Search results

Bladechanter feat has the two-weapon fighting style (apart from the e levels of wizard and fighter) prerequisite. My question is: is the fighting style prerequisite a fluff thing, or setting dependant or is it crucial for balance? I ask because a player of mine wants to do a dueling bladechanter...

If you are walking on the edge of it yes. But if I know there is a hazard and I don't know how big but still need to traverse it, I would try to go around it by a wide margin, say 30 ft and then try again, if I still take damage, maybe another 15. It's trial and error if you don't know where the...

I'm not sure if it's raw, but they way I've always seen it being ruled is that once you first entered the area (and take your first 2d4 damage) the DM tells the player that the area is dangerous and asks if the PC (or decides if it's a monster) wants to keep moving through there. They don't know...

Makes sense, so it's passive Perception if they don't want to / have no reason to spend and Acton to look for danger. Still seems odd that if they are proficient in Perception and their wis is greater than my wis, they automatically see it. The spell says the area looks natural.

Still curious about the first part though. How have you been adjusting the spell?

My bad, it is indeed 3rd level, I went by memory on this one

The spike growth spell states, and i quote " A creature that can’t see the area when the spell is cast can spot the hazardous terrain just before entering it by making a Perception check against your spell save DC." Does the creature need to spend an action to search and thus make the check or...

I think the feat is too powerful. Removing AC bonus from cover is the specific part of the feat that im looking to modify. Specially because the feat already ignores cover in a more limited way through ricochet maneuver. Now.i need to figure out how to modify it to still make it balanced. My...

I gave you three examples of shots, target behind an arrowslit, through the hole of a locked door and behind a castle wall. Two of those are listed on the Adventurer's guide as examples of 3/4 cover (and thus would provide no AC against a deadeye shooter without the ricochet maneuver) and could...

My angle is a different one. I think ignoring cover on every attack for free is too cheap. I think you need to invest something (a bonus action and only one attack per turn) to be able to ignore the target being behind an arrowslit. An arrow hitting you through the hole of a locked door is a...

Thanks a lot

On a second thought, I think the overlap still bother me a bit. I think ricochet for n 0 exertion covers very well the talent to shoot through cover that the feat historically offers (and i like the idea that only one attack can surpass cover and consumes the archer bonus action to "carefully...

I was building a rogue character (for fun) amd when I came to choose my tricks, I stumbled upon the following. Observer: You gain an expertise die on Perception checks and increase your passive Perception score by 3. Now naturally, if you have an expertise die, you passive already increases by...

Good point about the ricochet NOT costing exertion due to the feat (I completely missed that). In light of that fact, the niche where ricochet does help (as exemplified by @Boldo) makes it not feel like a wasted space

Pleaae help.me.understsndnthis feat amd maneuver interaction. The deadeye feat gives you access to the ricochet maneuver, which let's you make your next attack ignoring cover on the target. All good, but the 2nd bullet on the deadeye feal also says that target with cover doesn't have an AC...

A5e datasheet? Where can I get my hands on that? Can you give me a link please?

Does that mean that I could also choose " I want +1d6 damage". Then roll it , miss it and waste the resource? Or even choose the +1, roll it, miss it anyway, and waste the resource? I'm ok with that option, the ranger has to many plusses to attack and damage to get a killer alpha strike if he...

This is quite specific, so I'm kinda after help with RAW interpretation or maybe how others have ruled it (or, God forbid, designer's intention). The accuracy Bonus of the Ranger's trained accuracy feature reads "When you make a weapon attack, you can use your reaction to gain an attack bonus...

Yeah, I'm of the same opinion. I wasn't sure about the 2 maneuvers you get when you multiclass, but I am planning to solve the fighter progression issue (where you take a dip in fighter as a rogue or herald for example and you almost double the rate of your maneuvers for the rest of you career)...

Just being sure i am not missing something... Let's say i have 9 levels in ranger and decided to take 2 levels in rogue. Do I get 2 new traditions and 2 maneuvers at my highest degree (3rd in this case) or 2 1st degree maneuvers? I think it would get 3rd degree maneuvers if I'm reading...