arcane trickster and haste

[Chugger]

Arcane Trickster at some point gets lvl 3 spells, meaning Haste is an option. But you only get one Sneak Attack on your "turn", so haste wouldn't make that much sense - except, is there a way to get a hasted attack outside the AT's turn?

Okay, suppose the Hasted AT does Ready for his main attack on his turn and then uses his second, hasted attack to get a Sneak Attack on his turn.

Ready is a reaction thing, right? If the condition of his Ready occurs, he uses his reaction to make his readied attack, which if an ally is near or he's somehow hidden to target or has adv is also a Sneak Attack (meaning 2 sneak attacks on the round) - or am I getting this wrong?

How would you word this Ready attack please?

Also the cunning action would be done in the turn, if I get this correctly - is there any nuance to consider for that? I'm guessing one could try hiding to set up the readied attack or something, but are there other issues please?

[Finieous]

Yeah, it works. You could Ready to attack when an opponent or companion attacks. Word it as a "counterattack" or "coordinated attack" if a narrative explanation is needed.

[thoroughlyS]

Yes, it is possible to sneak attack on your turn, and Ready to sneak attack off-turn as well. The most effective wording I can think of relies on a party member:

"I ready an action to attack the next creature the attacks."

This wording basically guarantees that you will get off a sneak attack, because you are attacking which ever creature your melee buddy happens to be within 5 feet of (assuming they aren't using a reach weapon). To make the most of this strategy, I recommend using ranged weapons, like a shortbow. If you [I]really want to be a melee character, keep a loaded hand crossbow as a back-up weapon and make sure to draw it on your turn.

[Chugger]

Thanks. Good advice.

Can I make my reaction shot (on my Ready action) w/ a hand xbow even if I don't have xbow expertise feat pls?

I've seen people say that you can take a second shot without the feat (is it reloading that's the issue?). If someone knows how this works I'd sure appreciate it. Thx in advance.

[Specter]

But remember, if you get dispelled or your concentration fails, you'll miss an entire turn, so you don't to cast it around casters.

[Chugger]

But remember, if you get dispelled or your concentration fails, you'll miss an entire turn, so you don't to cast it around casters.

Can you please explain the mechanic how this would happen?

I've cast Haste on turn one. They can dispell me or might not til they see what it is I cast on myself - for all they know I just did Blade Ward. Okay, turn two I Ready my action but go ahead and use my hasted portion to get off a Sneak Attack. Then, if the terms of my Readied action are met, I get to do another Sneak Attack (if its terms are met, i.e. an ally close enough or w/e), I get off the second Sneak Attack in my reaction phase.

I get that using magic around casters is dicey. I saw someone unload six charges of a magic missile wand into a caster. The DM waited til he'd rolled all the little D4s and added it all up - and he held up his hand and said SHIELD! And laughed. And this wasn't a high level caster. Anyway, if you can tell me the mechanic that does what you said, I'd appreciate it.

[Specter]

Can you please explain the mechanic how this would happen?

I've cast Haste on turn one. They can dispell me or might not til they see what it is I cast on myself - for all they know I just did Blade Ward. Okay, turn two I Ready my action but go ahead and use my hasted portion to get off a Sneak Attack. Then, if the terms of my Readied action are met, I get to do another Sneak Attack (if its terms are met, i.e. an ally close enough or w/e), I get off the second Sneak Attack in my reaction phase.

I get that using magic around casters is dicey. I saw someone unload six charges of a magic missile wand into a caster. The DM waited til he'd rolled all the little D4s and added it all up - and he held up his hand and said SHIELD! And laughed. And this wasn't a high level caster. Anyway, if you can tell me the mechanic that does what you said, I'd appreciate it.

From Haste:
"When the spell ends, the target can’t move or take actions until after its next turn, as a wave of lethargy sweeps over it."

So, ends = broken concentration, lasted longer than duration or got dispelled. Since any NPC with Dispel Magic can automatically cancel your spell, you should beware of that.

[MeeposFire]

Can you please explain the mechanic how this would happen?

I've cast Haste on turn one. They can dispell me or might not til they see what it is I cast on myself - for all they know I just did Blade Ward. Okay, turn two I Ready my action but go ahead and use my hasted portion to get off a Sneak Attack. Then, if the terms of my Readied action are met, I get to do another Sneak Attack (if its terms are met, i.e. an ally close enough or w/e), I get off the second Sneak Attack in my reaction phase.

I get that using magic around casters is dicey. I saw someone unload six charges of a magic missile wand into a caster. The DM waited til he'd rolled all the little D4s and added it all up - and he held up his hand and said SHIELD! And laughed. And this wasn't a high level caster. Anyway, if you can tell me the mechanic that does what you said, I'd appreciate it.

If you lose haste before the duration runs out you lose your next turn.

[Chugger]

From Haste:
"When the spell ends, the target can’t move or take actions until after its next turn, as a wave of lethargy sweeps over it."

So, ends = broken concentration, lasted longer than duration or got dispelled. Since any NPC with Dispel Magic can automatically cancel your spell, you should beware of that.

Oh right, forgot about that part. Thanks.

[lunaticfringe]

Dispel Magic, Line 2 I believe.

Any spell of 3rd level or lower on the target ends. Do not pass Go, Do not collect 200gp.

It is the bane of Arcane Tricksters and Eldritch Knights. Counterspell is pretty ****ing hilarious as well (if you DM).

[RSP]

Thanks. Good advice.

Can I make my reaction shot (on my Ready action) w/ a hand xbow even if I don't have xbow expertise feat pls?

I've seen people say that you can take a second shot without the feat (is it reloading that's the issue?). If someone knows how this works I'd sure appreciate it. Thx in advance.

It's the loading property:

"Loading: Because of the time required to load this weapon, you can fire only one piece of ammunition from it when you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it, regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make."

I'd probably say it's limited to 1 attack per round, regardless of how you get more attacks (like from a reaction).

Crossbow Expert gets around this.

[GoodmanDL]

Also note that if you ready an action to attack, you still have only one reaction to use to attack, or cast shield, or counterspell a dispel magic...

[Christian]

It's the loading property:

"Loading: Because of the time required to load this weapon, you can fire only one piece of ammunition from it when you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it, regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make."

I'd probably say it's limited to 1 attack per round, regardless of how you get more attacks (like from a reaction).

Crossbow Expert gets around this.

On the contrary. It's limited to one attack per action used, the feature is quite explicit. So there's no reason you couldn't fire the crossbow on your turn and then again with your reaction on a later turn. You just can't fire it more than once with your Attack action, even if you have multiple attacks.

[RSP]

On the contrary. It's limited to one attack per action used, the feature is quite explicit. So there's no reason you couldn't fire the crossbow on your turn and then again with your reaction on a later turn. You just can't fire it more than once with your Attack action, even if you have multiple attacks.

It's not explicit at all. You could certainly argue that's the intent, but it's not what the Ability states, unless it's been errata'd. You get one shot, "regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make."

[lperkins2]

... You get one shot, "regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make."

You left out the salient part, "when you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it,". This means if you take an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it, then a second action, bonus action, or reaction, to again fire it, you get two shots. This easily could be on the next round, or it could be via haste, or action surge, or that fighter thing that lets an ally make an attack as a reaction. If you ignore the first half, then it becomes 'you get one shot, ever', which would be absurd.

[RSP]

You left out the salient part, "when you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it,". This means if you take an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it, then a second action, bonus action, or reaction, to again fire it, you get two shots. This easily could be on the next round, or it could be via haste, or action surge, or that fighter thing that lets an ally make an attack as a reaction. If you ignore the first half, then it becomes 'you get one shot, ever', which would be absurd.

Again, argue intent and I won't argue against you, but the line says when use use any of those actions, you get one shot, regardless of what you would otherwise usually get.

[RSP]

You left out the salient part, "when you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it,". This means if you take an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it, then a second action, bonus action, or reaction, to again fire it, you get two shots. This easily could be on the next round, or it could be via haste, or action surge, or that fighter thing that lets an ally make an attack as a reaction. If you ignore the first half, then it becomes 'you get one shot, ever', which would be absurd.

You're also leaving out the one thing we know about why there's only one shot allowed "Because of the time required to load this weapon..." Taking an additional action doesn't change the amount of time that passes over the course of a round (6 seconds).

[Christian]

Again, argue intent and I won't argue against you, but the line says when use use any of those actions, you get one shot, regardless of what you would otherwise usually get.
I really don't understand what you're arguing here. The rule says, and again I'll quote: "you can fire only one piece of ammunition from it when you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it, regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make". So when you use your action to fire it with an Attack action, you fire one piece of ammunition & thus can only make one attack, even if you have the Extra Attack feature. Then, if something lets you use it with a bonus action, you can fire one piece of ammunition with that action; and if something lets you use it as a reaction, you can fire one piece of ammunition with your reaction. If you're a fighter using your Action Surge to get a second action during your turn, you can use that action and your regular action to take two Attack actions and fire one piece of ammunition with each.

This is not a RAI argument: that's exactly what the weapon property says. A RAI argument would be something like, let's see,
You're also leaving out the one thing we know about why there's only one shot allowed "Because of the time required to load this weapon..." Taking an additional action doesn't change the amount of time that passes over the course of a round (6 seconds)., where you extend the flavor description of the property in a way that makes real-world sense.

[lperkins2]

...

Exactly.

As for the idea that the loading time is the same, even when you gain an extraordinary ability to take additional actions, it doesn't really make sense. Consider a level 1 fighter taking the attack action, he takes 6 seconds to attack. Of course, at level 2, he suddenly can gain a burst of speed, letting him attack a second time, in the same 6 seconds. He can instead drink a potion, activate a magic device, or anything else that normally would take 6 seconds, all within the same original 6 seconds. And when he gains 2 levels in rogue, and his friend drops haste on him? Now he can attack 3 times, or attack, drink a potion, and zap a wand, all while running 10 miles an hour via bonus action dash, all in 6 seconds. It isn't that he has learned how to minimize the movement required to attack, thereby getting in a second attack within the 6 seconds, by moving at the same speed (TWF, Extra Attack, Multi Attack), it is that he is overall moving faster. The loading property basically says that economy-of-motion can't help enough to get off a second shot from features that otherwise would let you. It says nothing about magical effects, class abilities, or anything else, that let you take an extra action.

Oh, and remember our high level rogue friend? The one who gets to take two full turns the first round of combat? He not only gets an extra action in the round, he gets an extra bonus action, extra movement, and an extra reaction. If you want to say it takes 6 seconds to fire a crossbow without crossbow expert no matter what, I guess shooting a crossbow needs to make him skip his extra turn...

[Mellack]

I really don't understand what you're arguing here. The rule says, and again I'll quote: "you can fire only one piece of ammunition from it when you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it, regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make". So when you use your action to fire it with an Attack action, you fire one piece of ammunition & thus can only make one attack, even if you have the Extra Attack feature. Then, if something lets you use it with a bonus action, you can fire one piece of ammunition with that action; and if something lets you use it as a reaction, you can fire one piece of ammunition with your reaction. If you're a fighter using your Action Surge to get a second action during your turn, you can use that action and your regular action to take two Attack actions and fire one piece of ammunition with each.

This is not a RAI argument: that's exactly what the weapon property says. A RAI argument would be something like, let's see, , where you extend the flavor description of the property in a way that makes real-world sense.


There is another interpretation of that text. "you can fire only one piece of ammunition from it when you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it, regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make" That can also be read to say you get just one shot, no matter if you put all three actions into it. If you use your action to attack, and get a bonus action shot, and a reaction action shot, you can still only fire once. That also appears to be a valid reading of the text. Since the action types are listed together, it could be read as the restriction applying to them as a whole. Not necessarily how I would read it, but I can see it going that way. Not the clearest of language.

[Specter]

There is another interpretation of that text. "you can fire only one piece of ammunition from it when you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it, regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make" That can also be read to say you get just one shot, no matter if you put all three actions into it. If you use your action to attack, and get a bonus action shot, and a reaction action shot, you can still only fire once. That also appears to be a valid reading of the text. Since the action types are listed together, it could be read as the restriction applying to them as a whole. Not necessarily how I would read it, but I can see it going that way. Not the clearest of language.

Not really, bro. The actions are separate, and there's no'and' in there.

[RSP]

I really don't understand what you're arguing here. The rule says, and again I'll quote: "you can fire only one piece of ammunition from it when you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it, regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make". So when you use your action to fire it with an Attack action, you fire one piece of ammunition & thus can only make one attack, even if you have the Extra Attack feature. Then, if something lets you use it with a bonus action, you can fire one piece of ammunition with that action; and if something lets you use it as a reaction, you can fire one piece of ammunition with your reaction. If you're a fighter using your Action Surge to get a second action during your turn, you can use that action and your regular action to take two Attack actions and fire one piece of ammunition with each.

This is not a RAI argument: that's exactly what the weapon property says. A RAI argument would be something like, let's see, , where you extend the flavor description of the property in a way that makes real-world sense.

Does your Action let you make an attack? Does your bonus action let you make an attack? Does your reaction let you make an attack?

Lets assume "yes" with all three above action types. So that means you normally have 3 attacks.

The loading property, however, states when you use those actions, you can only fire the weapon once "regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make." So even though you can normally make 3 attacks using each of those actions, you can only fire the crossbow once, because that's what the feature says. (Side note: Legendary Actions aren't included on this list of effected action types, meaning you could possibly get more attacks using Legendary Actions).

Further, it explicitly states the reason is because of time, not action economy.

RAW, the only way around this is Crossbow Expert.

[RSP]

Not really, bro. The actions are separate, and there's no'and' in there.

Yet there's an "or," meaning whatever action type is used, you still get to fire the crossbow just once. You're assuming they meant to say "you can fire only one piece of ammunition from it, per action spent, when you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it."

Are you using your Action to fire the crossbow or your reaction to fire it? Doesn't matter because regardless of what you can normally do, you can only fire the crossbow once.

If they had put an "and" in the sentence instead of the "or" it would read
"Loading. Because of the time required to load this weapon, you can fire only one piece of ammunition from it when you use an action, bonus action, and reaction to fire it, regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make."

See how that means it's referring to all three Action types being used together? So if they used "and" instead, it would mean the Loading property only limits the number of attacks you make when using all three action types: Action, Bonus Action and Reaction.

So if they'd used "and" then you'd be fine using Extra Attack with a crossbow. You'd also be fine using Extra Attack and also attacking with your Reaction, just so long as you didn't also use your Bonus Action. It would be a ridiculous restriction if they had used "and."

[RSP]

A RAI argument would be something like, let's see, , where you extend the flavor description of the property in a way that makes real-world sense.

It's not flavor, it's literally telling you why the restriction exists.

[lunaticfringe]

BAM (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/07/20/loading-property/)!

Ugh you made me look up a Sage Advice, how dare you!

And/or are highly criticized by literal minded people who have trouble grasping Context. Don't feel too bad, you're not alone. =P

[RSP]

BAM (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/07/20/loading-property/)!

Ugh you made me look up a Sage Advice, how dare you!

And/or are highly criticized by literal minded people who have trouble grasping Context. Don't feel too bad, you're not alone. =P

Nice find and thanks for posting. However, it doesn't change the wording of the rule, or what the words "and" or "or" mean..

I do tend to go by JC's intent though.

[lunaticfringe]

Nice find and thanks for posting. However, it doesn't change the wording of the rule, or what the words "and" or "or" mean..

I do tend to go by JC's intent though.

Or can be used to connect alternative terms for the same thing/concept. Within the context of the rule Action, Bonus, and Reaction are all Actions You Can Potentially Make An Attack With.

It is confusing because you can't, as far as I know, utilize the Extra Attack Class Feature while using a bonus action or reaction to attack.

[Zalabim]

Nice find and thanks for posting. However, it doesn't change the wording of the rule, or what the words "and" or "or" mean..

I do tend to go by JC's intent though.

If it meant once per turn, it would say once per turn. Usually I see the argument that it doesn't prevent you from making your other attacks in other ways just as long as you only fire the crossbow once, not to open that can of worms either.

I think Rangers have both the cases of the limit applying to a reaction and the limit applying to a bonus action. If you can ready the Hunter's Volley action, you can still only fire one piece of ammunition, and the limit would stop Swift Quiver too.

[Findulidas]

Haste comes pretty late when you are 1/3 caster though, just be aware. Its also not illusion or enchantment so you have to spend one of the other choices to pick it. Probably comes by level 14 then. Many campaigns dont even get there. So essentially dont have this as an major idea for a character you make at level 1-3.

[Chugger]

My brain hurts.

I know I can take two shots in a round w/ a hand xbow (as a rogue) with the xbow exp feat - I have a hand free to load it - while it's not entirely clear from the rules it seems I take a shot with my main hand and quickly reload with my off-hand (the feat lets me ignore the loading property but I must have extra ammo and I must have a free hand) - then use a free action to pop the hand xbow into my offhand and shoot (which is stupid but it's how the rules read). If I don't have a free action to pop it back into my main hand, then I end the round with the hand xbow in my off hand. I start the next round shooting using my bonus action off hand shot, reload the hand xbow - and pop it into my main hand with a free action, then take my main action / main-hand shot - and reload. And rinse and repeat as long as the combat lasts.

I asked above if I can take one shot from my off hand without the xbow exp feat. Kind of like a TWF except it's a hand xbow. I know I can't reload it conveniently or easily without the feat, but if I just want the one shot, can I do it without the feat? I ask because the feat seems to say that it allows you to make a bonus action shot with a hand xbow in the off hand - which would imply that if it allows you to do this you _can't_ without the feat (can't take a bonus-action off-hand shot with a hand xbow after using main hand for a one-handed weapon attack without the xbow exp feat). This is so convoluted... agh.

Why don't they make a dadgum matrix of what is and is not allowable - a handy chart?

[lunaticfringe]

My brain hurts.

I know I can take two shots in a round w/ a hand xbow (as a rogue) with the xbow exp feat - I have a hand free to load it - while it's not entirely clear from the rules it seems I take a shot with my main hand and quickly reload with my off-hand (the feat lets me ignore the loading property but I must have extra ammo and I must have a free hand) - then use a free action to pop the hand xbow into my offhand and shoot (which is stupid but it's how the rules read). If I don't have a free action to pop it back into my main hand, then I end the round with the hand xbow in my off hand. I start the next round shooting using my bonus action off hand shot, reload the hand xbow - and pop it into my main hand with a free action, then take my main action / main-hand shot - and reload. And rinse and repeat as long as the combat lasts.

I asked above if I can take one shot from my off hand without the xbow exp feat. Kind of like a TWF except it's a hand xbow. I know I can't reload it conveniently or easily without the feat, but if I just want the one shot, can I do it without the feat? I ask because the feat seems to say that it allows you to make a bonus action shot with a hand xbow in the off hand - which would imply that if it allows you to do this you _can't_ without the feat (can't take a bonus-action off-hand shot with a hand xbow after using main hand for a one-handed weapon attack without the xbow exp feat). This is so convoluted... agh.

Why don't they make a dadgum matrix of what is and is not allowable - a handy chart?

Wow you are making that absurdly complicated.

When you use the Attack action and attack with a one- handed weapon, you can use a bonus action to attack with a loaded hand crossbow you are holding.

A Hand Xbow is a one handed weapon, why are you switching hands? Off hand isn't even a thing. Nor are free actions.

Draw Crossbow > Action Attack > Bonus Action Attack. Boom Done.

[Chugger]

Not absurd. Why does the feat (xbow exp) appear to grant the ability then?

phb the feat says "When you use the Attack action and attack with a one handed weapon, you can use a bonus action to attack with a hand crossbow you are holding." Why? If you already can do this, why does the feat appear to grant this power? Is this an accidental redundancy?

You can call my reaction to this other things but not "absurd" - it's hardly absurd - I have a reasonably strong reason to doubt, as stated above - therefore not at all absurd.

[lunaticfringe]

Not absurd. Why does the feat (xbow exp) appear to grant the ability then?

phb the feat says "When you use the Attack action and attack with a one handed weapon, you can use a bonus action to attack with a hand crossbow you are holding." Why? If you already can do this, why does the feat appear to grant this power? Is this an accidental redundancy?

You can call my reaction to this other things but not "absurd" - it's hardly absurd - I have a reasonably strong reason to doubt, as stated above - therefore not at all absurd.

Because if you are a Fighter with a Battleaxe you can bust a Mook in the Face with your Action and then pull your sidearm a shoot the other Mook savaging the Cleric with your Bonus Action without needing the Dual Wielder feat.

All Light weapons are one-handed but not all one-handed weapons are Light.

[Chugger]

Because if you are a Fighter with a Battleaxe you can bust a Mook in the Face with your Action and then pull your sidearm a shoot the other Mook savaging the Cleric with your Bonus Action without needing the Dual Wielder feat.

All Light weapons are one-handed but not all one-handed weapons are Light.

Thanks for trying, but this doesn't answer my question. Let's let someone else try - unless insight comes to you, and I'm hoping it will. Not at all trying to insult you. I realize you're trying to help me and thank you for it.

[lunaticfringe]

Geez ok.

Crossbow Expert is a broad feat that supports multiple play styles because there are 3 different Crossbows.

Heavy Crossbows that are Martial Heavy 2 handers
Light Crossbows that are Simple 2 handers
Hand that are Martial Light One Handers

"You ignore the loading quality of crossbows with which you are proficient"

This is for Crossbow users that have the Extra Attack Class Feature. A 12 level Fighter can make 3 attacks per Attack Action. Without the feat they can only make 1 Attack per Attack Action with a crossbow, with it they get all 3 Attacks with their Attack Action while using a crossbow. Fighters & Rangers wielding Heavy Crossbows probably benefit the most from this,

"Being within 5 feet of a hostile creature doesn't impose disadvantage on your ranged attack roll"

Super broad that basically benefits anyone stuck in melee with any ranged weapon.

When you use the Attack Action with a One-Handed weapon, you can use a bonus action to attack with a loaded hand crossbow.

This benefits 2 play styles Pure Ranged & Switch Hitters. A Rogue or Dex Fighter or Bard or Whatever can swing a Rapier around in melee with a loaded Hand Xbow then get a shot off as a bonus If they need to/feel like it. Normally to Two Weapon Fight both weapons need to have the Light Property so with out this feat (or Dual Wielder) they could not make bonus action attack while wielding a non light weapon like the Rapier. They cannot reload while holding the Rapier so generally the Rapier gets put away next turn if the fight switches from melee to ranged. Which takes us to Pure Ranged Hand crossbow.

Rogues & Archery Lore Bards love this because they don't get Extra Attack without multiclassing, but it can be utilized by anyone with proficiency with Hand Xbow. You just wield one Hand Crossbow. You attack using your Action, because your other hand isn't full the weapon is reloaded. You attacked with a One-Handed weapon so you fufilled the parameters of the 3rd bullet point so you are free to use a bonus action to make 1 additional attack with your hand crossbow.

If you are just wielding a hand crossbow there is no need to do weird juggly stuff. Knocking an arrow is not part of any action economy. Loading cancels Extra Attack, that's it. A Rogue with a hand xbow is basically just using a fancy shortbow, Crossbow Expert is desirable because of the Bonus Attack and no disadvantage if an enemy is within 5ft.

There is no god damn Free Action or Off Hand BS. Unlearn that nonsense, wrong edition bro.

[Christian]

I asked above if I can take one shot from my off hand without the xbow exp feat. Kind of like a TWF except it's a hand xbow. I know I can't reload it conveniently or easily without the feat, but if I just want the one shot, can I do it without the feat? I ask because the feat seems to say that it allows you to make a bonus action shot with a hand xbow in the off hand - which would imply that if it allows you to do this you _can't_ without the feat (can't take a bonus-action off-hand shot with a hand xbow after using main hand for a one-handed weapon attack without the xbow exp feat).
Correct, you cannot.

When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand.
Hand crossbows are not light melee weapons--they're light ranged weapons, and this rule therefore does not apply to them.

[Chugger]

Correct, you cannot.

Hand crossbows are not light melee weapons--they're light ranged weapons, and this rule therefore does not apply to them.

Ah, there it is. I knew it'd be simple...I just have rule-fatigue I think. Thanks!

[smcmike]

Not absurd. Why does the feat (xbow exp) appear to grant the ability then?

phb the feat says "When you use the Attack action and attack with a one handed weapon, you can use a bonus action to attack with a hand crossbow you are holding." Why? If you already can do this, why does the feat appear to grant this power? Is this an accidental redundancy?

You can call my reaction to this other things but not "absurd" - it's hardly absurd - I have a reasonably strong reason to doubt, as stated above - therefore not at all absurd.

I think the point was that, if you are using A hand crossbow and have the crossbow expert feat, there is no need to switch hands to take advantage of the bonus attack offered by crossbow expert.

[Chugger]

I think the point was that, if you are using A hand crossbow and have the crossbow expert feat, there is no need to switch hands to take advantage of the bonus attack offered by crossbow expert.

Extreme maybe but not "absurd" - I'm reacting to someone calling me "absurd" when I was not - because I have to be prepared for many types of DMs where I often play - and some DMs are hardcore and may interpret it as needing to be an offhand attack (I've seen crazier). So yes in some "better world sense" it's extreme but it is not based on my experience with the people I play with. Of course in a better world you'd just fire with main hand, reload, fire with main hand, reload. But dnd isn't a reality emulator - it's a ruleset. And again, some DMs I work with...you get it now, I hope.

[Chugger]

I'd seen this earlier but then forgot on where it was "Does Crossbow Expert let you fire a hand crossbow
and then fire it again as a bonus action?
It does! Take a
look at the feat’s third benefit. It says you can attack with a
hand crossbow as a bonus action when you use the Attack
action to attack with a one-handed weapon. A hand cross
-
bow is a one-handed weapon, so it can, indeed, be used for
both attacks, assuming you have a hand free to load the
hand crossbow between the two attacks."

This is from JC's Sage Advice. Now I just got to cement this ... or print it out.... :D

[smcmike]

Extreme maybe but not "absurd" - I'm reacting to someone calling me "absurd" when I was not - because I have to be prepared for many types of DMs where I often play - and some DMs are hardcore and may interpret it as needing to be an offhand attack (I've seen crazier). So yes in some "better world sense" it's extreme but it is not based on my experience with the people I play with. Of course in a better world you'd just fire with main hand, reload, fire with main hand, reload. But dnd isn't a reality emulator - it's a ruleset. And again, some DMs I work with...you get it now, I hope.

I can understand where this interpretation might come from, but the rule does not say anything about using a second hand.

[Chugger]

I can understand where this interpretation might come from, but the rule does not say anything about using a second hand.

It does but the _entire_ ruling may require consulting _several_ places in the phb. Please read the quote from Sage Advice (JC) I put up there and tell me there is nothing about having a free hand to reload. He was quite clear on that at least (the phb is a nightmare for me...or rather parts of it are - much is good and plain - but there are many poorly explained portions).

[smcmike]

It does but the _entire_ ruling may require consulting _several_ places in the phb. Please read the quote from Sage Advice (JC) I put up there and tell me there is nothing about having a free hand to reload. He was quite clear on that at least (the phb is a nightmare for me...or rather parts of it are - much is good and plain - but there are many poorly explained portions).

Oh, yes, you need a second hand to load a crossbow. I meant that nothing in the text of the feat indicates that you must have a weapon in both hands.

[Malifice]

As for the idea that the loading time is the same, even when you gain an extraordinary ability to take additional actions, it doesn't really make sense. Consider a level 1 fighter taking the attack action, he takes 6 seconds to attack. Of course, at level 2, he suddenly can gain a burst of speed, letting him attack a second time, in the same 6 seconds.

Presuming 1 'attack' = 1 swing.

Its not. A combat round is several swings, parries, feints, thrusts, pommel smashes, lunges etc. Met with the same from the opponent(s).

1 'attack' is simply represents the attack potential of the PC. It represents 1 (or more) of those slashes, lunges, thrusts etc possibly striking home wouding the opponent, glancing off his armor or requiring a last minute dodge/ parry from the opponent, or a lucky miss (in each event, causing the loss of HP).

You can also narrate a Fighter making '8 attack rolls' as simply making one 'big swing' with each attack roll representing a portion of the power of that one big swing. Conversely you can narrate '1 attack roll' as representing a series of lightning jabs, and the cumulative effect of those rapid strikes. You can narrate each 'attack roll' as representing but one of several swings, thrusts or lunges over the course of several seconds.

An attack roll does not represent one discrete attack. Combat is an abstraction remember.

[Chugger]

Presuming 1 'attack' = 1 swing.

Its not. A combat round is several swings, parries, feints, thrusts, pommel smashes, lunges etc. Met with the same from the opponent(s).

1 'attack' is simply represents the attack potential of the PC. It represents 1 (or more) of those slashes, lunges, thrusts etc possibly striking home wouding the opponent, glancing off his armor or requiring a last minute dodge/ parry from the opponent, or a lucky miss (in each event, causing the loss of HP).

You can also narrate a Fighter making '8 attack rolls' as simply making one 'big swing' with each attack roll representing a portion of the power of that one big swing. Conversely you can narrate '1 attack roll' as representing a series of lightning jabs, and the cumulative effect of those rapid strikes. You can narrate each 'attack roll' as representing but one of several swings, thrusts or lunges over the course of several seconds.

An attack roll does not represent one discrete attack. Combat is an abstraction remember.

I think you've mastered the art of talking past me! :smallwink:

[greenstone]

I think the point was that, if you are using A hand crossbow and have the crossbow expert feat, there is no need to switch hands to take advantage of the bonus attack offered by crossbow expert.

A better point is: the extra attack granted by the Crossbow Expert feat is not two-weapon fighting. None of the two-weapon fighting rules or features or styles apply.

For example, you do get your attribute bonus to the damage of the extra attack.