Action into Bonus action

[Bladewing2013]

So lets set aside RAW here.
Can anyone provide a good solid explanation I can't use my action to do an effect that takes a bonus action?
For example, why can't my spell-caster can't cast Expeditious retreat with his action?
Or why my cleric can't cast healing words with his action?

[DivisibleByZero]

Because that's the way that the game was designed.
Even Mearls has stated that he'd completely remove bonus actions and lump them into cleaner and easier to understand regular action if he were designing 5e now and not 3-4 years ago. I believe the exact word he used to describe bonus actions was "hacky," if I'm not mistaken.

[tieren]

Personal favorite:

Had a DM rule that Moon druids wildshape as a bonus action "rather than as an action" meant they couldn't do it with their regular action (like the base class does).

[Tiadoppler]

A fluffy reason:

It's all down to muscle memory. For years, you've trained to be able to move and fight in combat, and still be able to quickly and efficiently perform little useful actions in the fraction of a second between the swing of a sword and a sprint to the next opponent. To try to use one of these deeply ingrained abilities by themselves would be confusing and distracting, and in the heat of battle, a momentary distraction can be lethal.

[LeonBH]

Bonus actions are a limited resource, and what you're saying will give you either 1 bonus action and 1 action, or 2 bonus actions (effectively). This frees up a lot of restrictions around scarcity of bonus actions, which is a major component of the action economy.

For example, a level 3 cleric can cast Spiritual Weapon and conjure a weapon, making it attack with their bonus action. However, because they can also transform bonus actions into actions, they can now make two attacks with their Spiritual Weapon per turn.

Take Bards as another example. They use their Bardic Inspiration with a bonus action, which means they cannot both perform a Healing Word and give out Bardic Inspiration in the same turn. If they were able to use their action to cast Healing Word, this combination becomes possible.

Wizards also benefit from this when they cast Flaming Sphere. It takes their bonus action to move the sphere, but being able to move it with an action means the sphere can move twice its normal distance in a round. Heat Metal falls in the same category, wherein you can force Constitution saves twice a round using both bonus actions and actions.

That's just some of the concerns you'll deal with for single-classed builds. For multiclassed builds, you will potentially encounter more min-max scenarios you may not have anticipated before.

[clash]

I would not break anything to let players use bonus actions as actions. Most bonus actions have a superior, equivalent action, and the oens that dont are fine as an action.

[LeonBH]

A fluffy reason:

It's all down to muscle memory. For years, you've trained to be able to move and fight in combat, and still be able to quickly and efficiently perform little useful actions in the fraction of a second between the swing of a sword and a sprint to the next opponent. To try to use one of these deeply ingrained abilities by themselves would be confusing and distracting, and in the heat of battle, a momentary distraction can be lethal.

This fluff doesn't hold up if you play a new adventurer who just learned how to cast Misty Step, or who just learned to use a Second Wind.

[Tiadoppler]

This fluff doesn't hold up

Eh. I tried.


No, the rule doesn't make a lot of sense, except as a balance issue. I was trying to answer OP's request for a non-RAW explanation. I have most experience with 4e, where you could turn a Standard into a Move and a Move into a Minor action.

As a game design issue, I think the point is to make turns more varied and allow players to do more different things on their turn. I've played in a game in which the players got only a single action each turn. What do you do each turn? Attack, because there are almost no other choices that are worth skipping your Attack for. End result: People standing still in a small room, shooting guns at each other.

[Provo]

Thematically it makes no sense. Mechanically, LeonBH did a great job of explaining the pitfalls.

The problem seems to revolve around spells and spell-like abilities (shadow monk's teleport). You could rule that bonus action spells or spell-like abilities can only trigger once per turn. (As in you could trigger two different effects but not the same effect twice).

Then I imagine that using an action as a bonus action would be hard to break.

[LeonBH]

Thematically it makes no sense. Mechanically, LeonBH did a great job of explaining the pitfalls.

The problem seems to revolve around spells and spell-like abilities (shadow monk's teleport). You could rule that bonus action spells or spell-like abilities can only trigger once per turn. (As in you could trigger two different effects but not the same effect twice).

Then I imagine that using an action as a bonus action would be hard to break.

But then you are adding a new limitation that also doesn't make sense except for balance. If you could use either your action or bonus action to trigger an effect, why can you use both to do it twice?

[Kane0]

It probably wouldn't be much of a problem as long as you don't allow the same bonus action to be used twice in the same turn (eg double Cunning Action).

[Provo]

But then you are adding a new limitation that also doesn't make sense except for balance. If you could use either your action or bonus action to trigger an effect, why can you use both to do it twice?

It would seem to me that bonus actions act concurrently with actions in the same sense that movement acts concurrently with action.

This is not RAW, but the book does not discuss the nature of bonus actions. It only describes the mechanics.

This ruling make sense in that it's sensible that you can do two different actions concurrently but not two of the same action concurrently. (I.E. you can't move a burning sphere left and right at the same time)

Granted adding a new limitation seems burdensome for a scenario that comes up so rarely.

[Level2intern]

I would allow it. Double cunning action? How is that a problem? Every action you can perform with cunning action you can also perform with a regular action.

Attack twice with spiritual weapon? What is the difference between a spiritual weapon and a cantrip damage? I don't think attacking twice is going to net much additional damage. The extra movement makes sense to me. I'm okay with the balance of sacrificing your action to be able to get more movement out of it. Is this really going to ruin anyone's game?

If someone finds a game breaking exploit that ruins the fun, then tell them no. Why stifle creativity for fear of some hypothetical corner case muchinkinism.

[Provo]

It would seem to me that bonus actions act concurrently with actions in the same sense that movement acts concurrently with action.
My reasoning here is this:
-Actions take the majority of the turn.
Minor actions too short to prevent an Action seem to be covered under "other actions"
-Many bonus actions clearly take a significant amount of time (dashing for instance)

Therefore bonus actions are more easily seen as multi-tasking rather than a follow-on task.

In two weapon fighting for instance your main hand and off hand are both fully active throughout the turn. They are not instead patiently waiting on each other.

[strangebloke]

It probably wouldn't be much of a problem as long as you don't allow the same bonus action to be used twice in the same turn (eg double Cunning Action).

Yeah this is my thought.

Like, say a sorcerer wanted to 'ready' a bonus action to cast misty step as a reaction whenever the enemy moved into his square. He can't do that right now by RAW at all, but with this ruling he could do that and still get his bonus action to, I don't know, quicken out a cantrip or something.

[Asmotherion]

So lets set aside RAW here.
Can anyone provide a good solid explanation I can't use my action to do an effect that takes a bonus action?
For example, why can't my spell-caster can't cast Expeditious retreat with his action?
Or why my cleric can't cast healing words with his action?

Personally, I allow a Bonus Action being used as an Action, but not the reverse. Practically, during the 6 seconds a turn lasts (the way I rule/interpret it):

-An action may last aproximatelly 4-5 seconds, until it resolves.
-A bonus action lasts aproximatelly 1-2 seconds until it resolves.
-Finally, a free action lasts less than a second.
-A regular move action resolves during the 6 seconds of the turn (during which you take your action and bonus action).

[Pex]

Bonus actions are a limited resource, and what you're saying will give you either 1 bonus action and 1 action, or 2 bonus actions (effectively). This frees up a lot of restrictions around scarcity of bonus actions, which is a major component of the action economy.

For example, a level 3 cleric can cast Spiritual Weapon and conjure a weapon, making it attack with their bonus action. However, because they can also transform bonus actions into actions, they can now make two attacks with their Spiritual Weapon per turn.

Take Bards as another example. They use their Bardic Inspiration with a bonus action, which means they cannot both perform a Healing Word and give out Bardic Inspiration in the same turn. If they were able to use their action to cast Healing Word, this combination becomes possible.

Wizards also benefit from this when they cast Flaming Sphere. It takes their bonus action to move the sphere, but being able to move it with an action means the sphere can move twice its normal distance in a round. Heat Metal falls in the same category, wherein you can force Constitution saves twice a round using both bonus actions and actions.

That's just some of the concerns you'll deal with for single-classed builds. For multiclassed builds, you will potentially encounter more min-max scenarios you may not have anticipated before.

Nitpick: Bards can already by the rules use Bardic Inspiration as a Bonus Action and then cast Cure Wounds as a standard action, so doing this to cast Healing Word would be suboptimal.

To avoid your general point, you could amend the house rule that a bonus action done as a standard action cannot also be used as a bonus action on that turn.

[LeonBH]

Nitpick: Bards can already by the rules use Bardic Inspiration as a Bonus Action and then cast Cure Wounds as a standard action, so doing this to cast Healing Word would be suboptimal.

To avoid your general point, you could amend the house rule that a bonus action done as a standard action cannot also be used as a bonus action on that turn.

Well, that's like saying taking Healing Word is suboptimal compared to Cure Wounds. It isn't, due to the range of Healing Word. If the Bard did not have enough movement to reach someone for a Cure Wounds, they wouldn't be able to cast the heal spell.

And like I said above, if you prevent duplication of the bonus action and action, that just means you're adding a new restriction that you can't really justify by fluff, except for reasons of balance. Which is just the same, in principle, as disallowing bonus actions from being used as actions.