Search results

The basic pact weapon (i.e. NOT an actual magic weapon you bind with a ritual) is created, not summoned or plane shifted. It's not a magical process, it's as natural to D&D worlds as dragon breath, golems or ghosts. Therefore, in an AMF a bladepact warlock can create a pact weapon, and it...

I can't stop you homebrewing, but if it were actually magical it would say so. It's actually more words to say it counts as magical than it does to say it is magical. Like they do for every single magical weapon in the DMG.

I chose my words carefully. I said "at 3rd level". And since I said "while benefitting" from Favoured Foe it prevents you from "benefitting" from concentration spells, I'm still not wrong. You cannot simultaneously benefit from both.

I'm now convinced that this is the case. And that's a problem. On its face, at 3rd level the ability lets you do 2.5 extra damage....per round....if you hit that target at least once in that round. So less than 2 per round given that you might miss. This is not much at all. Then...it only...

The crux of my uncertainty is this: a Pact of the Blade warlock's weapon counts as a magic weapon for the purposes of bypassing damage resistance/immunity, but counting as a magic weapon for one purpose does not make it an actual magic weapon! For example, it won't detect as magic to a detect...

Thanks for your reply. Is an effect which lasts until you lose concentration by definition an effect that requires concentration?

There are a handful of effects in 5e that are NOT spells, but last for a certain duration "or until you lose your concentration (as if you were concentrating on a spell)". So how can these effects be combined with concentrating on an ACTUAL spell? According to the PHB p203, the following...

What game mechanic do you use to represent the chance of the cleric fumbling when casting a spell that uses saving throws rather than attack rolls?

I find this argument to be disingenuous. The wizard in the back is NOT merely 'standing in the back not swinging a sword', he is standing in the back 'messing with forces Man Was Not Meant To Know!' Without a possible negative consequence. Unless he casts a spell that involves an attack roll...

It's NOT 'typeless' damage. It is bludgeoning, piercing, slashing or radiant damage, matching the damage type of the weapon. There is no such thing as 'typeless' damage in 5e. Sneak Attack, critical hit damage, hunter's mark damage, NONE of those exist separately; they all just increase...

I rolled and played a Barbarian/Warlock. I had intended to roll up a Hexblade (new at the time), but my rolls were 18 17 17 14 13 5, and my first thought was if I took variant human I could have three 18s in my physical stats! Of course I could've made a great Hexblade with those rolls (or...

If, I repeat if, you have a player saying that his PC is doing stupid stuff, that's one thing: a player problem, not a rules problem. But just like The Batman-comics AND TV show-WHEN The Batman survives the fall-and he will!-the writer will provide some explanation. The player having his high...

Really? At the end of an episode, Batman gets pushed out of a plane at 1000 feet. The action freezes while the announcer says, "Will Batman survive the fall? Will The Riddler get away with his dastardly plan? Tune in next week! Same bat time, same bat channel!" ....and YOU think that the...

It's been said many times that high level D&D PCs ARE superhuman! We KNOW that high level PCs are intended to be tough enough to survive such a fall, because the rules for falling and the rules for the hit points of high level PCs demonstrate that they can indeed survive such a fall. If the...

I agree with you. If the DM asked me why I was jumping off a cliff, and then went with my answer (trying to survive=roll falling damage normally, trying to commit suicide=auto-death) then no-one in this thread on either side would bat an eyelid. Unfortunately we have DMs on this thread openly...

I'll hold my hands up; I totally missed the intended humour. Maybe if the other posters who are saying the same thing weren't being completely serious I would have spotted your intention. My bad.

Completely agree that the DM decides if any spiders present are the ones in the MM (if they are then they are, by the rules, both monsters AND creatures). The ones that don't pose a threat and therefore don't get stats are not monsters, but the natural language of the word 'creature' applies to...

None of that makes sense in the context of this thread. No-one is trying to kill themselves. Asking the player who is about to jump "Are you trying to kill yourself?", they answer "No, I'm trying to take as little damage on the way down as possible", and you responding "Okay, you obviously are...

Getting damaged hurts. Getting magically healed is pleasurable. This can be....misused...? :)

I'll just remind you what I already said: ALL spiders are 'creatures', but only the ones you can fight and possibly kill and that have stats (and hit points) counts as 'monsters'. This is not me 'ruling' this. This is from the 5e Monster Manual.