Simple RAW 3

[Holcane]

Q 260: If you were to Scry someone and they do not move, can you see what is above them or is the field of vision restricted to where the sensor ends up?

[Arkhios]

Cutting Words is still an attack on a creature period!
It's specifically targeted and it bestows a singular harmful effect upon that target.

Before you even begin to argue about it, simply tell me how it doesn't qualify as an attack?

An attack requires that you make an attack roll. You don't make an attack roll with Cutting Words, so it's not an attack as the rules define attacks. Note that I'm referring to what rules say, not to what common sense would say.
While I agree that insulting your target would make sense as a verbal attack, the rules as written don't recognize such a thing.

Here's a quote from Player's Handbook, page 194, regarding attacks:

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.

[FinnS]

An attack requires that you make an attack roll. You don't make an attack roll with Cutting Words, so it's not an attack as the rules define attacks. Note that I'm referring to what rules say, not to what common sense would say.
While I agree that insulting your target would make sense as a verbal attack, the rules as written don't recognize such a thing.

Here's a quote from Player's Handbook, page 194, regarding attacks:

No, that quote does not say that an attack has to involve an attack roll.
It simply says that when determining if something is an attack that if you make an attack roll then it's definitely an attack.
There are attacks that don't require an actual attack roll, The Maneuver "Feinting Attack" for example. That is EXACTLY like Cutting Words as both ATTACKS are attempting to confuse and distract the creature into letting its' guard down and be more susceptible.

Cutting Words is either a verbal attack or a Charm. Take your pick but there is no third choice as it flat out says in the Cutting Words description that a creature that can't hear you or is immune to charm can't be affected.

When the exact wording of a Law is in dispute, the spirit of that Law can and should be used to clarify said Law.
The spirit of Sanctuary spell is to protect a creature from attack and negate their ability to take offensive actions in order to have that protection.

[Arkhios]

No, that quote does not say that an attack has to involve an attack roll.
It simply says that when determining if something is an attack that if you make an attack roll then it's definitely an attack.
There are attacks that don't require an actual attack roll, The Maneuver "Feinting Attack" for example. That is EXACTLY like Cutting Words as both ATTACKS are attempting to confuse and distract the creature into letting its' guard down and be more susceptible.

Cutting Words is either a verbal attack or a Charm. Take your pick but there is no third choice as it flat out says in the Cutting Words description that a creature that can't hear you or is immune to charm can't be affected.

When the exact wording of a Law is in dispute, the spirit of that Law can and should be used to clarify said Law.
The spirit of Sanctuary spell is to protect a creature from attack and negate their ability to take offensive actions in order to have that protection.

Apparently you don't have access to the book, or else you could have read it yourself. Here's the whole thing about making attacks, from Player's Handbook, pages 193-194:

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.

1. Choose a target. Pick a target within your attack's range: a creature, an object, or a location.
2. 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.
3. 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.

That's all there is to defining an attack. In contrary to your claim, the structure of using Cutting Words isn't same as the structure of making an attack. Yes, you choose a target, and yes, you determine modifiers, but that's all. Cutting Words does not involve an attack roll, thus it is not an attack. As such, Cutting Words does NOT break Sanctuary.

Also, even if Cutting Words was considered a Charm, it isn't same as casting a spell just because it's a charm effect.

Also, while Feinting Attack is similar to Cutting Words, neither of them breaks Sanctuary, because neither of them explicitly makes an attack roll. Feinting Attack is just a name for the ability. Name ≠ Function.

[qube]

Q:259
What happens when a death domain cleric 1/ sorcerer 3 twin casts a toll the dead cantrip?

Is that 4 targets?

A 259: you can't

Reaper (death cleric): "when the cleric casts a necro cantrip that normally targets only a single creature, the spell can instead target two creatures"

Twin spell: "When you Cast a Spell that Targets only one creature and doesn’t have a range of self,"

You can't apply twin spell to a necro cantrip boosted with Reaper. (or Reaper on a twinned spell, for that matter)

Q 260: If you were to Scry someone and they do not move, can you see what is above them or is the field of vision restricted to where the sensor ends up?

A 260: RAW doesn't really help. These are the direct relevant parts, of the scrying spell:

You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you
...
the spell creates an invisible sensor within 10 feet of the target. You can see and hear through the sensor as if it were there.

IMHO, (so not RAW, but an interpretation) I would think the sensor does allow sight in all directions. this is based upon another part of the scrying:

Instead of targeting a creature, you can choose a location you have seen before as the target of this spell. When you do, the sensor appears at that location and doesn't move.

When the sensor is inside the area - you'd be unable to spot whats behind it, and thus never scry the entire location. (perhaps, that's the intent - and if so, I'm wrong - but I don't think so)

[qube]

Cutting Words does not involve an attack roll, thus it is not an attack. As such, Cutting Words does NOT break Sanctuary.

Indeed:
(1) it is indeed not an attack.
(2) if cutting words was a spell, it would break it

any creature who targets the warded creature with an attack or a harmful spell must first make a Wisdom saving throw.
-- Sanctuary, on the protection it gives

If the warded creature makes an attack or casts a spell that affects an enemy creature, this spell ends.
-- Sanctuary, on when it breaks

(3) however, as it's a feature, not a spell, by strictly RAW, it doesn't break it

(4) A DM might reasonably decide however that it does break it though, as it's a technicality (ref 2/3).

[The Ship's dog]

Q 261
Since the Paladin's Rivine Smite ability states that you need to hit with a melee weapon attack rather than an attack with a melee weapon, and an unarmed strike can be used as a melee weapon attack in replacement for an attack with a melee weapon (since unarmed strikes don't count as weapons), can you divine smite using an unarmed strike?

[Erys]

Q 261
[C]an you divine smite using an unarmed strike?

A261: Yes.

"Unarmed strikes are melee weapon attacks." — Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 15, 2017.
Cite

[Dalebert]

Q 262 Any reason why you couldn't command your undead to obey all verbal orders from someone else?

[FinnS]

Indeed:
(1) it is indeed not an attack.
(2) if cutting words was a spell, it would break it

any creature who targets the warded creature with an attack or a harmful spell must first make a Wisdom saving throw.
-- Sanctuary, on the protection it gives

If the warded creature makes an attack or casts a spell that affects an enemy creature, this spell ends.
-- Sanctuary, on when it breaks

(3) however, as it's a feature, not a spell, by strictly RAW, it doesn't break it

(4) A DM might reasonably decide however that it does break it though, as it's a technicality (ref 2/3).

By this logic neither a Beholder's Eye Rays or a Dragon breathing are attacks either and wouldn't, by your definition here, break Sanctuary as they are "features", not spells and do not require an attack roll.
Yeah...oookkkk.

Again, it does NOT say that an attack has to have an Attack roll, it simply says that if an attack roll is involved it is definitely an attack.

Anything that targets a creature and causes a harmful effect is an attack, PERIOD!!!

That it was suggested that the maneuver Feinting Attack would not break Sanctuary just goes to show the amount of silliness going on here.
A feint is an attack, it's a fake attack sure but the whole point of a freakin feint is to make your opponent believe it's a real attack.

[Arkhios]

By this logic neither a Beholder's Eye Rays or a Dragon breathing are attacks either and wouldn't, by your definition here, break Sanctuary as they are "features", not spells and do not require an attack roll.
Yeah...oookkkk.

Again, it does NOT say that an attack has to have an Attack roll, it simply says that if an attack roll is involved it is definitely an attack.

Anything that targets a creature and causes a harmful effect is an attack, PERIOD!!!

That it was suggested that the maneuver Feinting Attack would not break Sanctuary just goes to show the amount of silliness going on here.
A feint is an attack, it's a fake attack sure but the whole point of a freakin feint is to make your opponent believe it's a real attack.

It may be RAI (Rules as Intended), but this thread is about RAW. Silly or not, that's how the Rules Are Written.

[qube]

By this logic neither a Beholder's Eye Rays or a Dragon breathing are attacks either and wouldn't, by your definition here, break Sanctuary as they are "features", not spells and do not require an attack roll.
Yeah...oookkkk.

Anything that targets a creature and causes a harmful effect is an attack, PERIOD!!!

Unless you got a book & pagenumber for that, I will humbly disagree with you. Even if you use the irrefutable Tripple Exclamation Marks argument

Just think about it ... if you are right, it would be nonsensical for Sactuary to specifically note

any creature who targets the warded creature with an attack or a harmful spell must first make a Wisdom saving throw.
-- Sanctuary, on the protection it gives

Q 262 Any reason why you couldn't command your undead to obey all verbal orders from someone else?

A 262 depends on how you make 'm, but I don't think so.

[FinnS]

Unless you got a book & pagenumber for that, I will humbly disagree with you. Even if you use the irrefutable Tripple Exclamation Marks argument

Just think about it ... if you are right, it would be nonsensical for Sactuary to specifically note

any creature who targets the warded creature with an attack or a harmful spell must first make a Wisdom saving throw.
-- Sanctuary, on the protection it gives

And if your definition of what defines what an Attack is is right then Dragon Breath and Beholder Eye Rays won't break Sanctuary either or Invisibility for that matter as it has the exact same end criteria.

CLEARLY, Dragon Breath and Beholder Eye Rays are considered Attacks despite being "features" that do not require attack rolls.

[qube]

FinnS, I'm not quite sure how you are confused by

Unless you got a book & pagenumber for that, I will humbly disagree with you.

RAW stands for "Rules As Written", not "Rules As FinnS Says They Are"

That means that doing something that is not specified as an attack or a harmful spell, does not break something that is only broken by an attack or a harmful spell.

And while, if you read my post, I would certainly agree that harmful abilities (such as a dragons breath weapon) should also fall under the protection of sanctuary, no matter how much I want something, it does not change what is written in the PHB/DMG/...

[FinnS]

FinnS, I'm not quite sure how you are confused by

Unless you got a book & pagenumber for that, I will humbly disagree with you.

RAW stands for "Rules As Written", not "Rules As FinnS Says They Are"

That means that doing something that is not specified as an attack or a harmful spell, does not break something that is only broken by an attack or a harmful spell.

And while, if you read my post, I would certainly agree that harmful abilities (such as a dragons breath weapon) should also fall under the protection of sanctuary, no matter how much I want something, it does not change what is written in the PHB/DMG/...

Except there is nothing that says an Attack MUST have an Attack Roll.
What it says is that when determining if something is an Attack that if it has an Attack roll it DEFINITELY is an Attack.
It does NOT say that it MUST have an Attack Roll to be an Attack, it just doesn't.
That is the flaw in your definition.

As I have pointed out many times now, there are Attacks that do not have Attack Rolls.

Just seriously tell me that Dragon Breath should not be considered an Attack, like...c'mon now.

[qube]

A261: Yes.

"Unarmed strikes are melee weapon attacks." — Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 15, 2017.
Cite

Appendum (to make things confusing): the Sade Advice Compendium, page 4, on sneak attack, notes

The Sneak Attack feature works with a weapon that has the finesse or ranged property. An unarmed strike isn’t a weapon, so it doesn’t qualify

Seeing as Divine smite notes "when you hit a creature with a melee weapon Attack," and not, for example "when you hit a creature with a melee weapon", unarmed strikes work.

(and to confuse things even more, as for the love of Sune, I have no clue what would be broken on allowing sneak attack to unarmed strikes, as DM, I allow it in my games)

[qube]

What it says is that when determining if something is an Attack that if it has an Attack roll it DEFINITELY is an Attack.
It does NOT say that it MUST have an Attack Roll to be an Attack, it just doesn't.
That is the flaw in your definition.

As I have pointed out many times now, there are Attacks that do not have Attack Rolls.

Sigh, no. Seriously, it is absolutely not a flaw. As specific overwrites generic, only the things that are mentioned to be an attack, are considered an attack.

So, while sure, while there could be other things, that are considered attacks - Unless you got a book & pagenumber for them, stating they are attacks, in RAW, they are not considered to be attacks.

Sorry, but that's how Rules As Written, opposite to Rules As Intended works

Edit: Or: by RAW, Cutting Words is not an attack because it does not involve an attack roll - it's not an attack because it's nowhere specified that it is an attack.

Just seriously tell me that Dragon Breath should not be considered an Attack, like...c'mon now.

Wait a second ... Dragon Breath wouldn't fall under sanctuary to begin with. sanctuary prevents you from being targetted; but RAW states that the target for area spells is not the people in it, but the point of origin. So, the condition

any creature who targets the warded creature with an attack or a harmful spell must first make a Wisdom saving throw.
-- Sanctuary, on the protection it gives

is not triggered. the warded creature wasn't targetted by the caster, he was just "accidently" too close to the thing that was targetted.

[Dalebert]

Guys, I respectfully request that you take this argument to its own thread and just post a link to that thread here. Once it becomes this contentious, it's no longer simple. I feel like it is cluttering up the RAW thread.

[Arkhios]

Guys, I respectfully request that you take this argument to its own thread and just post a link to that thread here. Once it becomes this contentious, it's no longer simple. I feel like it is cluttering up the RAW thread.

True, true. For myself it's crystal clear and simple. I've tried to be as clear and polite as possible, but obviously I failed in one or the other.

FWIW, I asked about this in Twitter from Crawford. Let's wait and see what he thinks, ok?

[FinnS]

Sigh, no. Seriously, it is absolutely not a flaw. As specific overwrites generic, only the things that are mentioned to be an attack, are considered an attack.

So, while sure, while there could be other things, that are considered attacks - Unless you got a book & pagenumber for them, stating they are attacks, in RAW, they are not considered to be attacks.

Sorry, but that's how Rules As Written, opposite to Rules As Intended works

Edit: Or: by RAW, Cutting Words is not an attack because it does not involve an attack roll - it's not an attack because it's nowhere specified that it is an attack.

Except it doesn't actually say that an Attack must require an attack roll, it only says that it is the most common criteria for what is considered an attack.

Wait a second ... Dragon Breath wouldn't fall under sanctuary to begin with. sanctuary prevents you from being targetted; but RAW states that the target for area spells is not the people in it, but the point of origin. So, the condition

any creature who targets the warded creature with an attack or a harmful spell must first make a Wisdom saving throw.
-- Sanctuary, on the protection it gives

is not triggered. the warded creature wasn't targetted by the caster, he was just "accidently" too close to the thing that was targetted.

You're a little confused here. You don't seem to be understanding that according to your definition of what constitutes an Attack, A Dragon with Sanctuary cast on it could fly around breathing on people without Sanctuary coming off because:
A) Dragon Breath is a "feature"
and
B) It doesn't require an attack roll

Guys, I respectfully request that you take this argument to its own thread and just post a link to that thread here. Once it becomes this contentious, it's no longer simple. I feel like it is cluttering up the RAW thread.

Fair enough.

[Dalebert]

I went ahead and made a thread. I respectfully request that folks continue the debate here:

What is technically considered an attack?

[The Ship's dog]

Q263
How does the spell Lightning Arrow and the magic item Javelin of Lightning ability interact? Would the line effect of the Javelin still be used? Also, does the extra 4d6 Lightning damage from the Javelin's ability get nullified by Lightning Arrow, even though it says that the target takes damage from the Javelin plus 4d6 Lightning damage?

Would any of this even work?

[Erys]

Q263
How does the spell Lightning Arrow and the magic item Javelin of Lightning ability interact? Would the line effect of the Javelin still be used? Also, does the extra 4d6 Lightning damage from the Javelin's ability get nullified by Lightning Arrow, even though it says that the target takes damage from the Javelin plus 4d6 Lightning damage?

Would any of this even work?

A263: No concrete RAW to my knowledge.

I would say either you use the spell, or use the javelins natural magic properties. Not both.

[Timy]

Q263 Does an elf get a full long rest by "trancing" 4h ?

[Erys]

Q264 Does an elf get a full long rest by "trancing" 4h ?

A264: No. The elf must still enjoy four more hours of 'light activity' to get the benefits of a Long Rest.

Cite

[LuccMa]

Q265

In which order are Uncanny Dodge and Spirit Shield resolved? Does Uncanny Dodge resolve first and afterwards the barbarian can decide if he wants to use Spirit Shield or is the flat reduction reduced before Uncanny Dodge resolves?

Spoiler: Uncanny Dodge

Show

Uncanny Dodge
Starting at 5th level, when an attacker that you can see
hits you with an attack, you can use your reaction to
halve the attack's damage against you.

Spoiler: Spirit Shield (Revised Subclasses)

Show

Spirit Shield

Beginning at 6th level, the guardian spirits that
aid you can provide supernatural protection for
your allies. If you are raging and a creature you
can see within 30 feet of you takes damage, you
can use your reaction to reduce that damage by
2d8.
When you reach certain levels in this class, you
can reduce the damage by more: by 3d8 at 10th
level and by 4d8 at 14th level.

Spoiler: Resistance & Reduction, phb 197

Show

Resistance and then vulnerability are applied after
all other modifiers to damage.

[Lombra]

Spoiler: Q265

Show

Q265

In which order are Uncanny Dodge and Spirit Shield resolved? Does Uncanny Dodge resolve first and afterwards the barbarian can decide if he wants to use Spirit Shield or is the flat reduction reduced before Uncanny Dodge resolves?

Spoiler: Uncanny Dodge

Show

Uncanny Dodge
Starting at 5th level, when an attacker that you can see
hits you with an attack, you can use your reaction to
halve the attack's damage against you.

Spoiler: Spirit Shield (Revised Subclasses)

Show

Spirit Shield

Beginning at 6th level, the guardian spirits that
aid you can provide supernatural protection for
your allies. If you are raging and a creature you
can see within 30 feet of you takes damage, you
can use your reaction to reduce that damage by
2d8.
When you reach certain levels in this class, you
can reduce the damage by more: by 3d8 at 10th
level and by 4d8 at 14th level.

Spoiler: Resistance & Reduction, phb 197

Show

Resistance and then vulnerability are applied after
all other modifiers to damage.

A 265

You only have one reaction, and both abilities require one, so as far as RAW you can' t activate both at the same time. If this question comes from an homebrewed extra reaction then this is not the place to ask it.

edit: one reaction for each round of combat, to clarify.

[Erys]

Q265

In which order are Uncanny Dodge and Spirit Shield resolved? Does Uncanny Dodge resolve first and afterwards the barbarian can decide if he wants to use Spirit Shield or is the flat reduction reduced before Uncanny Dodge resolves?

Spoiler: Uncanny Dodge

Show

Uncanny Dodge
Starting at 5th level, when an attacker that you can see
hits you with an attack, you can use your reaction to
halve the attack's damage against you.

Spoiler: Spirit Shield (Revised Subclasses)

Show

Spirit Shield

Beginning at 6th level, the guardian spirits that
aid you can provide supernatural protection for
your allies. If you are raging and a creature you
can see within 30 feet of you takes damage, you
can use your reaction to reduce that damage by
2d8.
When you reach certain levels in this class, you
can reduce the damage by more: by 3d8 at 10th
level and by 4d8 at 14th level.

Spoiler: Resistance & Reduction, phb 197

Show

Resistance and then vulnerability are applied after
all other modifiers to damage.

A265: I don't know if there is a RAW answer for this. I would default Uncanny Dodge then Spirit Shield; or go off their respective players initiatives to see which goes off first.

That said, remember, Uncanny Dodge only applies against Attacks.

[Maxilian]

A 265

You only have one reaction, and both abilities require one, so as far as RAW you can' t activate both at the same time. If this question comes from an homebrewed extra reaction then this is not the place to ask it.

edit: one reaction for each round of combat, to clarify.

Both abilities are from different players, the first one is when you are hit, the someone else takes damage while at 30 feet from you.

So he is basically asking, if i (the rogue) get hit by Tiamat's tail, and i use Uncanny Dodge and then the Barbarian use Spirit Shield on the rogue, how would it work? (Is better for the PC if the Spirit Shields apply first, but i will go with the idea that UD applies first, mainly because the one that is affected by the effect is the one using the ability)

[Arial Black]

Both abilities are from different players, the first one is when you are hit, the someone else takes damage while at 30 feet from you.

So he is basically asking, if i (the rogue) get hit by Tiamat's tail, and i use Uncanny Dodge and then the Barbarian use Spirit Shield on the rogue, how would it work? (Is better for the PC if the Spirit Shields apply first, but i will go with the idea that UD applies first, mainly because the one that is affected by the effect is the one using the ability)

Spirit Shield reduces the damage that the rogue takes. The damage that the rogue takes is half the source damage (if Uncanny Dodge is used). Spirit Shield has no effect to reduce the incoming damage, only to reduce the damage taken, which has already been halved in this case.

So, Uncanny Dodge first, Spirit Shield second. It could not work the other way round, because if the rogue takes full damage he already didn't use Uncanny Dodge to half it.