack feature as soon as you take the attack action, because that is the only requirement described in the feature.
""any attack that you do when taking the attack action". Would be redundant as it's already talking about those attacks.
I'd once again appreciate it if you cooled it with the hostile attitude... There's absoutely no reason for it. We should be able to keep it nice and civil while disagreeing.
And this is where we strongly disagree. The ability reads like this.
Taking the attack action normally gives you an attack
Taking the attack action gives you two attacks instead of one
Taking the attack action also allows you to replace one of those by casting a cantrip
Therefore one attack from an attack action can be replaced by a cantrip
Getting to use the extra attack is never mentioned as a condition for anything, the only trigger in the feature is using the attack action.
"When activated, this machine has the ability to paint two houses instead one, moreover one of the these houses can be painted red"
Can said machine only paint a house red if it gets to paint two houses? Obviously not. All it requires to paint a house red is to be activated and paint one house.
" Moreover, you can cast one of your cantrips in place of one of those attacks.""
Now please provide the exact sentence that says that you can only replace an attack if you take two attacks, or that the ability to replace one of your attacks relies on the ability to take two attacks.
"The only thing that is said is that one of the extra attacks"
An "extra attack" is not a thing in the rules though, nor is it part of the what the "extra attack feature" does. This is where I think you are misunderstanding the feature a little bit. The first part of the feature gives you two attacks, which are identical to the one attack you could make before, not a special kind of "extra attack" which qualifies for anything special.The second part then explains that ontop of getting two attacks, you also get the ability replace one of those attacks with a cantrip.
Nowhere does it say that being prevented from taking advantage of the first part of the feature stops you from using the second part. You are simply adding that.
All I am doing is explaining to you what the feature is saying. Calling it "pure sophistry" is just a way of undermining my opinion. The only action mentioned is the standard attack action, and both the first and the second sentence depend on it. The reason the second sentence references the first is because it wants to clarify that only one of your two possible attacks can be replaced.
The feature is saying "You can attack twice instead of once, and you can replace one of the attacks with a cantrip" Nowhere does it say what you claim it does. It appears to me you are reading restrictions into the feature which do not actually exist.
I agree that RAI is a bit iffy, and I do hope we get a sage advice, because it me it's pretty clear that RAW qualifies the haste attack action, but I wouldn't wanna use it if Crawford doesn't believe it's RAI. My guess is that they didn't consider the haste spell when writing the additional part of the feature.
I've been surprised by RAI before though, so yea.. crossing my fingers that it'll happen
As for balance.. I do believe that upcasting spirit shroud is still a stronger option for a bladesinger(Assuming that you are two weapon fighting), however the haste option would be more flavorful for my character theme.
Moreover, you can cast one of your cantrips in place of one of those attacks.
This might be the only thing that matters, but we'll see. The above sentence, and therefore the feature, does not care in which order the attacks are made. If the wizard wanted their first attack to be with a cantrip, they could. And if the cantrip alone still defeats the only enemy within reach and they do not make a follow-up weapon attack, they still technically took the Attack action. What's more, the cantrip doesn't even need to be a damaging one. They could even cast blade ward as their attack action and nothing else. It would still be legal, as weird as it might look.
Remember, the Extra Attack feature allows for up to two attacks. It does not require two attacks. The possible combinations are as follows:
Choose a willing creature that you can see within range. Until the spell ends, the target's speed is doubled, it gains a +2 bonus to AC, it has advantage on Dexterity saving throws, and it gains an additional action on each of its turns. That action can be used only to take the Attack (one weapon attack only), Dash, Disengage, Hide, or Use an Object action.
Oh, well that settles it. The bladesinger can only ever make one weapon attack with that cantrip. Or can they? Are there any cantrips which also require making a weapon attack? As a matter of fact, there are two: booming blade and green-flame blade. In my opinion, so long as you limit the cantrip to one of those two choices, the bladesinger can use one of those two as their additional attack via haste.
Attack Action: make attacks in turn up to maximum of MaxAttacks.
Hasted Attack Action: make attacks in turn up to maximum of 1.
Extra Attack feature grants 2 things:
+1 MaxAttacks
When player takes Attack action and makes 2 attacks, they can replace 1 of the attacks with a Cantrip.
The Haste Spell allows an extra Attack action but places restriction of 1 attack, regardless of any amount you could otherwise do.
If player uses this Hasted Attack action, they can make the attack, but as this action only grants 1 attack for this action, this action doesn't qualify for the Extra Attack's secondary feature as the wording imparts the requirement of 2 attacks (hence "in place of one of those attacks" phrasing and not "in place of one attack made with your attack action").
-
You could therefore, while hasted, make 2 normal attacks and 1 cantrip, and still have a bonus action for a higher level spell if you can cast one using a bonus action.
The intent is very clearly to give you more flexibility with your turns, not let you cheese the game by circumventing the Haste restriction you can execute a multi-spam BB/GFB + attack. Especially if you MC into Sorc for yet another BB/GFB. Throw in some Paladin and maybe a Fighter dip and you're no one-turn-killing ancient dragons like they're insects.
-
Since this is the Wizard forum not the Rules forum I will add: regardless of RAW interpretation or any RAI sage advice presents - in my games you will not ever be allowed to use the hasted action to cast a cantrip because that shit is beyond broken. The options for abuse become insane. This is why they made it a restriction in the first place.
I woud not consider it "cheesing" at all as it'd simply be following the rules as written as I understand them.
I respect your opinion even if I don't agree that it that is actually RAW for all the reasons I've repeatedly tried to explain to Lyxen without much success. I do understand your concerns with regards to balance so It's fair enough that you wouldn't allow it.
RAW the only sane way to interpret Haste is by assuming it's the most specific game feature regarding its own Attack action, unless another rule specifically addresses the Haste spell. It's deliberately written to rule out enhancements like Extra Attack and even restricts other normal uses of the Attack action by narrowing the type of attack to weapon attacks. For example Sun Soul monks can't use it for Radiant Sun Bolt and a Lich can't use it to make an extra Paralyzing Touch attack.
RAI it's also clear the designers didn't want you casting spells or making more than a single weapon attack with it. They took special care to leave out the Cast A Spell action, ad hoc actions that could be used to activate magic items, and even ad hoc spell attacks.
The extra attack feature does not require the ability to take two attacks, it only requires the attack action, the haste restriction is added ontop of the attack action taken through the haste spell which simply makes it so you can only use one of the attacks from the extra attack feature.
RAW the only sane way to interpret Haste is by assuming it's the most specific game feature regarding its own Attack action, unless another rule specifically addresses the Haste spell. It's deliberately written to rule out enhancements like Extra Attack and even restricts other normal uses of the Attack action by narrowing the type of attack to weapon attacks. For example Sun Soul monks can't use it for Radiant Sun Bolt and a Lich can't use it to make an extra Paralyzing Touch attack.
RAI it's also clear the designers didn't want you casting spells or making more than a single weapon attack with it. They took special care to leave out the Cast A Spell action, ad hoc actions that could be used to activate magic items, and even ad hoc spell attacks.
I'll just use quote for once so you know I'm talking to you :P I was one the fence when you mentioned the radiant bolt, but then you brought up a good point. The spell does clarify a weapon attack, and not an attack, which is more specific than a regular attack action and it's fair to assume it's intended for a very particular use.
With the new Errata for scag, blade singers now have this wording attached to their extra attack feature;
“Moreover, you can cast one of your cantrips in place of one of those attacks.”
Making the entire thing
"Starting at 6th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn. Moreover, you can cast one of your cantrips in place of one of those attacks."
Haste has the wording
"it gains an additional action on each of its turns. That action can be used only to take the Attack (one weapon attack only), Dash, Disengage, Hide, or Use an Object action."
Leading me to believe that since you are taking an additional attack action, and you can replace one of your attacks in an attack action, that you can replace the attack, granted by the haste attack action, with a cantrip.
The main objection I've seen to this reading is that haste specifies " (one weapon attack only" but personally I don't see why that would prevent you from replacing that one weapon attack with a cantrip as the text is just preventing you from doing multiply attacks with the attack action.
I would love a Sage advice here, but I don't think you could replace attacks not mage with the Extra Attack Feature. the same thing would otherwise be true for opportunity attacks (without Warcaster).
@Lxyen
You are correct that it does not say "any attack" to is restricted to attacks granted to you by the atack action. Haste grants you an attack action that can only give you one attack, I don't see why that should exclude you from replacing it with a cantrip, since the attack meets the requirement.
@Sutlo
The reason it doesn't work with Atack of oppertunity is that it requires an attack granted by the attack action. Haste grants you an attack action. Haste only says that you specfically can only gain one attack from the attack action. As I read it, there is no further restriction to it.
I don't see the feature requiring you to make an extra attack though? It says you can replace one of the attacks granted to you by the attack action with a cantrip. The Extra Attack feature is expanding your options when taking the attack action. Haste then caps it to one attack, but I see no reason to think the cantrip bit does not apply.
Come on indeed. That phrasing is there because it is following the previous sentence which is stating the normal conditions under which you are taking the attack action, which is why it is refering to several attacks. The cantrip section does not imply that it only triggers once you are able to successfully take both attacks granted by the attack action.
"Extra Attack" is simply the name of the feature as far as I'm aware. Normally that feature gives you two attacks instead of one when taking the attack action, those two attack function identically to the one attack normally gained by the attack action. In the case of the bladesinger they are also given the ability to replace one of the attacks given to them by the attack action with a cantrip. It does not say you are required to have more than one attack granted by the attack action for it to work.
Haste does not disable your extra attack feature, it just makes it so you cannot gain more than one attack from the attack action, the feature is still there.
Can't figure out the multi quite feature *sigh*
1.
That's an entirely subjectively reading. "One of those attacks" refers to the attacks granted by taking the attack action, which the the haste attack qualifies for. It does not refer to a special kind of attack called "Extra Attack" because that is not a thing in DND 5e.
2.
"Extra attack" is not a type of attack in the rules. It is the name of a feature that grants you two instead of one attacks when taking then attack action. these attacks are the exact same mechanical attacks as the attack normally granted by the attack action. "“Moreover, you can cast one of your cantrips in place of one of those attacks." Says that you can replace one of the attacks granted to you by the attack action with a cantrip.
3.
That's simply incorrect. The feature is not disabled, normally extra attack is simply cancelled out because of the cap on the number of attacks you can get. Had the phrasing been "This attack action cannot benefit from the extra attack feature" you would have been correct, but it only specifically limits the amount of attacks you can take with the attack action. It does not interact wiht the canptrip portion at all. Nor does it mention disabling the extra attack feature.
And as I've clarified to you before - the feature does not apply to all attacks, it applies to attacks granted to you when taking the attack action, which you do an additional time when under the effects of the haste spell. The cantrip portion does not rely on being able to actually take more than one attack, it relies on you taking the attack action.
You seem to think that the extra attack feature is something that is triggered by anything other than taking the attack action. That's not true. All you need to do is take the attack action and the Extra attack feature is triggered. You are then capped to only 1 attack, but the rest of the feature applies as always.
1.
The first sentence says you gain two instead of one attack when taking the attack action, the second sentence says you can replace one of the attacks (from the attack action) with a cantrip. The name of the feature is entirely irrelevant since it is not referenced anywhere.
2.
The second attack is cancelled out, the ability to replace an attack after taking the attack action is not, because feature tells you that you can replace one of the attacks after taking the attack actions with a cantrip. That still happens because the feature is triggered by taking the attack action.
3.
Which is fine, I was explaining to you why the text in haste does nothing to prevent the ability to replace an attack with a cantrip when using the attack action. It only prevents you from taking more than one attack.
The feature says that when taking the attack action you gain two attacks instead of one, and that you can replace one of those attacks with a cantrip. Those Attacks refers to the attacks you can make when taking the attack action. That is quite clear.
4.
I agree this is ridiculous, but I doubt we agree why...
"Starting at 6th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn. Moreover, you can cast one of your cantrips in place of one of those attacks"
It literally says one of "One of those attacks which you can make when taking the attack action can be replaced by an cantrip". How much clearer can it get?
5.
The attacks you can make by taking the attack action.
6.
Except it is happening. "Those Attacks" is refering to attacks from the attack action. It is the only thing it could possible refering to. The says it's "Attacks" is because you normall get two, the fact that something is making you only have one has no impact on that rest of the feature.
When you take the attack action, the full effect of the feature come into action. Part of that feature (The second attack) is then capped by the restrictions on haste,but the second part remain intact. Nowhere does it say that the ability to replace one of the attacks from the attack action relies on you being able to attack twice, and in no way does the haste spell prevent the feature from activating therefore you can replace your attack with a cantrip.
They apply to eachother in that they both tell you how you can use your attack action at level 6.
If they intended it to work as you seem think it does, all they had to do was write something akin to "When taking more than one attack with the attack action, you can replace one of them with a cantrip"
They did not, because that is not how the feature appears to work. All it says is that one attack can replaced by a cantrip when taking the attack action. It is that simple.
There's no need for personal attacks here. I also happen to find your attitude a tad frustrating but I dont think going after eachother in such a matter is very appropriate.
1. Yes the feature is called "Extra Attack"
2. The feature starts by saying that the attack action gives you two attacks instead of one.
3 The feature refers to "those attacks" you get from taking the attack action, which was previously mentioned in the feature.
I'm not extracting anything. I'm saying that "those attacks" clearly refers back to the attacks you can make when taking the attack action, which the is the only kind of attack the feature is ever talking about. The first part is merely telling you that you can take two instead of one.
1. Yes, the attacks from the attack action, which you normally get two of through extra attack feature.
2. What an odd thing to get hung up on...
It specifically refers to those attack you get when using the attack action, which are the only attacks ever mentioned in the extra attack feature. You are using the extra attack feature as soon as you take the attack action, because that is the only requirement described in the feature.
""any attack that you do when taking the attack action". Would be redundant as it's already talking about those attacks.
I'd once again appreciate it if you cooled it with the hostile attitude... There's absoutely no reason for it. We should be able to keep it nice and civil while disagreeing.
And this is where we strongly disagree. The ability reads like this.
Getting to use the extra attack is never mentioned as a condition for anything, the only trigger in the feature is using the attack action.
"When activated, this machine has the ability to paint two houses instead one, moreover one of the these houses can be painted red"
Can said machine only paint a house red if it gets to paint two houses? Obviously not. All it requires to paint a house red is to be activated and paint one house.
" Moreover, you can cast one of your cantrips in place of one of those attacks.""
Now please provide the exact sentence that says that you can only replace an attack if you take two attacks, or that the ability to replace one of your attacks relies on the ability to take two attacks.
"The only thing that is said is that one of the extra attacks"
An "extra attack" is not a thing in the rules though, nor is it part of the what the "extra attack feature" does. This is where I think you are misunderstanding the feature a little bit. The first part of the feature gives you two attacks, which are identical to the one attack you could make before, not a special kind of "extra attack" which qualifies for anything special.The second part then explains that ontop of getting two attacks, you also get the ability replace one of those attacks with a cantrip.
Nowhere does it say that being prevented from taking advantage of the first part of the feature stops you from using the second part. You are simply adding that.
All I am doing is explaining to you what the feature is saying. Calling it "pure sophistry" is just a way of undermining my opinion. The only action mentioned is the standard attack action, and both the first and the second sentence depend on it. The reason the second sentence references the first is because it wants to clarify that only one of your two possible attacks can be replaced.
The feature is saying "You can attack twice instead of once, and you can replace one of the attacks with a cantrip" Nowhere does it say what you claim it does. It appears to me you are reading restrictions into the feature which do not actually exist.
Reminder, to take "one of those" doesn't require there be more than one.
I can take "one of those" attacks even if there is only one, cause I only need to take one.
Although RAI it's probably not intended, and probably not too balanced either.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
I agree that RAI is a bit iffy, and I do hope we get a sage advice, because it me it's pretty clear that RAW qualifies the haste attack action, but I wouldn't wanna use it if Crawford doesn't believe it's RAI. My guess is that they didn't consider the haste spell when writing the additional part of the feature.
I've been surprised by RAI before though, so yea.. crossing my fingers that it'll happen
As for balance.. I do believe that upcasting spirit shroud is still a stronger option for a bladesinger(Assuming that you are two weapon fighting), however the haste option would be more flavorful for my character theme.
This might be the only thing that matters, but we'll see. The above sentence, and therefore the feature, does not care in which order the attacks are made. If the wizard wanted their first attack to be with a cantrip, they could. And if the cantrip alone still defeats the only enemy within reach and they do not make a follow-up weapon attack, they still technically took the Attack action. What's more, the cantrip doesn't even need to be a damaging one. They could even cast blade ward as their attack action and nothing else. It would still be legal, as weird as it might look.
Remember, the Extra Attack feature allows for up to two attacks. It does not require two attacks. The possible combinations are as follows:
But there is also haste to consider.
Oh, well that settles it. The bladesinger can only ever make one weapon attack with that cantrip. Or can they? Are there any cantrips which also require making a weapon attack? As a matter of fact, there are two: booming blade and green-flame blade. In my opinion, so long as you limit the cantrip to one of those two choices, the bladesinger can use one of those two as their additional attack via haste.
My interpretation:
MaxAttacks = 1
Attack Action: make attacks in turn up to maximum of MaxAttacks.
Hasted Attack Action: make attacks in turn up to maximum of 1.
Extra Attack feature grants 2 things:
+1 MaxAttacks
When player takes Attack action and makes 2 attacks, they can replace 1 of the attacks with a Cantrip.
The Haste Spell allows an extra Attack action but places restriction of 1 attack, regardless of any amount you could otherwise do.
If player uses this Hasted Attack action, they can make the attack, but as this action only grants 1 attack for this action, this action doesn't qualify for the Extra Attack's secondary feature as the wording imparts the requirement of 2 attacks (hence "in place of one of those attacks" phrasing and not "in place of one attack made with your attack action").
-
You could therefore, while hasted, make 2 normal attacks and 1 cantrip, and still have a bonus action for a higher level spell if you can cast one using a bonus action.
The intent is very clearly to give you more flexibility with your turns, not let you cheese the game by circumventing the Haste restriction you can execute a multi-spam BB/GFB + attack. Especially if you MC into Sorc for yet another BB/GFB. Throw in some Paladin and maybe a Fighter dip and you're no one-turn-killing ancient dragons like they're insects.
-
Since this is the Wizard forum not the Rules forum I will add: regardless of RAW interpretation or any RAI sage advice presents - in my games you will not ever be allowed to use the hasted action to cast a cantrip because that shit is beyond broken. The options for abuse become insane. This is why they made it a restriction in the first place.
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
I woud not consider it "cheesing" at all as it'd simply be following the rules as written as I understand them.
I respect your opinion even if I don't agree that it that is actually RAW for all the reasons I've repeatedly tried to explain to Lyxen without much success. I do understand your concerns with regards to balance so It's fair enough that you wouldn't allow it.
RAW the only sane way to interpret Haste is by assuming it's the most specific game feature regarding its own Attack action, unless another rule specifically addresses the Haste spell. It's deliberately written to rule out enhancements like Extra Attack and even restricts other normal uses of the Attack action by narrowing the type of attack to weapon attacks. For example Sun Soul monks can't use it for Radiant Sun Bolt and a Lich can't use it to make an extra Paralyzing Touch attack.
RAI it's also clear the designers didn't want you casting spells or making more than a single weapon attack with it. They took special care to leave out the Cast A Spell action, ad hoc actions that could be used to activate magic items, and even ad hoc spell attacks.
The extra attack feature does not require the ability to take two attacks, it only requires the attack action, the haste restriction is added ontop of the attack action taken through the haste spell which simply makes it so you can only use one of the attacks from the extra attack feature.
I'll just use quote for once so you know I'm talking to you :P I was one the fence when you mentioned the radiant bolt, but then you brought up a good point. The spell does clarify a weapon attack, and not an attack, which is more specific than a regular attack action and it's fair to assume it's intended for a very particular use.