Search results

It's still completely logical. Just because 1 hour of fighting isn't likely doesn't mean that the sentence is illogical if read that way. And having a 1 hour period that includes combat, casting spells afterwards, and doing other activities (like making the camp more defensible or scouting for...

I'd say it works fine. ES changes the range to 300 feet, spell sniper doubles the range, I don't see any reason why they wouldn't stack. It certainly isn't a case of specific beats general, because both are specific rules. Not sure how that is supposed to factor into it.

That's the problem people have with the list. For basic English, there are two grammatically accurate ways of reading that sentence. Either 1 hour of any of the following activities; or the activities include fighting, spellcasting, or 1 hour of walking. Yes rules-wise, 1 hour of combat is...

I don't think that supports your furthest reach argument at all. Not really sure how you think it supports that. I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make here. Not sure where you're getting this from. This isn't RAW at all. You don't trigger OAs by moving closer to a dragon. You...

Since it hasn't been FAQ'd at all and Jeremy Crawford confirmed the multiple zone approach, I would say that is RAI. If that wasn't the intention, I would expect to see someone say that wasn't the intention when it was designed. Unless we have something to say otherwise, I think we need to...

I think the hedging out creatures is supposed to push them out of the area. It could definitely be more clear, but I can't think of another way to interpret "hedging out." If it doesn't push creatures away at the time of casting, I don't know what hedging out creatures is supposed to mean...

Listing that number on it's own is somewhat misleading. Each ancestry (race) has it's own set of feats and you choose one each at levels 1, 5, 9, 13, and 17. Each class has it's own set of feats which are choses one each at level 1 then all even levels. And then there are skill/general feats...

As it is currently written above, it is a bonus to AC not a different armor calculation. So it would stack. AC would be 13 (mage armor) + 3 (Dex) + 4 (Int) for 20 total. No defense style bonus since you're not using armor. That is why others have suggested changing to to be 10 + Dex + Int...

According to Tim Kask (see the link here), hit points were never supposed to be actual physical damage, even at the earliest stages of DnD.

Yeah, I think the cavalier archetype is well designed in that aspect. It works for a mounted combatant or just a defensive-oriented fighter. Very few of its features only affect mounted combat.

No. You have to see someone move out of your reach in order to make an opportunity attack.

Others and the OP have mentioned Unearthed Arcana, so I want to point out that UA is explicitly playtest material. It's there for players to try out and give feedback on before it is published in an official product. I would avoid using if you're starting out. Some things can be pretty...

I believe they were talking about how they house rule it. Which is the same as how I would treat it. I think it's a good ruling for blind people fighting each other. Completely RAW, your attacks have disadvantage because your blind, but if your opponent is blind then all attacks against them...

Not my thing. Interesting ideas, but these backgrounds all give more than skills than any other background. I wouldn't use add in options that don't follow the same rules for the basic options.

I haven't done it yet, but I was planning on running Lost Mines of Phandelver and then transitioning into Red Hand of Doom. Characters should be just about the right level and you can always add in a few things to help transition them. Especially if they need to travel from one place to the next...

I might allow an invisible familiar to use the Help action. You could probably easily come up with a way to annoy someone even if you can't be seen. But I would also rule in that instance that the enemy knows the location of the familiar. Allowing the enemy to attack it at disadvantage. And...

As others pointed out, you can narratively explain if the enemy failed the second save. I don't think it is necessarily unreasonable to say the character doesn't know if it failed or not. But do you do that for all effects? Do players know if some enemies save vs their fireball? Do players know...

They are interesting, but I wouldn't find them fun. Most of these reactions just make enemies tougher or allow them to cause more damage. These are actually quite powerful against players. It may encourage movement, but most of that movement is going to be chasing after monsters or moving to...

So if I finish two assignments early, I can only get one candy. That's what you're saying? You are free to read that interpretation as RAW, but it is definitely not the only RAW way to read it. If it was meant to be that explicitly singular, it would clearly state that is effects a single die...

Monsters don't need anything to make up for it. Unless you as the DM are constantly moving monsters out of range without using Disengage, the difference between the players and monsters shouldn't really affect the balance between them. If it's only occasional, it won't make a difference. If...