Search results

This seems like a pretty good compromise between just using the average (no variance) and multiplying dice (too much variance). You get much reduced variance but still have some randomness. If you really want to be fancy you could replace every 4d4 by alternating 1d8+5 and 1d8+6 (so 8d4 becomes...

There are a lot of ways to play a bladesinger; it sounds like you want to play up the melee-gish aspect? I think the only dip I would consider before hitting wizard 5 is maybe fighter 1, and that only because if you take fighter 1 later you don't get the CON save proficiency that comes with it...

Yep, I agree with others who've pointed out that it's not the existence of enchantment magic that's the issue (for most people, I think), it's conflating any form of one-sided coercion with love, which some people already do IRL without having a game reinforcing the connection. Nobody is going...

I should have phrased my comment differently. It's not the rules about controlling your pet that I find samey; I agree that uniformity here is a good thing. But there isn't anything really special about this pet: it's just a thing that can attack and take attacks. It has some nice immunities and...

Performance of Creation is super awkward, mechanically. Way too many ifs and thens and caveats, especially for an ability that is so situational. It becomes a pet at 14, at which point you will just find 10 minutes to create it every day outside combat, but the actual pet mechanics are too samey...

You may want to recalibrate your sarcasm detector there, Salthorae :-)

This was my initial thought too, and Hold Person was the spell I went to... but the more I think about it, I'm not sure a one round Hold Person inflicting the paralyzed condition on one humanoid for one round is necessarily better than upcasting Command and making two targets of most any...

Or make him an aboleth in disguise. (Or have him working with an aboleth)

You can't use a punch with it because fists aren't a "melee weapon" (EDIT: just reread it; it doesn't say "make an attack with a melee weapon, it says "make a melee attack with a weapon", but same difference; fists aren't considered a "weapon" even though you can make "melee weapon attacks" with...

Yep! As long as you have a melee weapon available.

My guess is because you actually need to have a weapon in your hand and use it -- you can't use an arcane focus in place of the spell's material component of "a weapon", despite the fact that no GP cost is listed. The spell doesn't provide you with a weapon with which to make the melee weapon...

Dang, somebody has a dissenting opinion that they're posting about this issue on the internet. I guess this is no longer like all those other issues where there's a broad consensus and therefore nobody does that.

Right, if you had to be able to make a melee attack, then the spell would never work, since you've already used your action to cast a spell. I guess maybe if you had a Scimitar of Speed? Actually no, not even then, since it says the attack has to be part of the same action!

Presumably from BSQWIC

Others will stop that kind of cold exploit...

I think RAW it would apply to one roll: "when you cast a spell that deals damage of the type associated with your draconic ancestry, you can add your Charisma modifier to one damage roll of that spell." The triggering condition is "casting a spell", and it grants you +CHA to one roll. It...

That's more or less what I was envisioning. Messing with concentration is playing with fire, balance-wise, so if it were me I would say let's address it on a case-by-case basis, rather than implementing a blanket house rule like that. But my gut says it wouldn't open up anything wildly overpowered.

I assume what you are going for is that you want Suggestion to apply for one round? There is no rule to remove concentration from a spell in exchanged for a reduced duration. You could, of course, work with your DM to homebrew something like that, but there's no particular reason to think that...

This isn't usually too hard to achieve, though. If a fireball hits two creatures (which most people would consider a poor use of a fireball), then its single-target-equivalent damage value is essentially 12d6. A Paladin using a 3rd level smite gets 4d8 out of that slot, on top of their regular...

I think the only difference in the case where average damage from the AoE is enough to kill enemies outright is that single target damage from a single spell or attack is capped at one enemy's worth of HP; so it's not that the AoE gets more efficient, it's that single target damage gets less...