Search results

I don't think you understand what CR is meant to accomplish, there. There are not many anomalies, and most of them seem to be "the standard formula isn't producing quite what we want. Let's tweak it". One or two are almost certainly editing mistakes, but I've yet to find one that looks like it...

Well, got a reply: From Twitter So, that's the official ruling. I am certain that all discussion about this point will now cease and everyone will agree that I am right1. 1 Reality may differ from projections

Exactly. You can only benefit from one feature, spell, item or whatever at a time that says your AC equals, is or is set to something. So Mage Armour and the Draconic sorceror bloodline say your AC is 13. Barbarians have an Unarmoured AC "equal to 10 + their Dexterity modifier + their...

I completely agree that a shield is armour. I completely disagree that I'm taking liberties in what I mean by "wielding". If a shield is strapped on, you can still bash people with it. Actually, a well fitting shield is extremely natural to use - effectively, you backhand the target with a lump...

If +2AC is a Very Big Deal, what do you think about an attack that gives your target a minimum of +2 and a maximum of +6 to AC? Because that is what happens if you attack someone with a shield, without having the Tavern Brawler feat to support it. In my opinion, the penalty for attacking with...

I think removing the AC bonus if you attack with a shield is just too much faff. One of the best things about 5e is that it doesn't need constant recalculation. Consider: Under the actual rules of 5e, you get the AC bonus from a shield while you wield it. There is no condition or exemption -...

It's not a house rule and it's not contrary to the rules. It is a ruling, though. It's not contrary because nowhere is there a rule that says you can attack with shields. There are bits of flavour text imply attacking with a shield, but there is no actual text that says "you can attack with a...

Nitpicking here, but: Dual Wielder says that you can use Two Weapon Fighting "even when the one handed melee weapons you are wielding are not light". So you can wield a pair of longswords, if you like. Or a longsword and a shield.

Fighters are not proficient in "ALL shields". They are proficient in "Shields". As armour. Of course, you are perfectly entitled in your own game to allow proficiency with armour to allow a character to use that armour as a weapon. I personally will not allow it in my games, because I do not...

I think the rules are clear on those points. Spiked Shields are not martial or simple. They are not on the list or martial or simple weapons. Spiked Shields are not light. They do not say they are light. They're also not versatile, finesseable and you don't need to load them. Weapons are assumed...

Fighters are proficient with simple weapons and martial weapons. Spiked shields are not on that list. In order to be considered proficient with a weapon, you need to have proficiency in it as a weapon. Would you consider a character who is proficient in heavy armour to also be able to add their...

Up to the GM to make a ruling. At the very least, though, they aren't going to be proficient with it. My ruling would be that the bonus action to shove remains just that. A bonus action to shove. Otherwise the spiked shield is just an improvised weapon that deals d6 piercing damage and gives...

At no point did anyone I've seen claim that a shield is light. It isn't. I'm not sure what you're trying to refute there. Am I missing something? Edited to add: Ah, I see where the suggestion was. That wasn't me, though. I completely agree with you in that a shield should not be light...

Because a shield bash involves an attack roll and potential damage. Shield Mastery allows you, when you use the Attack action, to use a bonus action to Shove using your shield. Shove is, technically, a thing that can be done using the Attack action that is not an attack - you forego the attack...

It's also worth noting that there is nothing in the 5e rules that says that you lose the shield's AC bonus if you attack with it. If you have a shield, you can attack with it as an improvised weapon (with disadvantage and without including your proficiency), doing 1d4+ Strength modifier damage...

The Shield Mastery feat gives you a bonus action to Shove with your shield, not attack. However, it also gives you the ability to add your shield bonus to Dexterity saving throws against spells and other harmful effects that target only you, and allows the use of a reaction to get evasion (no...

Cleric domain spells are extra prepared spells. The acolyte gets an extra 1st level spell slot. To the best of my knowledge, there is no way in the system to get extra general-purpose spell slots other than taking a level in a class that provides them. Even items like the ring of spell storing...

Not in this case. The Acolyte has exactly the number of spells prepared as a 1st-level Cleric would (1 + 2 from the Wisdom modifier). The Magic Initiate feat actually gives the character innate spellcasting, with one slot per day that can only be used for the extra spell. WotC has confirmed...

Well, drat. There goes that idea :-)

So, I mentioned a while back that I'm working on a tool that applies racial (and other) templates to statblocks. (I'm still working on it, albeit slowly; too much work recently. I was hoping to get it able to automatically pick spells this week (cantrips for High Elves, replacement cantrips for...