Results 1 to 7 of 7
-
2017-10-03, 01:49 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2016
Attack action Vs. attacking? RAW/RAI interpretation
So the invisibility spell says it ends if the target "attacks or casts a spell".
Commanders strike for battlemaster lets you take the attack action, and give up an attack so have someone else use their reaction and attack.
So, if you can cast invisibility on yourself, have one attack(no extra) and also have that maneuver, would using the commanders strike while invisible end your invisibility? Or not.
I'd argue by RAW that you took the attack action, but didn't make an attack, that your invisibility would persist.Last edited by Arelai; 2017-10-03 at 01:50 PM.
-
2017-10-03, 01:52 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2015
Re: Attack action Vs. attacking? RAW/RAI interpretation
That maneuver is worded that way because Fighters get Extra Attack (and more beyond that), and this maneuver replaces but a single one of those.
In the case that the Fighter were 4th level or lower, lacking Extra Attack, this would not be considered an attack because no attack was rolled with a d20.If you quote me and ask me questions,
and I continue to not respond,
it's probably because I have
you on my Ignore list.
Congratulations.
-
2017-10-03, 01:59 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2016
- Location
- Houston
- Gender
Re: Attack action Vs. attacking? RAW/RAI interpretation
Extra attack says you 'can' make an additional attack. Not that you are forced to or have to. If you're interrogating somebody and punch them, a lvl20 fighter doesn't have to take 4 swings at them.
You're taking the attack action, but not making an attack (rolling a d20) so it should be fine.
However, keep in mind that commander's strike stipulates, "When you do so, choose a friendly creature
who can see or hear you." Don't try this under a Silence.
-
2017-10-03, 02:05 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2015
Re: Attack action Vs. attacking? RAW/RAI interpretation
Oh man, this has a chance to be the perfect thread:
The invisible Battlemaster Fighter uses Commander's Strike.
1. Does his use of the Attack action count as an attack and break Invisibility?
2. Is his position revealed to his enemies? What if he previously used the hide action? What if he subsequently uses the hide action, without moving?
3. What if he directed his companion to kill an innocent in order to save 10? Does that make him Evil?
-
2017-10-03, 02:08 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2014
Re: Attack action Vs. attacking? RAW/RAI interpretation
I agree with the others. If you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack. There's no attack roll for commander's strike, so it stands to reason that it is not an attack.
That said, I could see this turning into an argument at the table, so it may not be worth it.Last edited by Easy_Lee; 2017-10-03 at 02:08 PM.
-
2017-10-03, 10:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2014
Re: Attack action Vs. attacking? RAW/RAI interpretation
I'd say no. He specifically has to attack something. Commanders strike on its own doesnt do that even though it uses the attack action. Conversely a reaction attack (an attack made without using the attack action) however would break invisibilty.
2. Is his position revealed to his enemies? What if he previously used the hide action? What if he subsequently uses the hide action, without moving?
3. What if he directed his companion to kill an innocent in order to save 10? Does that make him Evil?
-
2017-10-04, 09:57 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2010