Search results

No, it only allows you to use a weapon as a focus; it's not itself a focus.

I want a Ring of Walking on Sunshine :)

Best exploit that immediately comes to mind is flooding an area of dangerous terrain so you can walk safely across it. With create water and shape water you could manage that pretty well I guess. But it doesn't seem particularly game breaking.

You just made a clear point that, by RAW, you can't cast the spell by targeting the empty space. If you can't cast the spell, why would you lose the slot and your action? Not that I disagree with that ruling, just that I don't think you're getting it from the rules at all.

Who says you waste your turn? Just ask the DM: "Can I target square A?" "No". "Can I target square B?" "No." "Square C?" "Yes." "Ah there he is." That is my point, the rules don't say how to resolve it, so that is just as "RAW" as your suggestion. From which I conclude that this is not a place...

I understand your point. But there's no practical difference between the first option and ruling that you cast the spell and automatically miss. So that distinction seems a bit moot. There's a big difference between that and the second option, since it turns firebolt in to an effective...

Updating status...

Like, the slot is expended and the action wasted, to no effect? Or like the DM says "you are unable to cast the spell, you'll have to do something else?"

What would you say happens then if the wizard suspects that an invisible creature is in a space and tries to cast firebolt at it, but the creature is not there?

For the most part I think it is OK, the disadvantage rule for opponents you can't see is good enough for me. True Strike in particular is weird, because you need to know pretty well where the target is (so you can point to them and distinguish them from other nearby creatures), but you don't...

I think stealth rules vary a lot from table to table, but for me, unless the deurgar used its action to hide and beat your perception with its stealth check, then you would know where it was and could target it with an attack.

OK this is really a separate issue, but ray of enfeeblement is also a terrible spell.

You know, cantrip spell scrolls are super cheap :) It was a good level 1 spell in 3e. But keeping it a cantrip, I'm reasonably content with my version: you cast it on an ally, they get advantage on their next attack. That's useful when anyone in the party has a more powerful attack option than...

Just to add, the only reason I feel so confident that there aren't clever ways to make TS really useful is that I've read through a dozen or so threads over the past six years where people have looked for one. Eventually you convince yourself its not there to find. Actually, I remember someone...

Oh good point about dex saves I forgot. So your argument is: TS is helps when your hit chance is terrible, but then you have to compare to a save cantrip Invisibility rules out most save cantrips (frostbite, toll the dead, infestation). Cover (lets suppose) rules out bonfire, and gives a big...

And you hope it will be visible again by your next turn? Even so, I think acid splash is a superior option in this case. (It has a save and you don't need to see the target.)

If the target is behind full cover, how are you casting true strike on them? "To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover."

Yes, but in occasions where you can see your opponent but you have to come out of hiding to attack them, then TS gives you advantage. Depending on how your DM runs stealth, that could be more or less common. But it probably won't ever be very common.

Negating disadvantage isn't really any more useful than granting advantage. Getting advantage on the plane shift attack is nice. But if it is worth you casting TS (and hoping to keep your concentration up), then it is also worth getting an ally (or better your familiar) to use the help action...

To be fair, it is effective when you are in an ambush situation and you can cast it before rolling initiative. But that just hardly comes up very often.