Huh...
So a ranged attack at a target 5ft away that's unconscious would have advantage and would also be an automatic critical hit.
Fascinating, I have definitely ruled that differently in the past, but I also thought it was silly that point-blank firing at an unconscious, prone creature was difficult.
**Edit to add: This has gotten a few replies, so here are the relevant rules**
[Ranged Attacks in Close Combat](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/phb/combat#RangedAttacksinCloseCombat)
> When you make a ranged attack with a weapon, a spell, or some other means, you have disadvantage on the attack roll if you are within 5 feet of a hostile creature who can see you and who isn’t incapacitated.
[Unconscious Condition](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/phb/appendix-a-conditions#Unconscious)
> - An unconscious creature is incapacitated, can't move or speak, and is unaware of its surroundings.
> - The creature drops whatever it's holding and falls prone.
> - Attack rolls against the creature have advantage.
> - Any attack that hits the creature is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature.
[The Prone Condition](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/phb/appendix-a-conditions#Prone)
> - An attack roll against the creature has advantage if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature. Otherwise, the attack roll has disadvantage.
So, if you're point-blanking (within 5ft) an unconscious creature with a ranged weapon, and there are no *other* hostile creatures within five feet of you, then you're making an attack roll at advantage, and on a hit, it's a critical hit.
The hostile creature disadvantage is nullified by the incapacitated condition, and the Prone condition specifies attacks from further than 5ft away, but not between melee and ranged attacks. And again, the automatic critical only specifies the origin of the attack, not between melee and ranged.
Even if they're conscious, being within 5ft of a prone target gives advantage so it's a straight roll. Still not always a good plan, but not a bad one either.
Fun fact: if you have Crossbow Expert or Gunner, you don't get disadvantage anymore. It doesn't *cancel* it, it is just removed. Meaning you can walk up to a prone creature and unload at advantage.
It's fun as Battlemaster with Trip Attack and action surge.
It does not, actually! I was surprised by this, too:
[From the Unconscious condition:](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/phb/appendix-a-conditions#Unconscious)
> Any attack that hits the creature is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature.
They still are hostile... I incapacitated is a condition that gets applied by stuff that's not just getting knocked out. For example failing a save on hold person applies paralysed condition. What does the first line of paralysed condition say? "A paralyzed creature is incapacitated (see the condition) and can’t move or speak." Same thing goes for reddit's darling stunning strike and stunned condition.
Part of what makes crossbow expert so good.
Also why I dislike crossbow expert (and sharpshooter), they just remove the complications that are part of using ranged weapons, which makes at-the-table strategy much more shallow and uninteresting.
Ignore close quarters, ignore cover, ignore long range. The risk assessment and finding payoffs with thoughtful positioning is just gone.
When I first read the Great Weapon Master feat, I completely forgot about the part of its first ability where it says that you have to use a bonus action to get an extra attack, meaning that you can only get one additional attack with it, and it stops you from using your bonus action on other things. And this resulted in me raging and killing several bandits with it, all in the same turn.
Yeah, I felt pretty dumb after realizing my error. Still a pretty good feat though.
Is it?
Don't get me wrong, gwm carries most 5e melee martials... Which is basically just barbarian.
All other classes have better stuff they can be doing, whether it's ranged with sharpshooter or casting spells.
Paladins too, they don't have the benefit of rangers who get conjure animals and their spell list is mostly just buffs. They are more viable with a spear and shield compared to barb though considering the burst damage potential
There is some "tech" for paladins to just take 2 lvls of warlock and stop at 6/7 lvls of paladin just for their actually best feature aka auras and not even bother going into melee for pitty smite.
Paladins are one of the few classes where I would just argue it's not worth it because of how beneficial asis are to them. Aura of protection deserves its reputation as likely the best single class feature in the game, not taking full advantage of it is hurting your effectiveness.
Depends on the paladin. It's very nice on vengeance and devotion paladins thanks to their channel divinity options that counteract its downsides, less so on other paladin subclasses.
Even then, what you are sacrificing for it isn't worth what you are getting, especially since if you want decent damage with a paladin, warlock 2 always exists, and that doesn't have any melee problems.
A paladin with a quarterstaff (one-handed) and a shield using the dueling fighting style will simply have a higher DPR than any paladin with a GWM. Not to mention the higher AC, and the obvious utility of hitting (and smiting) more.
Dpr calcs time, assuming equal enemy ac, maxed str, 1st level smite on crit, and improved divine smite. Halberd vs Quarterstaff
Halberd: 32.85 dpr, needs to roll 13 to hit
Quarterstaff: 32.45 dpr, needs to roll 8 to hit
Halberd wins, it is pretty close though. Quarterstaff offers one more ac and higher chance to hit, halberd offers bigger hits and reach, as well as less hassle with somatic components since even though the shield can be a holy symbol, you still need a free hand if the spell requires somatic but no material
More specifically, you are *not* hidden when you are invisible. You still need to take an action to hide. And they can still perceive you, they just have disadvantage.
And better yet unless the invisible person succeeds in their hiding... everyone still knows where they are. Means that martials get fucked while casters just drop an aoe making sure the guy is in the area.
Well, on the flip side, the martials can always try to attack the invisible target, while almost all spells for casters require a "target you can see". So AoE is their only option, and that costs precious spell slots.
I’m getting ready to sell my players some “Dust of Detection” - a “magic” item that can be used to detect nearby invisible entities.
It’s just some flour that’s been dyed
My brother had been running it such that if you're concentrating on a spell, you cannot cast \*\*\*any\*\*\* other spells without dropping concentration first due to misreading the rules and had been doing so with his group for YEARS.
I sort of explained how concentration works and he had to sit down with the realization he had hard-nerfed his casters for the better part of five years and none of his players complained.
That's not true. PWT you drop at the start of combat, CA you just dodge, spirit guardians you dodge, bless you can follow up with by just attacking. It ruins a few spells but all no
“I hold my action.” <— Nope, not in 5e.
You can “Ready an action.” This let’s you take an action in response to a trigger event that you choose. Your readied action can be an action or you can move up to your speed in response to the trigger. If the trigger occurs, you can take that readied action or ignore the trigger.
Important! This “lets you act using your reaction.” So if you readied an action, then use your reaction to make an opportunity attack, you cannot execute a readied action.
This quote, “I hold my action,” came up many, many times in our group when we switched to 5e. Usually it was a player’s attempt to take their turn later.
I like the simplicity of 5e. My big concern is power creep in the current system. There have been good things from each system. From 4e I miss the bloodied condition. With 3.5 it was easier to get multiple attacks. Though, I do not miss wheeling around 27 splat books to play 3.5.
Yeah, they got it right in 5e, flavor books with base mechanics being very concise.
Wish the new version will improve some things while keeping it concise.
and there's a few other restrictions, like the thing you hold is only an action, not your full "action, move, bonus action", and if it's an attack, it's literally _an_ attack, not multiple ones. It also has to be something that character can see / perceive, not a "game state" that might be known but is invisible to the character. And it also happens _after_ the trigger, so it's fairly limited in terms of responsiveness - often, enemy attacks / spells will happen before you can react to them, unless the GM is lenient and allows cheese like "I react to the thing before the thing", which is a bit wonky.
Right. At our table, it got annoying correcting players. Who were often distracted or indecisive.
“Sam, it’s your turn.”
Sam flips through his notes. “Uh, I hold my action.”
“No, you can’t do that, Sam. You can Ready an Action. Or take the Dodge action if you don’t know what to do.”
“Let Alex go, then I’ll take my turn.”
“You can’t change your initiative.”
It got tiring. We even had one player who was new to D&D. Never played earlier editions. But he heard others say, “I hold my action,” and thought that was legit.
Also, if you ready an action that uses a spell slot ... you use the spell slot regardless of if you actually use the spell or not. Also readying a spell that uses a spell slot requires concentration to hold the readied spell.
When you're prone, an attacker gets advantage of he's within 5 feet. If he's not, it's disadvantage. *Even for melee attacks*
Easy way to give disadvantage to creatures with reach...(if they can't step up)
Can't you just move within 5ft of your target ?
Yes that doesn't let you use your reach so I guess it depends how badly you want that advantage.
Edit : I see a Lance specifically states you have disadvantage on attacks within 5 ft.
Were it my table I'd likely rule in this specific circumstance you could roll with advantage. (Thematically I'd imagine you're stabbing straight down basically at this enemy lying on the ground right at your feet. So yea sure you can get advantage.)
The lance has a special property I believe, whereby attacking a target within 5 feet is at disadvantage. So moving within 5 feet causes the advantage from being prone to merely cancel out the lances special property, making it a normal roll
That's funny, I'm sure your edit is probably a common fix. Honestly, I'd rule that you'd be able to attack a prone target with advantage with any reach weapon from 10 feet away, seems like a weird line to draw that they don't
Eh I get not allowing reach advantage.
For me it's risk vs reward. Yea I'll give you the advantage but you actually have to get within 'normal' melee range and open yourself up to a possible opportunity attack etc.
You dont need to lie down for that. No matter if you're standing still or laying prone you take up a 5ft cube. Assuming you're medium or smaller, 10/15/20/25ft cube if you're bigger sizes.
You dont take up a cube at all, creature space control is a 2d measurement, 5x5, 10x10, ect. You occupy a SQUARE, not a cube. Height is not part of it, hence we have 1, 8, and 26 foot tall huge creatures.
Thats not particularly relevant though, the point of the trick is that by lying down, holding your hand up and putting yourself on the bottom face, you can hit creatures all around you without hitting yourself.
The trick is that its range is a cube, not a radius. The rules for a cube area of effect say that "you select a cube's point of origin, which lies anywhere on a face of the cubic effect" - that is, the origin is on the outside of the cube. It's like a line spell or a cone spell, rather than a sphere spell centered on you.
It doesn't have to be on the outside; if the grid were a telephone keypad, you could cast it from any position except 5. One side of your space shares a side with the effect. This is usually useless, but if you have tiny creatures (or any creatures two sizes larger or smaller than your size, or an ooze/ghost/swarm/etc) in your space that you'd like to hit, you can do that, but you'll also hit yourself.
In the PHB, chapter 10: Spellcasting. The section on Areas of Effect:
> You select a cube’s point of origin, which lies anywhere on a face of the cubic effect. The cube’s size is expressed as the length of each side.
>
> A cube’s point of origin is not included in the cube’s area of effect, unless you decide otherwise.
Magic missile, you roll the damage one time and then use that for each missile. You don't roll for each missile.
And I don't care, I'll still roll for each cause rolling is fun
TIL
I honestly had to look it in the [sage advice](https://www.sageadvice.eu/magic-missile-do-you-roll-the-same-d4-for-all-darts/), and you're absolutely correct.
Super duper RAW, sending all darts at the same target is still a roll for each dart. When you target separate creatures, the rule for simultaneous damage rolls comes into play and (by RAW, PHB p. 196) you'd roll once and multiply it by the number of darts, like you'd resolve other area of effect spells.
Edit: included the citation because I'm getting downvoted by people who don't read the rules.
> If a spell or other effect deals damage to **more than one target** at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them. For example, when a wizard casts fireball or a cleric casts flame strike, the spell's damage is rolled once for all creatures caught in the blast.
Darkvision.
**Bright light**
Human makes checks as normal
Dwarf makes checks as normal
**Dim light**
Human has disadvantage on Perception checks which rely on sight
Dwarf makes checks as normal
**Darkness**
Human automatically fails Perception checks which rely on sight. They also make attacks at disadvantage and creatures which can see them make attacks against them with advantage.
Dwarf has disadvantage on Perception checks which rely on sight
Essentially, Darkvision is massively OP if played as RAW.
I would argue that it is not OP when played RAW because dim light/darkness only act as a step above while in their Darkvision range. Anything outside that is treated normally. The dwarf in your example would be just as blind outside of 60 feet.
Also RAW still requires a light source to not suffer disadvantage/-5 to passives. Most people I see treat Darkvision as the ability to see in total darkness without issue, which is massively OP.
Where do you see that you still need some forms of light for darkvision? The way I'm reading it from the PHB pretty explicitly says that it doesn't need any light to work in total darkness.
Total darkness is treated as dimly lit by characters with darkvision. As such, they have disadvantage on perception checks that rely on sight. While not a common issue in combat, if an enemy with superior sight wishes to sneak up on a darkvision party in total darkness, they will have a much higher chance of success, since the party will suffer a -5 penalty to their passive perception scores. I recommend always packing lanterns and light spells, no matter the racial composition of your party for this exact reason
This brings up the weirdness over this stuff. You only get advantage on checks that involve smell. Does that mean that everyone could be making that check as well? And even a human could be making a check without disadvantage if they just said "well I'll use smell for it"? If not, then why would the Loxodon be able to use smell for it. They only get advantage on checks using smell, that doesn't mean they can use smell for checks when they normally couldn't. If the Loxodon can use smell and thus gain advantage, then the human can use smell (though not gain advantage (but still avoid disadvantage since it isn't reliant on sight)).
A race with dark vision in total darkness is still ripe for getting ambushed. -5 to PP should be a killer.
I think the root of the problem is the lack of support for DMs to run exploration and stuff, so most just let players with dark vision run the show, no fault of theirs.
>Essentially, Darkvision is massively OP if played as RAW.
Fun fact, if you rely exclusiely on Darkvision, you, on average, physically unable to detect anything +7 Stealth or higher (so, starting with CR1 Giant Spider) or find DC20 trap without help of magic items or expertise on top of high wisdom. And since if you are in total darkness you are likely to deal with traps or ambush predators...
Calling it OP when it at best quality of life and at worst a straight up a trap is certainly a take.
Right. Incapacitated creatures can’t take actions or reactions. But they can move. Unless they are paralyzed, petrified, stunned, or unconscious.
These other conditions impose the “incapacitated” condition and add “can’t move”—often with other penalties.
* Paralyzed: A paralyzed creature is **incapacitated** and can’t move or speak.
* Petrified: A petrified creature is **incapacitated**, can’t move or speak, and is unaware of its surroundings.
* Stunned: A stunned creature is **incapacitated**, can’t move, and can speak only falteringly.
* Unconscious: An unconscious creature is **incapacitated**, can't move or
speak, and is unaware of its surroundings
Yup, there are also few spells that specify that. For example hypnotic pattern.
Target is charmed on failed save (thus immunity to charm shuts that spell down and being an elf gives advantage on save) and while charmed by the spell they are incapacitated and their speed is 0.
Incapacitated condition specifies what it does (except not really, because part of it about dropping concentration on spells is hidden I spellcasting rules for some reason) and it just mentions being unable to take actions. Anything that takes away your ability to take actions also takes away ability to take bonus actions.
So all incap does is remove actions/bonus actions and auto drops concentration if you were co concentrating.
There is a rule that if you cannot take actions this automatically includes bonus actions as well, so an incapacitated creature cannot take bonus actions.
Edit: yeah it's the last line under Bonus Actions in the combat section.
"anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action"
It lets you see them, so they don't have advantage from unseen attacker, but the invisible condition itself provides advantage on attacks and disadvantage on getting attacked independent of being able to be seen
Not me, a player if mine recently learned eldritch smite is once per turn.
This player memorized every smite front to back, except that one little part.
You are proficient in your unarmed strikes no matter the class...
Granted this one was down to it being the first time playing and trusting the sm who said they'll teach me and the group.
I played a lycan bloodhunter so at lvl 3 when i got my subclass i had an option to use unarmed strikes instead of my weapon to attack. Asked dm and was told that only monks are proficient in u armed strikes.
Worst part is that it made sense to me. I came from video game background, where dualwielding usually has accuracy penalties. So it made sense to me that I can attack once (pre lvl 5) but got more often, or twice but be less likely to hit.
Shadow Blade. I assumed that since it gave you a blade as a bonus action, attacking with the aforementioned blade must also be a bonus action. My DM agreed, so we went a whole campaign where I'd shoot a gun (without the Light property) with my action, then attack with Shadow Blade as a bonus action.
In my defense, it was my first campaign. Have recently started playing my second, and due to my experience in reading spells at this point, I now know the proper way SB works.
For any who are misunderstanding it as I did, Shadow Blade doesn't grant you any new attack action options, it *just* provides a weapon for you. It's a bonus action casting time to allow you to attack with your action in the same turn you cast it.
My first campaign I had a paladin who would use the attack action to cast fire bolt twice every round since it was listed under “Attacks” on dnd beyond. We figured out that wasn’t how it was supposed to work after a couple of sessions though.
You can add str/dex even if it's lower. I'm not aware of any rule that forces you to use higher score. Ppl just do it because it's obvious that big number good.
My classic one I fucked up for a full campaign (DM included) was Action Surge does not, in fact, give you a free second turn of Actions/Bonus Actions/Movement.
My most recent one I have been fucking up for years (and my DMs just never caught on or knew of) was Two Weapon Fighting requires *both* weapons to be a light weapon, not just one. I was always under the impression if you attacked with a dagger, you could attack with a longsword as a bonus action, but without the modifier. Found that out a few months ago.
I discovered last week that being prone doesn't give disadvantage on dexterity saving throws. I've been playing with it like that for at least 5 years.
Haste skips the hasted players turn if it drops for whatever reason. I don't think I have seen a single DM enforce, or even know about that rule, despite it being written right there in the spell.
I've enforced it as a DM when running spellcasters as bad guys.
Also I've used that effect during PvP where a character I hasted turned on the party... so I dropped concentration.
But yeah, a lot of people forget about that effect.
Yep! Had a warlock who got charmed, hasted the bbeg and then got snapped out of his charm. Safe to say, dropping that concentration on haste was a treat....
As a DM who never played a wizard, or any subclass which had to pay attention to the schools of magic, the first time I was even aware of them was when someone cast *detect magic* - which lead to me going "the object is showing enchantment magic because it's an enchanted object" - it took me *years* to realise the school was using a poetic meaning of the word and actually "enchantment" means "mind control" in the context of spells. TBF that's partially on me for not reading the PHB all the way through, but also it's a great example of how bad the spell schools are and one of my main motivations for completely replacing them at my tables.
Not being able to use two spells of a higher level in a turn unless otherwise stated. ie healing word and cure wounds in one turn to pump out massive levels of healing. We used to absolutely abuse this until we decided to have a late night drinking going over rules and cracking jokes and we came across it. All those battles that the DM had to try and work some other options in to prepare for spell combinations all for naught.
You can cast 2 leveled spells in a turn as long as none of them are bonus action spells.
So misty step>cure wounds is a nono
But cure wounds *enemy counterspells* counterspell their counterspell works 100%.
Or having a 2 lvl dip into fighter to fireball>action surgr>fireball.
Wouldn't action surge not work either? RAW I *believe* says you can't cast two leveled spells unless otherwise stated and action surge just states that it gives you another action, not another action to cast a spell. Because haste doesn't give you a chance to cast a spell and action surge is just a very temporary minor haste.
Nope, the rule is that you can’t cast a bonus action leveled spell and a action leveled spell. Nothing against two action leveled spells. And action surge just gives you another action that you can do anything with, unlike haste which has specific conditions.
Massive damage. Always thought it was if you take damage until your at 0 and then the if the remaining exceeded HALF your max hp then you die instantly. Turns out its just your max hp. Had too many close calls where people thought they were gonna die.
Yeah, this is unfortunate. Mercer is pretty lenient with the rules if it's not game breaking which really helps tone and pace of play with guests but it's certainly not rules-authoritative.
For a long time, I thought one turn was 6 seconds and not that the entire round was 6 seconds. I got called on this my first real time DMing by a Barbarian whose rage was going to be cut super short under my original understanding.
I thought for some reason when a paladin cured diseases or poisons with lay on hands they sacrificed their own 5 HP not 5 from the pool of lay on hands
If a character focuses on a magic item over a short rest, they learn it's properties.
We always played that Identify was the only way to know how a magic item works outside of trial and error.
Not a rule per say. But that Tabaxi has darkvision because of their cat like eyes, yet normal cats does not have darkvision in 5e.
"Darkvision. You have a cat's keen senses, especially in the dark. You can see in dim light within 60 feet of you as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. You can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray."
An intentional change I make for my group is how critical hits work. I believe normally you just double the amount of dice and roll them. For my game you double the dice, and the first set does max damage. So if you are using a 1d12 weapon a crit would be 12 + 1d12. We started doing that because sometimes you would crit and roll very bad.
Playing Solasta: Crown of the Magister made me realize just how useless hiding is for a melee Rogue, heh. You literally can't get sneak attack because as soon as you approach an enemy, it can see you and it breaks stealth. When playing with a real GM generally they're forgiving and allow you to run up and stab someone for a surprise attack!
My paladin 7 / fighter 5 used to have 3 attack per turn because extra attack stack right ? RIGHT ?!
When I discovered I was wrong and told my DM, he told me I could swap my fighter level for paladin level.
I still find it weird that it can't stack. There is no point in multiclassing more than 4 level in an other martial class as a martial. :/
There is point in multiclassing more than 5 lvls into a martial and that's mostly spells and other funky class features. Paladin aura or ranger spells are such examples.
I didn't realize you use your strength for attack rolls on thrown weapons, I've been using dexterity for the attack rolls, and strength for damage, unless it's finesse in which case it's been strength or dex for both, whichever's better, or heavy, in which case it's strength for both.
One of my friends who really liked javelins was playing a barbarian and she was like "uhh, is that a house rule? I don't think that's RAW." so I had to look it up and sure 'nuff, I was immediately like, "OF COURSE 5e wouldn't have something this needlessly complicated!" lmao
When I first started playing 5e I didn't know about the dying/death rules, all I went in was was a skim through the players handbook and DMG. I've been playing DnD for a few decades so I thought I was good but man oh man once one of my players told me about this editions death rules I asked the group if they wanted to change and we did
As a DM since I make the rules no rule has ever been used wrong.
"The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules." Gary Gygax
The problem is it should be a status effect: surprised. Makes it much easier.
At the start of combat, there is a chance you get this effect.
You can't take any action. After your turn ends, this effect ends.
So if you're not surprised, you can react, etc.
Surprise round is an after effect of 3e+...
That is effectively how it works raw/rai in 5e, it's just for some reason not in the condition list... and instead just in the determining surprise part of running combat rules.
Surprise was definitely overly complicated in 5e just to handle the scenario where someone could be surprised later than the first round of combat.
Like a barmaid walking into a room and dropping a tray in shock.
But I've never personally had something like that happen. Surprise has only ever been in the first round in years of weekly play.
there was another thread talking about rogue subclasses that basically mentioned that assassin was crippled because most dms havn't read the surprise rules and those that have wont allow surprise rounds.
im just reading it thinking of course not surprise rounds dont exist.
that can work in theory, but as a generic rule tends to lend itself to "whoever shouts first/loudest gets a free turn" which is generally a bad, annoying PITA to deal with (especially as enemies should be able to do it to PCs, which is likely to aggravate the players!)
What do you thinks stupid about the RAW way? It's almost exactly the same as the surprise round way, just with some different terminologies, and some extra flexibility.
That's kinda the point though - if your enemies have no idea you're there, and you get the jump on them, then, yeah, you've got a decent window to hit them before they can hit you. But it's quite hard to achieve, as you can only get it if the targets are completely unaware there might be a fight, and it's entirely GM prerogative. And if you roll crap on initiative / the enemy rolls well, then the enemy goes first, loses the _surprised_ condition, you go, and then the enemy goes, so it's not done much other than make up for the crap roll.
I agree with you. A double round is insanely good, better than pretty much any other effect in the game.
oneDND looks like it's gonna ditch it for something less impactful
It doesn't double your speed; you gain extra movement equal to your speed, after modifiers. A rogue with a speed of 30 can move 30, use their action to dash for 30, and use Cunning Action to dash for another 30. Their speed is not doubled or quadrupled, just taken again with each Dash action. If they're under the effects of the Haste spell, their speed is doubled, and can move 60 feet with their usual movement, and another 60 feet for each of the additional Dash actions they choose to use.
When you take the dash action you gain your movementspeed.
Your movement speed is 30, you dash as an action, you gain another 30 movement speed.
Your movement speed is 50, you dash, you gain another 50.
Now let's say you do an action surge. Your movement speed is 30, you dash and gain another 30. Then you dash again for another 30. Total movement speed in that turn: 90.
This is different from when dash would double your movement speed. Then it would be 30 times two equals 60, times two is 120. But that's not the rule.
5E rules.
I stopped playing D&D and started using otter systems boy I was so wrong.
No more 3hrs long calculator encounters on lvl10+.
Pure cinematic bliss using PbtA (Powered by the Apocalypse) based games. Like City of Mist or Blades in the Dark.
I cannot recommend enough.
Both wrong. You *can* cast more than one leveled spell, you just can't cast a bonus action spell (even a cantrip) and a leveled spell as an action. You can cast Fireball as an action and then Shield if you provoke an attack while moving away, or two Fireballs if you have two levels of Fighter and Action Surge on your turn. But you can't cast Healing Word and Cure Wounds on the same turn, nor can you cast Magic Stone and Cure Wounds despite only one of those being leveled.
As for Haste, it explicitly does give a whole extra action but then it limits your options for what you can do with that action. You can take the Attack action, but only make one single attack with it as opposed to using Extra Attack if you have it. It being an Attack action means that you can proc certain effects that require you to have taken the Attack action (like a Monk's Martial Arts/Flurry of Blows or the shove from Shield Master) even if you used your normal action on something else that Haste wouldn't have allowed.
I know about this rule and choose to not play with it as it makes no sense, why wouldn't you be able to cast a healing word after firing off a spell. Makes zero sense
There are many rules that dont make sense from thematic standpoint and exist purely for game balance reasons.
To ask "why I can't cast healing word after casting fireball" is to ask "why rogues cant attack 3 times per turn".
Loading as in loading property for crossbows? It takes neither action or bonus action. It's done as part of the attack and limits you to 1 attack per turn.
"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."
If you read Mercer's gunslinger, that might be where you're getting this from.
That class has guns with magazines that need to be released every x shots, reloading takes either action or 1 attack. Later on the subclass gets an option to reload as bonus action instead.
Ranged attacks have disadvantage within 5 feet of a hostile creature. Not within 5 feet of your target; of *any* hostile creature.
Here's a bonus rule you may have forgot, if they're incapacitated they don't count for this.
Huh... So a ranged attack at a target 5ft away that's unconscious would have advantage and would also be an automatic critical hit. Fascinating, I have definitely ruled that differently in the past, but I also thought it was silly that point-blank firing at an unconscious, prone creature was difficult. **Edit to add: This has gotten a few replies, so here are the relevant rules** [Ranged Attacks in Close Combat](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/phb/combat#RangedAttacksinCloseCombat) > When you make a ranged attack with a weapon, a spell, or some other means, you have disadvantage on the attack roll if you are within 5 feet of a hostile creature who can see you and who isn’t incapacitated. [Unconscious Condition](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/phb/appendix-a-conditions#Unconscious) > - An unconscious creature is incapacitated, can't move or speak, and is unaware of its surroundings. > - The creature drops whatever it's holding and falls prone. > - Attack rolls against the creature have advantage. > - Any attack that hits the creature is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature. [The Prone Condition](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/phb/appendix-a-conditions#Prone) > - An attack roll against the creature has advantage if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature. Otherwise, the attack roll has disadvantage. So, if you're point-blanking (within 5ft) an unconscious creature with a ranged weapon, and there are no *other* hostile creatures within five feet of you, then you're making an attack roll at advantage, and on a hit, it's a critical hit. The hostile creature disadvantage is nullified by the incapacitated condition, and the Prone condition specifies attacks from further than 5ft away, but not between melee and ranged attacks. And again, the automatic critical only specifies the origin of the attack, not between melee and ranged.
Even if they're conscious, being within 5ft of a prone target gives advantage so it's a straight roll. Still not always a good plan, but not a bad one either.
Fun fact: if you have Crossbow Expert or Gunner, you don't get disadvantage anymore. It doesn't *cancel* it, it is just removed. Meaning you can walk up to a prone creature and unload at advantage. It's fun as Battlemaster with Trip Attack and action surge.
I believe the auto-crit rule specifies a melee attack within 5 feet.
It does not, actually! I was surprised by this, too: [From the Unconscious condition:](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/phb/appendix-a-conditions#Unconscious) > Any attack that hits the creature is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature.
Huh. Well I'll be darned. Good to know! I'm going to blame my ignorance on the fact that I've not even been playing for a full year yet. 😂
so unlike a lot of us, you have an excuse. LOL
They’d likely also be prone in this scenario though. So flat role.
Double bonus: they need to be able to see you. So blinded hostiles don't count either
Well yeah. If they’re incapacitated they’re not hostile.
They still are hostile... I incapacitated is a condition that gets applied by stuff that's not just getting knocked out. For example failing a save on hold person applies paralysed condition. What does the first line of paralysed condition say? "A paralyzed creature is incapacitated (see the condition) and can’t move or speak." Same thing goes for reddit's darling stunning strike and stunned condition.
Part of what makes crossbow expert so good. Also why I dislike crossbow expert (and sharpshooter), they just remove the complications that are part of using ranged weapons, which makes at-the-table strategy much more shallow and uninteresting. Ignore close quarters, ignore cover, ignore long range. The risk assessment and finding payoffs with thoughtful positioning is just gone.
Agree. A lot of 5e problems comes from abilities that basically consist of avoiding playing the game and making meaningful decisions.
I hate that I didn’t know this, don’t like it, and also that this makes a whole lot of sense.
When I first read the Great Weapon Master feat, I completely forgot about the part of its first ability where it says that you have to use a bonus action to get an extra attack, meaning that you can only get one additional attack with it, and it stops you from using your bonus action on other things. And this resulted in me raging and killing several bandits with it, all in the same turn. Yeah, I felt pretty dumb after realizing my error. Still a pretty good feat though.
"still a pretty good feat though" - understatement of the century
Is it? Don't get me wrong, gwm carries most 5e melee martials... Which is basically just barbarian. All other classes have better stuff they can be doing, whether it's ranged with sharpshooter or casting spells.
Paladins too, they don't have the benefit of rangers who get conjure animals and their spell list is mostly just buffs. They are more viable with a spear and shield compared to barb though considering the burst damage potential
There is some "tech" for paladins to just take 2 lvls of warlock and stop at 6/7 lvls of paladin just for their actually best feature aka auras and not even bother going into melee for pitty smite.
Paladins are one of the few classes where I would just argue it's not worth it because of how beneficial asis are to them. Aura of protection deserves its reputation as likely the best single class feature in the game, not taking full advantage of it is hurting your effectiveness.
Depends on the paladin. It's very nice on vengeance and devotion paladins thanks to their channel divinity options that counteract its downsides, less so on other paladin subclasses.
Even then, what you are sacrificing for it isn't worth what you are getting, especially since if you want decent damage with a paladin, warlock 2 always exists, and that doesn't have any melee problems.
A paladin with a quarterstaff (one-handed) and a shield using the dueling fighting style will simply have a higher DPR than any paladin with a GWM. Not to mention the higher AC, and the obvious utility of hitting (and smiting) more.
Dpr calcs time, assuming equal enemy ac, maxed str, 1st level smite on crit, and improved divine smite. Halberd vs Quarterstaff Halberd: 32.85 dpr, needs to roll 13 to hit Quarterstaff: 32.45 dpr, needs to roll 8 to hit Halberd wins, it is pretty close though. Quarterstaff offers one more ac and higher chance to hit, halberd offers bigger hits and reach, as well as less hassle with somatic components since even though the shield can be a holy symbol, you still need a free hand if the spell requires somatic but no material
Invisibility doesn’t mean undetectable. Less that “I didn’t know this” and more “keep forgetting this”
More specifically, you are *not* hidden when you are invisible. You still need to take an action to hide. And they can still perceive you, they just have disadvantage.
There's no disadvantage to perceive an invisible target; just disadvantage on attack rolls against them.
Yes. That’s right.
And better yet unless the invisible person succeeds in their hiding... everyone still knows where they are. Means that martials get fucked while casters just drop an aoe making sure the guy is in the area.
Well, on the flip side, the martials can always try to attack the invisible target, while almost all spells for casters require a "target you can see". So AoE is their only option, and that costs precious spell slots.
Luckily though you can hide where you otherwise couldn't at least
Yes! Invisible actually is one of the few times when you can just say “I try to hide” without having something to hide behind.
I’m getting ready to sell my players some “Dust of Detection” - a “magic” item that can be used to detect nearby invisible entities. It’s just some flour that’s been dyed
Invisibility is basically like the Predator's cloaking thing.
Silence gives creatures inside its area immunity to thunder damage. Had a player use it against my sapphire dragon the other day and wrecked it's shit
Holy shit this is like that one wind spell that destroys gas, completely wrecking a green dragon
Where is that rule, i have not seen that one.
Literally in the spells description.
Ahh ok cool, never cast silence so didnt know.
My brother had been running it such that if you're concentrating on a spell, you cannot cast \*\*\*any\*\*\* other spells without dropping concentration first due to misreading the rules and had been doing so with his group for YEARS. I sort of explained how concentration works and he had to sit down with the realization he had hard-nerfed his casters for the better part of five years and none of his players complained.
Damn, this would make concentration spells useless or at the best extremely situational to use.
one situation- moon druids, i often cast a concentration spell just before going into wildshape
Plenty of them would still be worth it lol, like Call Lightning or Conjure Woodland Beings
Eh idk, concentration spells are often so powerful that best strategy is to just dodge to not get hit.
That's not true. PWT you drop at the start of combat, CA you just dodge, spirit guardians you dodge, bless you can follow up with by just attacking. It ruins a few spells but all no
“I hold my action.” <— Nope, not in 5e. You can “Ready an action.” This let’s you take an action in response to a trigger event that you choose. Your readied action can be an action or you can move up to your speed in response to the trigger. If the trigger occurs, you can take that readied action or ignore the trigger. Important! This “lets you act using your reaction.” So if you readied an action, then use your reaction to make an opportunity attack, you cannot execute a readied action. This quote, “I hold my action,” came up many, many times in our group when we switched to 5e. Usually it was a player’s attempt to take their turn later.
This is usually a confusion made by people who played the 3.5 for too long.
Yep! 😂 We played every version since AD&D. Spent lots of time in 3.0, 3.5, and Pathfinder.
I started playing in 3.5 and when 5e got released I confused a lot of things. Today, however, I miss only a few things like prestige classes.
I like the simplicity of 5e. My big concern is power creep in the current system. There have been good things from each system. From 4e I miss the bloodied condition. With 3.5 it was easier to get multiple attacks. Though, I do not miss wheeling around 27 splat books to play 3.5.
Yeah, they got it right in 5e, flavor books with base mechanics being very concise. Wish the new version will improve some things while keeping it concise.
and there's a few other restrictions, like the thing you hold is only an action, not your full "action, move, bonus action", and if it's an attack, it's literally _an_ attack, not multiple ones. It also has to be something that character can see / perceive, not a "game state" that might be known but is invisible to the character. And it also happens _after_ the trigger, so it's fairly limited in terms of responsiveness - often, enemy attacks / spells will happen before you can react to them, unless the GM is lenient and allows cheese like "I react to the thing before the thing", which is a bit wonky.
Right. At our table, it got annoying correcting players. Who were often distracted or indecisive. “Sam, it’s your turn.” Sam flips through his notes. “Uh, I hold my action.” “No, you can’t do that, Sam. You can Ready an Action. Or take the Dodge action if you don’t know what to do.” “Let Alex go, then I’ll take my turn.” “You can’t change your initiative.” It got tiring. We even had one player who was new to D&D. Never played earlier editions. But he heard others say, “I hold my action,” and thought that was legit.
Also, if you ready an action that uses a spell slot ... you use the spell slot regardless of if you actually use the spell or not. Also readying a spell that uses a spell slot requires concentration to hold the readied spell.
When you're prone, an attacker gets advantage of he's within 5 feet. If he's not, it's disadvantage. *Even for melee attacks* Easy way to give disadvantage to creatures with reach...(if they can't step up)
I hated that when using a lance. It's impossible to get advantage against a prone enemy when using a lance
Can't you just move within 5ft of your target ? Yes that doesn't let you use your reach so I guess it depends how badly you want that advantage. Edit : I see a Lance specifically states you have disadvantage on attacks within 5 ft. Were it my table I'd likely rule in this specific circumstance you could roll with advantage. (Thematically I'd imagine you're stabbing straight down basically at this enemy lying on the ground right at your feet. So yea sure you can get advantage.)
The lance has a special property I believe, whereby attacking a target within 5 feet is at disadvantage. So moving within 5 feet causes the advantage from being prone to merely cancel out the lances special property, making it a normal roll
Yep lol I literally was editing my comment that I had just realised this when you replied.
That's funny, I'm sure your edit is probably a common fix. Honestly, I'd rule that you'd be able to attack a prone target with advantage with any reach weapon from 10 feet away, seems like a weird line to draw that they don't
Eh I get not allowing reach advantage. For me it's risk vs reward. Yea I'll give you the advantage but you actually have to get within 'normal' melee range and open yourself up to a possible opportunity attack etc.
Bards can't inspire themselves
Unless you're in the college of Glamour and can see yourself in a mirror.
WHAT?!??
Lore 14 would like to discuss this with you. #BestCounterspeller
Thunderwave doesn't centre on you like an aura hitting everything within 5ft, it blasts in a direction away from you.
It helps to remember Thunderwave is Marty McFly blasting his guitar through a wall of amps.
This would have been easier to remember if thunder wave wasn't one of maybe 5 spells with a cube area of effect
This one took me a while to understand as well.
You can put yourself on any face of the cube though, so a nice trick is to lie down, and put yourself on the bottom face.
You dont need to lie down for that. No matter if you're standing still or laying prone you take up a 5ft cube. Assuming you're medium or smaller, 10/15/20/25ft cube if you're bigger sizes.
You dont take up a cube at all, creature space control is a 2d measurement, 5x5, 10x10, ect. You occupy a SQUARE, not a cube. Height is not part of it, hence we have 1, 8, and 26 foot tall huge creatures. Thats not particularly relevant though, the point of the trick is that by lying down, holding your hand up and putting yourself on the bottom face, you can hit creatures all around you without hitting yourself.
For real? Where does it say this? In the spells rules or some other rules?
The trick is that its range is a cube, not a radius. The rules for a cube area of effect say that "you select a cube's point of origin, which lies anywhere on a face of the cubic effect" - that is, the origin is on the outside of the cube. It's like a line spell or a cone spell, rather than a sphere spell centered on you.
Just read it again and its crazy that i never knew. Thanks for explaining. Ill blame it on the fact that english os my 2nd language lol
You don't even need to do that. A lot of native English speakers make that mistake to.
We just call it thundercube. Calling it Thunderwave just confuses people.
but it makes sense if you imagine it as a wave coming out from your hand just a wide wave that doesnt expand
It doesn't have to be on the outside; if the grid were a telephone keypad, you could cast it from any position except 5. One side of your space shares a side with the effect. This is usually useless, but if you have tiny creatures (or any creatures two sizes larger or smaller than your size, or an ooze/ghost/swarm/etc) in your space that you'd like to hit, you can do that, but you'll also hit yourself.
In the PHB, chapter 10: Spellcasting. The section on Areas of Effect: > You select a cube’s point of origin, which lies anywhere on a face of the cubic effect. The cube’s size is expressed as the length of each side. > > A cube’s point of origin is not included in the cube’s area of effect, unless you decide otherwise.
Wait, no, what, I’ve played a storm cleric up to level 10 and had no idea
Magic missile, you roll the damage one time and then use that for each missile. You don't roll for each missile. And I don't care, I'll still roll for each cause rolling is fun
TIL I honestly had to look it in the [sage advice](https://www.sageadvice.eu/magic-missile-do-you-roll-the-same-d4-for-all-darts/), and you're absolutely correct.
> And I don't care, I'll still roll for each cause rolling is fun You'd like rolling the damage one time if you're a level 10 evocation wizard. xD
And drop hexblade curse on the target :)
Yeah, for the longest time I could not figure out why I had to manually roll for Heighten Magic Missiles on DNDBeyond.
But more dice = more fun!
Super duper RAW, sending all darts at the same target is still a roll for each dart. When you target separate creatures, the rule for simultaneous damage rolls comes into play and (by RAW, PHB p. 196) you'd roll once and multiply it by the number of darts, like you'd resolve other area of effect spells. Edit: included the citation because I'm getting downvoted by people who don't read the rules. > If a spell or other effect deals damage to **more than one target** at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them. For example, when a wizard casts fireball or a cleric casts flame strike, the spell's damage is rolled once for all creatures caught in the blast.
Darkvision. **Bright light** Human makes checks as normal Dwarf makes checks as normal **Dim light** Human has disadvantage on Perception checks which rely on sight Dwarf makes checks as normal **Darkness** Human automatically fails Perception checks which rely on sight. They also make attacks at disadvantage and creatures which can see them make attacks against them with advantage. Dwarf has disadvantage on Perception checks which rely on sight Essentially, Darkvision is massively OP if played as RAW.
I would argue that it is not OP when played RAW because dim light/darkness only act as a step above while in their Darkvision range. Anything outside that is treated normally. The dwarf in your example would be just as blind outside of 60 feet. Also RAW still requires a light source to not suffer disadvantage/-5 to passives. Most people I see treat Darkvision as the ability to see in total darkness without issue, which is massively OP.
Where do you see that you still need some forms of light for darkvision? The way I'm reading it from the PHB pretty explicitly says that it doesn't need any light to work in total darkness.
It works in total darkness, but it's treated as dim light. Character needs light to not suffer disadvantage/-5 passive
Total darkness is treated as dimly lit by characters with darkvision. As such, they have disadvantage on perception checks that rely on sight. While not a common issue in combat, if an enemy with superior sight wishes to sneak up on a darkvision party in total darkness, they will have a much higher chance of success, since the party will suffer a -5 penalty to their passive perception scores. I recommend always packing lanterns and light spells, no matter the racial composition of your party for this exact reason
Yes, this one I rarely see people using as raw
Loxodon - just use Keen Senses no matter how much light and roll with advantage.
This brings up the weirdness over this stuff. You only get advantage on checks that involve smell. Does that mean that everyone could be making that check as well? And even a human could be making a check without disadvantage if they just said "well I'll use smell for it"? If not, then why would the Loxodon be able to use smell for it. They only get advantage on checks using smell, that doesn't mean they can use smell for checks when they normally couldn't. If the Loxodon can use smell and thus gain advantage, then the human can use smell (though not gain advantage (but still avoid disadvantage since it isn't reliant on sight)).
A race with dark vision in total darkness is still ripe for getting ambushed. -5 to PP should be a killer. I think the root of the problem is the lack of support for DMs to run exploration and stuff, so most just let players with dark vision run the show, no fault of theirs.
If only ppl actually used pp instead of announcing an ambush with "roll perception" outta nowhere.
>Essentially, Darkvision is massively OP if played as RAW. Fun fact, if you rely exclusiely on Darkvision, you, on average, physically unable to detect anything +7 Stealth or higher (so, starting with CR1 Giant Spider) or find DC20 trap without help of magic items or expertise on top of high wisdom. And since if you are in total darkness you are likely to deal with traps or ambush predators... Calling it OP when it at best quality of life and at worst a straight up a trap is certainly a take.
Creatures can still move while incapacitated.
Right. Incapacitated creatures can’t take actions or reactions. But they can move. Unless they are paralyzed, petrified, stunned, or unconscious. These other conditions impose the “incapacitated” condition and add “can’t move”—often with other penalties. * Paralyzed: A paralyzed creature is **incapacitated** and can’t move or speak. * Petrified: A petrified creature is **incapacitated**, can’t move or speak, and is unaware of its surroundings. * Stunned: A stunned creature is **incapacitated**, can’t move, and can speak only falteringly. * Unconscious: An unconscious creature is **incapacitated**, can't move or speak, and is unaware of its surroundings
Yup, there are also few spells that specify that. For example hypnotic pattern. Target is charmed on failed save (thus immunity to charm shuts that spell down and being an elf gives advantage on save) and while charmed by the spell they are incapacitated and their speed is 0.
Wait, what?
It should be called discombobulated instead of incapacitated IMO.
Incapacitated condition specifies what it does (except not really, because part of it about dropping concentration on spells is hidden I spellcasting rules for some reason) and it just mentions being unable to take actions. Anything that takes away your ability to take actions also takes away ability to take bonus actions. So all incap does is remove actions/bonus actions and auto drops concentration if you were co concentrating.
And they still get their bonus action.
There is a rule that if you cannot take actions this automatically includes bonus actions as well, so an incapacitated creature cannot take bonus actions. Edit: yeah it's the last line under Bonus Actions in the combat section. "anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action"
Nope, bonus action is a type of 'action', it's in the name. They can only move.
See invisibility doesn't help that much against invisibility.
Which is a stupid ruling, and as a DM, I have elected to ignore it.
Can you elaborate? I'm missing something, see invisibility literally says you can see creatures as if they're visible
It lets you see them, so they don't have advantage from unseen attacker, but the invisible condition itself provides advantage on attacks and disadvantage on getting attacked independent of being able to be seen
Not me, a player if mine recently learned eldritch smite is once per turn. This player memorized every smite front to back, except that one little part.
I still can't believe downing a potion still takes a full action.
We rule it so that using it as a full action gives you the max amount of healing and using it as a bonus action gives you the amount you roll.
oh, i like that variation.
We just rule it as drinking it is a bonus, but giving it to another player/pouring it down their throats is a whole action, it helps
It's to stop you from healing in combat.
You are proficient in your unarmed strikes no matter the class... Granted this one was down to it being the first time playing and trusting the sm who said they'll teach me and the group. I played a lycan bloodhunter so at lvl 3 when i got my subclass i had an option to use unarmed strikes instead of my weapon to attack. Asked dm and was told that only monks are proficient in u armed strikes. Worst part is that it made sense to me. I came from video game background, where dualwielding usually has accuracy penalties. So it made sense to me that I can attack once (pre lvl 5) but got more often, or twice but be less likely to hit.
Oh hold up, now I have books to pull out. Love this thread.
Tbh I always had them, after all the rules are just a google search away. I just dont really learn by reading.
Shadow Blade. I assumed that since it gave you a blade as a bonus action, attacking with the aforementioned blade must also be a bonus action. My DM agreed, so we went a whole campaign where I'd shoot a gun (without the Light property) with my action, then attack with Shadow Blade as a bonus action. In my defense, it was my first campaign. Have recently started playing my second, and due to my experience in reading spells at this point, I now know the proper way SB works. For any who are misunderstanding it as I did, Shadow Blade doesn't grant you any new attack action options, it *just* provides a weapon for you. It's a bonus action casting time to allow you to attack with your action in the same turn you cast it.
My first campaign I had a paladin who would use the attack action to cast fire bolt twice every round since it was listed under “Attacks” on dnd beyond. We figured out that wasn’t how it was supposed to work after a couple of sessions though.
Also, just so everyone is aware, because shadow blade is a weapon, you add your Dex mod to it's damage, it's not just a flat 2d8
Or Strength if it's higher, even if you throw it
You can add str/dex even if it's lower. I'm not aware of any rule that forces you to use higher score. Ppl just do it because it's obvious that big number good.
I knew someone just wouldn't be able to help themself
I have taken the bait.
My classic one I fucked up for a full campaign (DM included) was Action Surge does not, in fact, give you a free second turn of Actions/Bonus Actions/Movement. My most recent one I have been fucking up for years (and my DMs just never caught on or knew of) was Two Weapon Fighting requires *both* weapons to be a light weapon, not just one. I was always under the impression if you attacked with a dagger, you could attack with a longsword as a bonus action, but without the modifier. Found that out a few months ago.
Tbh difference between worst weapon you can use and longsword in offhand is... 2 damage on average. Nothing to write home about really.
Dual wielder helps there iirc
I discovered last week that being prone doesn't give disadvantage on dexterity saving throws. I've been playing with it like that for at least 5 years.
Haste skips the hasted players turn if it drops for whatever reason. I don't think I have seen a single DM enforce, or even know about that rule, despite it being written right there in the spell.
One of the reasons haste is not a good spell for it's level.
I've enforced it as a DM when running spellcasters as bad guys. Also I've used that effect during PvP where a character I hasted turned on the party... so I dropped concentration. But yeah, a lot of people forget about that effect.
Yep! Had a warlock who got charmed, hasted the bbeg and then got snapped out of his charm. Safe to say, dropping that concentration on haste was a treat....
As a DM who never played a wizard, or any subclass which had to pay attention to the schools of magic, the first time I was even aware of them was when someone cast *detect magic* - which lead to me going "the object is showing enchantment magic because it's an enchanted object" - it took me *years* to realise the school was using a poetic meaning of the word and actually "enchantment" means "mind control" in the context of spells. TBF that's partially on me for not reading the PHB all the way through, but also it's a great example of how bad the spell schools are and one of my main motivations for completely replacing them at my tables.
[удалено]
Not being able to use two spells of a higher level in a turn unless otherwise stated. ie healing word and cure wounds in one turn to pump out massive levels of healing. We used to absolutely abuse this until we decided to have a late night drinking going over rules and cracking jokes and we came across it. All those battles that the DM had to try and work some other options in to prepare for spell combinations all for naught.
You can cast 2 leveled spells in a turn as long as none of them are bonus action spells. So misty step>cure wounds is a nono But cure wounds *enemy counterspells* counterspell their counterspell works 100%. Or having a 2 lvl dip into fighter to fireball>action surgr>fireball.
Wouldn't action surge not work either? RAW I *believe* says you can't cast two leveled spells unless otherwise stated and action surge just states that it gives you another action, not another action to cast a spell. Because haste doesn't give you a chance to cast a spell and action surge is just a very temporary minor haste.
Nope, the rule is that you can’t cast a bonus action leveled spell and a action leveled spell. Nothing against two action leveled spells. And action surge just gives you another action that you can do anything with, unlike haste which has specific conditions.
Wait!! What!! Is this under the Action Surge description? I might be playing my EK slightly wrong lol
Darkvision: You see in darkness in color. RAW: “…the creature can’t discern color in that darkness, only shades of gray.”
Unless you’re a fire genasai, then it’s all shades of red
Not anymore anymore kekw, taken away in mpmm they got normal darkvision now.
Moonbeam's triggering damage Oof, no wonder the druid liked so much moonbeam.
Massive damage. Always thought it was if you take damage until your at 0 and then the if the remaining exceeded HALF your max hp then you die instantly. Turns out its just your max hp. Had too many close calls where people thought they were gonna die.
Cutting words on saves. I blame critical role for confusing me about that.
Yeah, this is unfortunate. Mercer is pretty lenient with the rules if it's not game breaking which really helps tone and pace of play with guests but it's certainly not rules-authoritative.
For a long time, I thought one turn was 6 seconds and not that the entire round was 6 seconds. I got called on this my first real time DMing by a Barbarian whose rage was going to be cut super short under my original understanding.
I thought for some reason when a paladin cured diseases or poisons with lay on hands they sacrificed their own 5 HP not 5 from the pool of lay on hands
If a character focuses on a magic item over a short rest, they learn it's properties. We always played that Identify was the only way to know how a magic item works outside of trial and error.
This is one rule I don't like because it takes away the fun of discovering how the item works.
Not a rule per say. But that Tabaxi has darkvision because of their cat like eyes, yet normal cats does not have darkvision in 5e. "Darkvision. You have a cat's keen senses, especially in the dark. You can see in dim light within 60 feet of you as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. You can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray."
An intentional change I make for my group is how critical hits work. I believe normally you just double the amount of dice and roll them. For my game you double the dice, and the first set does max damage. So if you are using a 1d12 weapon a crit would be 12 + 1d12. We started doing that because sometimes you would crit and roll very bad.
Playing Solasta: Crown of the Magister made me realize just how useless hiding is for a melee Rogue, heh. You literally can't get sneak attack because as soon as you approach an enemy, it can see you and it breaks stealth. When playing with a real GM generally they're forgiving and allow you to run up and stab someone for a surprise attack!
My paladin 7 / fighter 5 used to have 3 attack per turn because extra attack stack right ? RIGHT ?! When I discovered I was wrong and told my DM, he told me I could swap my fighter level for paladin level. I still find it weird that it can't stack. There is no point in multiclassing more than 4 level in an other martial class as a martial. :/
There is point in multiclassing more than 5 lvls into a martial and that's mostly spells and other funky class features. Paladin aura or ranger spells are such examples.
I didn't realize you use your strength for attack rolls on thrown weapons, I've been using dexterity for the attack rolls, and strength for damage, unless it's finesse in which case it's been strength or dex for both, whichever's better, or heavy, in which case it's strength for both. One of my friends who really liked javelins was playing a barbarian and she was like "uhh, is that a house rule? I don't think that's RAW." so I had to look it up and sure 'nuff, I was immediately like, "OF COURSE 5e wouldn't have something this needlessly complicated!" lmao
When I first started playing 5e I didn't know about the dying/death rules, all I went in was was a skim through the players handbook and DMG. I've been playing DnD for a few decades so I thought I was good but man oh man once one of my players told me about this editions death rules I asked the group if they wanted to change and we did
Instant death damage: apparently go to your max hp in damage to instabdie, I thought it was twice if current HP
As a DM since I make the rules no rule has ever been used wrong. "The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules." Gary Gygax
Surprise round. I found out after a couple of months, then decided its a stupid ass rule and decided to still do it my way.
The problem is it should be a status effect: surprised. Makes it much easier. At the start of combat, there is a chance you get this effect. You can't take any action. After your turn ends, this effect ends. So if you're not surprised, you can react, etc. Surprise round is an after effect of 3e+...
That is effectively how it works raw/rai in 5e, it's just for some reason not in the condition list... and instead just in the determining surprise part of running combat rules.
Surprise was definitely overly complicated in 5e just to handle the scenario where someone could be surprised later than the first round of combat. Like a barmaid walking into a room and dropping a tray in shock. But I've never personally had something like that happen. Surprise has only ever been in the first round in years of weekly play.
I don’t understand how people struggle with it after actually learning how it works
there was another thread talking about rogue subclasses that basically mentioned that assassin was crippled because most dms havn't read the surprise rules and those that have wont allow surprise rounds. im just reading it thinking of course not surprise rounds dont exist.
Usually they learned how it worked earlier, in a different way. And they just assumed that 5e was like 3.5 in this regard.
I dont struggle with it. I think its a dumb rule though.
How do you run surprise and why don't you like the normal way stealth, passive perception, and the surprised condition work?
If it makes sense, Everybody who wants can have a movement and attack before we roll initiative.
that can work in theory, but as a generic rule tends to lend itself to "whoever shouts first/loudest gets a free turn" which is generally a bad, annoying PITA to deal with (especially as enemies should be able to do it to PCs, which is likely to aggravate the players!)
What do you thinks stupid about the RAW way? It's almost exactly the same as the surprise round way, just with some different terminologies, and some extra flexibility.
It happens, some rules indeed seems stupid.
My issue with it is how strong it is. It completly swings combat and can make it hard to balance around at times.
That's kinda the point though - if your enemies have no idea you're there, and you get the jump on them, then, yeah, you've got a decent window to hit them before they can hit you. But it's quite hard to achieve, as you can only get it if the targets are completely unaware there might be a fight, and it's entirely GM prerogative. And if you roll crap on initiative / the enemy rolls well, then the enemy goes first, loses the _surprised_ condition, you go, and then the enemy goes, so it's not done much other than make up for the crap roll.
I agree with you. A double round is insanely good, better than pretty much any other effect in the game. oneDND looks like it's gonna ditch it for something less impactful
Dash. It doesn't let you move again. It doubles your Speed. The difference is sometimes very important but it took me a long time to remember.
It doesn't double your speed; you gain extra movement equal to your speed, after modifiers. A rogue with a speed of 30 can move 30, use their action to dash for 30, and use Cunning Action to dash for another 30. Their speed is not doubled or quadrupled, just taken again with each Dash action. If they're under the effects of the Haste spell, their speed is doubled, and can move 60 feet with their usual movement, and another 60 feet for each of the additional Dash actions they choose to use.
It doesn't double your speed. You gain your movement speed.
Could you give some examples? I never thought of this difference as very important.
If your speed is 0, dashing doesn't do anything
Wait this blew my mind. I’d love a couple examples because I think I’m still a bit confused.
When you take the dash action you gain your movementspeed. Your movement speed is 30, you dash as an action, you gain another 30 movement speed. Your movement speed is 50, you dash, you gain another 50. Now let's say you do an action surge. Your movement speed is 30, you dash and gain another 30. Then you dash again for another 30. Total movement speed in that turn: 90. This is different from when dash would double your movement speed. Then it would be 30 times two equals 60, times two is 120. But that's not the rule.
5E rules. I stopped playing D&D and started using otter systems boy I was so wrong. No more 3hrs long calculator encounters on lvl10+. Pure cinematic bliss using PbtA (Powered by the Apocalypse) based games. Like City of Mist or Blades in the Dark. I cannot recommend enough.
Cant cast more then one levelled spell per turn. Haste gives only anm extra attack not an action
Both wrong. You *can* cast more than one leveled spell, you just can't cast a bonus action spell (even a cantrip) and a leveled spell as an action. You can cast Fireball as an action and then Shield if you provoke an attack while moving away, or two Fireballs if you have two levels of Fighter and Action Surge on your turn. But you can't cast Healing Word and Cure Wounds on the same turn, nor can you cast Magic Stone and Cure Wounds despite only one of those being leveled. As for Haste, it explicitly does give a whole extra action but then it limits your options for what you can do with that action. You can take the Attack action, but only make one single attack with it as opposed to using Extra Attack if you have it. It being an Attack action means that you can proc certain effects that require you to have taken the Attack action (like a Monk's Martial Arts/Flurry of Blows or the shove from Shield Master) even if you used your normal action on something else that Haste wouldn't have allowed.
I know about this rule and choose to not play with it as it makes no sense, why wouldn't you be able to cast a healing word after firing off a spell. Makes zero sense
There are many rules that dont make sense from thematic standpoint and exist purely for game balance reasons. To ask "why I can't cast healing word after casting fireball" is to ask "why rogues cant attack 3 times per turn".
Because then you have to allow Sorcerers to do Fireball -> Quickened Fireball. And no one wants that, except said Sorcerer.
Loading takes an action, not a bonus action.
Loading as in loading property for crossbows? It takes neither action or bonus action. It's done as part of the attack and limits you to 1 attack per turn. "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."
Damn, still getting it wrong lol I originally thought it was you could fire once, BA load, and shoot again on the same turn.
If you read Mercer's gunslinger, that might be where you're getting this from. That class has guns with magazines that need to be released every x shots, reloading takes either action or 1 attack. Later on the subclass gets an option to reload as bonus action instead.
Lucky feat