Search results

I think you're thinking of the reverse-grapplig rules in the DMG. They let you grab on and climb around a larger creature, and force it to oppose your attempts with acrobatics instead of athletics. It doesn't impede the dragon's ability to move, though.

Isn't the monster you're grappling just going to wail on you now? Is that what you really want?

Really all the information they give us about the Hexblade's patron is that it is some power in the Shadowfell. That's really it. That's enough leeway that the patron could be a sentient weapon, the Raven Queen herself, or any powerful denizen of the plane or related to the plane. Undead like...

Christ, dude. That's a sweet burn and all, but I'm going to ask you to leave me alone from now on.

Dude, just scroll up and read what I already said. Even better, learn to deal with the fact that someone else on the internet disagrees with you.

I already explained my view that the statement does not "basically says" that, so the question is moot.

It does not look like he's referencing RAI at all. Instead, it looks like he's simply answering a rules question. To me, the use of the word "intent" is incidental and colloquial.

We've had years of Crawford providing feedback and clarification on these issues. This is not exactly untrodden ground.

Ahh, my Google-foo is weak. Thanks. I should point out though that Crawford's tweets have the same function of the rules themselves; when he says it, it's the rules.

I still don't understand why the OP allowed his players to select optional monster races when he knew those PCs would not be able to function meaningfully in the game.

There isn't a Crawford tweet 100% on point, but this tweet exchange makes it pretty clear that releasing your grip on something does not consume your object interaction. https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/03/02/2-weapon-casting/

Ok, I gotcha. Well perhaps this warlock stumbles upon a leather-bound tome bound to a death spirit, and the pact the warlock forges with the death spirit is the source of his eldritch powers. Ok, I know that's a rough retread of Death Note, but it is still a source of inspiration for a background.

If your patron is a fallen celestial, why did you make your warlock a Hexblade? That is generally reserved for the denizens of the Shadowfell, while the Fiend pact is what would best fit a fallen angel.

I let my players use their object interaction to rearm themselves. For instance, I'll let them stow a bow and draw a pair of short swords all at once. I also roll shields into this as well, effectively ignoring the requirement of an action to don or doff a shield. I do this for two reasons. For...

Does the Reach property even need to be a thing? Wouldn't extended reach be better left to class features?

Yeah, but the tenor of your posts seemed much more in line with the rules as-is as opposed to suggesting how they could be improved with DM tweaks. I mean, your original post disputed the OP's premise of requiring rules changes.

You might be confusing Mearls with Crawford. Mearls gives rulings while Crawford's tweets carry the weight of the official FAQ or rules in the book.

This is not unique to versatile weapons. As clarified in this Crawford tweet, proper two-handed weapons, such as the greatsword or maul, can also be used in this fashion...

I say abstract weapons further: everything is either a light weapon, a one-handed weapon, or a two handed weapon (whether because it is very large or because you're using a weapon in each hand), and they do 1d6, 1d8, and 2d6 respectively.

Level 11 would definitely give the PCs a lot of extra juice in the fight against Strahd; the pacing guidelines indicate that PCs would normally be level 9 at the final confrontation and reach level 10 upon completion of the module. In either case, I structured the climax so the highlight...