D&D 5E Common rules mistakes

[Sadras]

Drinking from a tankard is considered part of interacting with an object during your movement, but drinking a potion requires an action to do.

To that I'd answer that the tankard is open-topped and a lot more user friendly than a stoppered vial.

 

[Sage Genesis]

MM pg 12.

MULTIATTACK
A creature that can make multiple attacks on its turn has the Multiattack ability.A creature can't use Multiattack when making an opportunity attack, which must be a single melee attack.

The general description of Multiattack has the "on it's turn" wording so all the instances throughout the book don't need it.

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 said before.

Don't take this as disagreement per se, when I said I am unsure I meant just that. I find 5e's writing maddeningly unclear at times.


(PS: It's page 11.)

Did you play 3E? It was a delay/readied action bonanza for martial characters/melee monsters.

Yes I did, quite extensively, but this is a play style issue. Our games never devolved into this kind of behavior.

 

[DaveDash]

Actually since you CAN make an OA (a reaction) on your turn it's clarifying that multi-attack does not apply in this case. This is not the same as readying an action and attacking NOT on your turn so not superfluous at all.
Which is line with all other rulings regarding this kind of feature, in which you can only make one attack using a reaction.

 

[Pvt. Winslow]

I'll try adding one, though I'm not sure if people are mistaken on it.

When in a grapple, both the character who initiated the grapple, and the target of the grapple, can both make attacks as normal. All the grappled condition does is reduce the target's speed to 0, it doesn't prevent them from using the Attack action on their turn. In order to break free of a grapple still requires your Action, but unlike some previous editions, both foes can wail on each other while glued to a spot on the floor and have full efficacy.

It also has no effect on enemy spellcasting, and to my knowledge there is currently no way to "pin" a target. That means a staple technique of grappling, that of locking down a spellcaster and preventing them from retrieving material components, does not work in 5E. Best you could hope for is forcing Disadvantage on ranged spell attacks, but it would have no effect on other spells.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

So does this sound accurate to tell my players to clarify the issue with all of us?


So, for example, orcs are charging through a door. The orcs have Initiative. Players go next. Elgweth's trigger is: "When an orc comes through the door, I fire an arrow." It is an action to Ready, and it triggers your "reaction", which you only get one per round (usually)

So the orc enters, and Elgweth fires after the trigger, then the orc finishes its move if still alive. Player's turn: well, Elgweth has already used his action and reaction for that round, but he has a move left if he wants to relocate.

Readying an Action in 5th edition does not change your Initiative order.

Hmm. It depends. I'm not exactly sure what you are describing. Here is how it works.

Initiative Count
Round 1
18 Orcs' turns: Orcs move towards the players but have not yet moved through the door.
16 Elgweth's turn: Elgweth uses his Action to ready an attack "When an orc comes through the door, I fire an arrow."
15- Other characters act.
Round 2
18 Orcs' turns: Orcs continue moving towards the players, passing through the door. As soon as the first one does, Elgweth uses his Reaction to fire an arrow at it. The orcs continue their turns.
16 Elgweth's turn: Elgweth regains the use of his Reaction, and now acts normally. In this case, there are more orcs, so he starts shooting arrows at them.
15- Other characters act.

Here is how it doesn't work:

Initiative Count
Round 1
18 Orcs' turns: Orcs move towards the players and pass through the door. Elgweth takes an action to shoot them. Wrong: He can't do this because his turn hasn't come up yet (assuming this is the start of combat and there wasn't already a previous round), and readying an action is an Action you take on your own turn.
16 Elgweth's turn: Elgweth moves but doesn't act because he already used his Action to shoot the orc. Wrong: Even if this were round 2 so that Elgweth could have had his shot readied, shooting an orc with a readied attack would use a Reaction rather than his Action.

Hope that helps.

This makes a lot of sense to me. I suppose it's all in the wording. Even IF movement was an action (which the above posters have convinced me it is not, thank you for the explanations,) just stating "I'll shoot as soon as he moves 5ft closer to me" would be enough to shoot before he reaches you, as your Ready action would go off after he moves that 5ft. So this is all good to know.

I wonder if the biggest reason behind the wording in the DMG is to give a bit of a boon to spellcasters when they cast a spell? By making your Readied action occur after the triggering Action, you can no longer shoot a caster as he casts a spell, potentially ruining it. This is important to know, as there could be times a DM (one playing particularly savvy foes), might have five archers Ready actions to shoot the spellcaster if he casts a spell, which would force five separate Concentration checks. Now, the caster would complete the spell, then five arrows would come his way. Equally scary, but perhaps less frustrating?

It also occurs to me that there is no such thing as disrupting a spell as it is being cast in 5e (unless it has a longer than normal casting time, like a minute). You can break concentration on an already cast spell, but damage can't stop the caster from casting a spell in the first place. This means that there is no particular benefit to shooting the caster before he finishes his spellcasting action anyway, unless you manage to "disrupt" his casting by killing him.

I would say reason being that you are not only drinking the potion like the tankard, but you are receiving the healing as well. So it takes the action to drink it and receive the healing effects.

I'd probably say that it is based on the fact that you also have to unstopper the potion. If there is an open potion in your hand, I might allow you to drink it for free.

I'll try adding one, though I'm not sure if people are mistaken on it.

When in a grapple, both the character who initiated the grapple, and the target of the grapple, can both make attacks as normal. All the grappled condition does is reduce the target's speed to 0, it doesn't prevent them from using the Attack action on their turn. In order to break free of a grapple still requires your Action, but unlike some previous editions, both foes can wail on each other while glued to a spot on the floor and have full efficacy.

It also has no effect on enemy spellcasting, and to my knowledge there is currently no way to "pin" a target. That means a staple technique of grappling, that of locking down a spellcaster and preventing them from retrieving material components, does not work in 5E. Best you could hope for is forcing Disadvantage on ranged spell attacks, but it would have no effect on other spells.

Also, grappling doesn't count as an Action, it counts as an attack. So characters with Extra Attack have more grappling attempts. The same thing goes with the shove attack.

I suppose you could tie up the caster to prevent them from casting spells. Or convince your DM that you should be able to improvise holding his arms is just as reasonable as tying him up.

 

[Paraxis]

Grapple does cause confusion because it like many things the expectations of the real world meaning of terms is not the game meaning of the same term.

A grappled character can still attack with a pole arm, cast spells that require somatic and material components, they can do anything besides move or stand up.

Speaking of which being grappled or even pinned by virtue of the grappler feat doesn't make you prone, and being pinned only causes the restrained condition, which again doesn't prevent you from using pole arms or casting spells.

Just a reminder sometimes words like "pinned" or "restrained" don't translate to the game effects well.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I'll try adding one, though I'm not sure if people are mistaken on it.

When in a grapple, both the character who initiated the grapple, and the target of the grapple, can both make attacks as normal. All the grappled condition does is reduce the target's speed to 0, it doesn't prevent them from using the Attack action on their turn. In order to break free of a grapple still requires your Action, but unlike some previous editions, both foes can wail on each other while glued to a spot on the floor and have full efficacy.

This is true, but as a tactical note: you can't stand up from being Prone when your speed is zero, so grapple/prone will tilt the combat decisively in your favor, at the opportunity cost of two attacks (or more) which you sacrifice to make the grapple/push prone.

 

[Pvt. Winslow]

This is true, but as a tactical note: you can't stand up from being Prone when your speed is zero, so grapple/prone will tilt the combat decisively in your favor, at the opportunity cost of two attacks (or more) which you sacrifice to make the grapple/push prone.

Oh hey! Good call! So there is a version of pin in 5E. Basically you just need to grapple a target, then on your next turn use the shove action to knock them prone. On their turn they can't stand from prone as they have 0 speed from the grapple, and if they attack you they have Disadvantage. As they are prone, all of your attacks will have Advantage against them. Only way for them to get away from you is to successfully make a Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check as an Action.

That is a cool find emdw45.

 

[Paraxis]

Once you have multiattack you can shove a target prone and then grapple with advantage, or grab first then shove, as both of those options take the place of a single attack if you take the attack action.

 

[Coredump]

nevermind...