SA is official. As official as any rulebook WotC releases. 5e's official policy is simply that you should ignore any official stuff you don't like (e.g. AL ignores a lot of official stuff in their campaign rules)
D&D 5E Dispel Magic & Spellcasting Ability Check
I would really rather not go through the PHB to list every single ability and spell that allows that. The simplest end would be you showing me how Initiative is not an ability check.
By RAW, if you accept that A) Initiative is an ability check, dexterity, and B) Jack of all Trades applies to all ability checks, then by definition Jack of All Trades applies to Initiative. The only way to not apply it is to say that either Initiative is not an ability check, or Jack of All Trades does not apply to all ability checks. If you play in either of those ways, that is fine, just don't tell new players it is RAW when it is a house rule.
Sage Advice is just that, advice. An official opinion is still an opinion. Everything in Adventures League that's legal is written, and every season it's updated, and when a new book comes out in the middle of a season, and ammendment comes out stating what's legal and what's not, and do you know what's never written in there? Nothing from Sage Advice, Unearthed Arcana, or any of those purchasable classes found in the DMs guild is ever found on print to be legal. If it's not in a book, it's not an official rule, period.
Sent from my SM-T813 using Tapatalk
You have to go through the book, there's an index in the back that shows you what pages everything is on.
You're trying to argue a technicality with a technicality. Your argument is weak. Initiative is not a skill, it can't be used as a skill and you can't gain proficiency in it. Jack of All Trades is worded the way it is, could be because the writers or editors were lazy, or because they didn't want to exclude tool proficiencies. It doesn't matter because it is 100% the DM'S choice on how he wants to handle it, not the player. It's not a house rule, because I'm not making anything up, I'm simply making a decision on how a rule is written.
Sent from my SM-T813 using Tapatalk
Lucas Blackstone
Explorer
In my Player's Handbook, in the Ability Check section sub header " Using Each Ability ", sub header "Dexterity" it straight up lists Initiative.
Jack of All Trades says " At 2nd level, you can add half your proficiency bonus, rounded down, to any ability check you make that doesn't already include your proficiency bonus.
Initiative checks do not normally include your proficiency bonus, and is an ability check that you make, there for you add half your proficiency bonus.
It's really simple. If you don't like it, as we talked about before you can of course not allow it, but the rules do allow for it. It doesn't really matter what Sage Advice said on the matter ( though they did clarify it ).
Then at this point we are just disagreeing on the difference between a house rule and a Ruling. IMO, a ruling applies when a rule is vague, like hiding. a house rule is when you make something specifically divorced or against the written rules. More specifically, it seems like you are arguing against RAI, not RAW, since you think JoAT is simply written wrong. I am simply saying that, were one to play the slave to RAW, Jack of all Trades applies to ALL Ability Checks, and Initiative is an ability check. By RAW, this is how it is written. If Jack of All Trades said "All Skills" You would be right, but it specifically says "ability checks", a much broader category.
You are disagreeing with RAI, when I have been talking only about RAW this whole time, so we really have no argument. I personally apply Jack of All Trades to initiative, and would tell others that is how it works as well, because that is the exact definition of what it says. The fact that you don't run it that way is perfectly fine with me, the only point I feel needs to be argued is that you say it is RAW, when it is not.
Last edited:
Here's not what you're not understanding, if you're not a DM, the decision is not yours to make. There is no argument.
Sent from my SM-T813 using Tapatalk
Harzel
Adventurer
No one is arguing your right to make the decision. But the decision that you are making contradicts RAW. Therefore it is a houserule.
Lucas Blackstone
Explorer
Did you misunderstand both my posts saying that you could choose to disallow it if you wanted to? I wasn't saying you had to play with the stock rules. You said in one of your posts "Initiative never use proficiency bonuses, so how would you ever get to add JoAT?". You put a question mark there and everything. I wasn't arguing with you. I was answering your question. Sorry if I offended you in doing so.
It doesn't contradict anything, the rule is written vague and subject to interpretation, and my interpretation is what it is. That's the purpose of a DM is to interpret vague rules so the players understand what freedoms and limits they have.
A house rule is something completely made up like, you roll a 1 on an attack and you drop your weapon.
Sent from my SM-T813 using Tapatalk
Similar Threads
