Search results

I know but I'm unsure what you mean to say with this. The initial burst is poison. The spores invading the creature's body is the disease. To extend this to the treant, the initial slam is bludgeoning and the fungus is the disease. I'm not saying the treant's slam is entirely negated, just the...

In D&D a parasite like that is a disease. Look at the 5e Slaad and see what it says about implanting an egg into a victim: it's a disease. Fungal spores invading a body? Explicitly a disease. Go look at the Gas Spore in the Monster Manual, you'll find it under "Fungi". People really need to...

Incidentally, the original Pathfinder tree is for me a (minor) example of game design failure. The flavor text states that it's a disease - because that's what fungal infections are, even in D&D. The mechanics say that it isn't. This is a situation that never should have happened in the first...

First of all, precedent of previous editions is hardly relevant. Unlike most RPGs, D&D tends to make some pretty sweeping changes over the years as the editions tick by. Entire classes and paradigms have been radically overhauled from one edition to another, so what a past edition did isn't very...

The Antimagic Field spell says that creatures created by magic temporarily wink out of existence. Strictly speaking that would also include zombies, assuming they were created by the Animate Dead spell. That's probably not really what the spell is meant to do as it didn't function this way in...

I can see why one would draw that conclusion but I'm not sure I share it. "Can do X on its turn" is not the same as "can only do X when it's their turn." The line about opportunity attacks is entirely superfluous if your interpretation were true, since it provides no information that hasn't been...

Not too sure about that. Note that the Multiattack action (which loads and loads of monsters have, including NPCs) doesn't have this on-your-turn limitation and can be fully used on a Readied Action.

If you go with a falling damage analogue (and I must admit I'm not entirely sold on that idea), I would propose to base the damage on the push distance prevented instead of the total distance. The impact is greater if the subject retains more kinetic energy. Let's say someone is pushed back 50'...

Lesser Restoration. That one seems truly gone, although Fabricate ought to be able to turn pottery shards into a pot for example.

Just because you're an ordained priest who can perform marriages doesn't mean you can call down divine intervention. There is a very clear, specific class ability for that. Saying that non-Cleric priests can replicate this is like saying every lumberjack can Hide in Plain Sight as a 10th level...

I would say no, you can't. Primarily because such a thing is a 10th level Cleric ability. Giving this ability to just about anybody who prays really robs the Cleric. Second, there's statistics to take into account. If you give a prayer just a 1% chance of success, then a group of ~70 people...

Exactly this. Every single attack is an "aimed shot" already because it represents spotting, creating, and exploiting openings well enough to score a meaningful enough blow. Bypassing armor is what the d20 roll is already for and there are numerous other mechanics already in place to measure...

None, although there are penalties for fighting simultaneously with both main- and off-hand. Namely you do less damage with the odd-hand. I suggest you take a look at this handy website WotC have set up if you have any other basic rules questions...

Well, falling damage still entirely bypasses 3e damage reduction but a launched boulder wouldn't. Even though both of them are essentially a collision with a rock. As I said, 3e came closer but it doesn't quite have it either.

Derren: Respectfully, if you want that level of world-simulation out of your RPGs then D&D might not be the best game for you. No edition of D&D was ever built with that kind of internal consistency. It came kind of close with 3e, where damage resistance meant that huge flying rocks could do...

But if you're hidden then you already have advantage on the attack next round. Your strategy is quite literally to cast a spell to grant yourself advantage and then follow up with an action that grants you advantage.

"Spellcasting" can only come form one specific class' spell list, but "Innate Spellcasting" has no such restriction. You can best see the difference when looking at a Drow Mage or Priestess of Lolth, as they have both. This is also explained on page 10 of the MM.

No, it seems you're still not understanding the difference between prescriptive and descriptive. In a descriptive sense: no, it can't throw around buildings or other "big freaking objects" because the Strength/Weight rules don't support it. It might be able to throw something pretty hard based...

*sigh* You are approaching this from a prescriptive point of view. The tarrasque is described as really bloody dangerous, ergo it can do such-and-such. My point is that statblocks don't work that way. They are descriptive instead of prescriptive. Statblocks show what a monster is or does, not...

Godzilla is not 50 feet tall. Godzilla is hundreds of feet tall. And just because the tarrasque has maximum D&D strength doesn't mean it's as strong as godzilla. Might as well say it's got the strength of Superman if you go by that logic.