log in or register to remove this ad

 

5E messy's 5e newbie questions thread

BlivetWidget

Explorer
I went through to find spells that can heal undead or constructs. They are Aura of Life, Aura of Vitality, Goodberry, Life Transference, Regenerate, Revivify (technically), and, of course, Wish.
I'd like to add Mending to your list of spells that can heal constructs. RAW it doesn't work on undead, but since corpses are objects, you could repair a corpse before your made it undead it or-holdonasecond... I just realized that Mending is the perfect assassin's spell to hide a knife wound.

Or, if you don't have Regeneration, use mending to reattach that limb before you Raise Dead.

Hm. Mending is looking better and better.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

messy

Explorer
73. it seems that it's possible to have four active spell effects in one round: one cast as a standard action (which would need to be a cantrip, like fire bolt), one cast as a bonus action (like misty step), one cast as a reaction (like shield), and one on which the caster is concentrating (like blur). is this correct?
 

iserith

Magic Wordsmith
73. it seems that it's possible to have four active spell effects in one round: one cast as a standard action (which would need to be a cantrip, like fire bolt), one cast as a bonus action (like misty step), one cast as a reaction (like shield), and one on which the caster is concentrating (like blur). is this correct?
That is correct, though it's not called a "standard action" in this game. It's just an "action."
 

messy

Explorer
I think this is pretty much entirely a DM call. First of all, though, note that the meaning of 'combustible' can vary somewhat, depending on to what extent you think it means 'easy to ignite' as opposed to just 'burnable'. That said, I just try to think in very rough terms about how hot I think the flame is, how long it is in contact with the item/substance in question, and how easy, more or less, the item is to ignite (which comes down to how hot it has to be and its heat capacity).

On one end of the spectrum, the flame from produce flame "harms neither you nor your equipment" and continual flame "produces no heat". I kinda don't think those are going to ignite anything.

Highly damaging but brief fires, such as flame strike or fireball, will certainly char paper or very thin wood, and might set it ablaze; however, because they are so brief, thicker wood or cloth would be lightly charred or singed. For oil, it depends on what you think 'oil' is in your world: if you think it is like kerosene, then it probably ignites; if you think it is more like a heavy fuel oil, whale oil, or vegetable oil, then (IMO) probably not.

Something like flame blade depends on how it is used. If it just strikes something, it might leave some soot, but probably won't set it on fire. But if you want to hold it against a piece of paper, kindling, or a torch - sure, it will set them on fire. I'd even let it work on something harder like a piece of coal, if you were patient.

Several spells specifically refer to their effect on 'flammable' objects. Personally, I don't think this adds much since it just moves the question to what materials you consider 'flammable'.
that all makes sense, but what about wall of fire? it doesn't specify, leading one to assume it doesn't ignite combustibles. but on the other hand, it's, ya know, a wall of fire. it really seems like an open flame would ignite anything flammable that touches it.
 

Harzel

Adventurer
that all makes sense, but what about wall of fire? it doesn't specify, leading one to assume it doesn't ignite combustibles. but on the other hand, it's, ya know, a wall of fire. it really seems like an open flame would ignite anything flammable that touches it.
Indeed, it does not specify, but it also doesn't say it emits light even though some other fire spells say how much light they emit. So I'd just ignore the omission and apply the same principles - it's dealing 5d8 damage, so my take is that like paper or thin wood ignites if it lasts for at least a round. If it lasts the full minute, just about anything that can burn will ignite. Of course, whether it keeps burning after the wall is gone is a matter of whether the material can sustain its own combustion. Sufficiently wet wood, for example, might not be able to do so.
 

delph

Explorer
74. Feat Second chance said "When a creature you can see hits you with an attack roll, you can use your reaction to force that creature to reroll" How it work with dis/advantage? they have to roll both dices or just one?
 

billd91

Hobbit on Quest
74. Feat Second chance said "When a creature you can see hits you with an attack roll, you can use your reaction to force that creature to reroll" How it work with dis/advantage? they have to roll both dices or just one?
If they rolled with advantage or disadvantage initially, I’d say they roll with it again. A reroll should involve all of the modifiers or factors of the initial roll.
 

messy

Explorer
75. does defense style work only with actual armor worn on one's body? does it work if the character isn't wearing armor but holding a shield? does it work with mage armor?

76. the observant feat mentions passive investigation, but i can't seem to find this mentioned anywhere else in the book. when is passive investigation used?

77. is a dark elf's sunlight sensitivity only applicable in actual sunlight, or in the presence of magical light, too (such as a light, continual flame, or daylight spell)?

78. many spells seem good-guy-oriented. would it be reasonable to have an evil cleric cast a reskinned version of divine favor that does necrotic damage?

79. since two-weapon fighting seems to deal only with light melee and thrown weapons, what's the benefit of a hand crossbow being light?
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen
75. does defense style work only with actual armor worn on one's body? does it work if the character isn't wearing armor but holding a shield? does it work with mage armor?
Only actual, worn armor. A shield is a bit of an edge-case, but I would say no. Definitely no to Mage Armor.

76. the observant feat mentions passive investigation, but i can't seem to find this mentioned anywhere else in the book. when is passive investigation used?
The DM can call for a passive check with any ability and/or skill, Wisdom (Perception) is just the most common. The player’s handbook suggests that passive checks be used to represent the average result of an action performed repeatedly over a period of time.

77. is a dark elf's sunlight sensitivity only applicable in actual sunlight, or in the presence of magical light, too (such as a light, continual flame, or daylight spell)?
Only in sunlight, though some magic effects (such as the light shed by a sun blade) specify that the light they create is sunlight.

78. many spells seem good-guy-oriented. would it be reasonable to have an evil cleric cast a reskinned version of divine favor that does necrotic damage?
Sure. Of course it’s up to the DM, but it’s a perfectly reasonable thing to allow in my opinion.

79. since two-weapon fighting seems to deal only with light melee and thrown weapons, what's the benefit of a hand crossbow being light?
None on its own, but it may interact with rules that care about weapons’ properties. For example, I think the optional speed factor rules in the dungeon master’s guide give a +2 initiative bonus for attacks with light weapons.
 

78. many spells seem good-guy-oriented. would it be reasonable to have an evil cleric cast a reskinned version of divine favor that does necrotic damage?
While I respect a DM's right to not approve house rules suggested by someone else, this is so reasonable that I'd consider a DM to be weirdly unreasonable not to allow it.

I always assume that, for instance, the spell sacred flame could instead be profane flame and do necrotic damage, or an Oathbreaker or other evil themed paladin could do necrotic damage with their smites.
 

billd91

Hobbit on Quest
While I respect a DM's right to not approve house rules suggested by someone else, this is so reasonable that I'd consider a DM to be weirdly unreasonable not to allow it.
Personally, I wouldn't go for it. I think the idea that radiant is good/necrotic is evil as opposite sides of the coin is not really true. I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to someone asking for a necrotic-themed alternative, but I wouldn't characterize it as something just any evil cleric would want/have access to because doing radiant damage with sacred flame implies some kind of draw upon the power of good.
 

77. is a dark elf's sunlight sensitivity only applicable in actual sunlight, or in the presence of magical light, too (such as a light, continual flame, or daylight spell)?
We just ignore that part of the drow heritage. My players are new enough that it's best to give them less to remember.
 

Al'Kelhar

Explorer
Plus you have massive penalties - disadvantage to any attack, saving throw or skill check based upon Strength or Dexterity.

So if you're building a prison for criminal mages, an effective way to suppress their abilities is to padlock them into suits of plate armour.
Ring mail. It's still heavy armour, but much, much cheaper.
 

Personally, I wouldn't go for it. I think the idea that radiant is good/necrotic is evil as opposite sides of the coin is not really true. I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to someone asking for a necrotic-themed alternative, but I wouldn't characterize it as something just any evil cleric would want/have access to because doing radiant damage with sacred flame implies some kind of draw upon the power of good.
How about radiant damage that looks like some sort of dark emanation, rather than bright and shiny?
 

billd91

Hobbit on Quest
How about radiant damage that looks like some sort of dark emanation, rather than bright and shiny?
That seems perfectly reasonable to me. The different special effect could be dependent on the diety/portfoloio/moral outlook supplying the divine, radiant power.
 

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top