November's SAGE ADVICE Is Here!

November's Sage Advice column by WotC's Jeremy Crawford is up. This month deals with lightfoot halfing and wood elf hiding racial traits, some class features, backgrounds (you can have only one!), muticlassing, surprise rounds in combat, and more. Check out this month's Sage Advice here. The advice here has been added to the Sage Advice Compendium.

 

[Orlax]

Learning by failure is a dumb way to teach. We didnt learn in school without teacher instruction or a tect explaining the process. The DMs shoud be taught the insides and guts of the system. The benchmarks, the justifications, the reasons for X.

5e is one of the best editions for teaching by it still failed to explain why "ClassX has Y and why DMs should beware touching it". The " modifying classes" article should have been in the DMG. There are DMs out there should don't realize all the hidden elements of the game.

Learning by failure is how you learn in school it's why they teach you the same thing over and over again and give you a chance to fail at it in homework. Also, and again, learning how to DM isn't like learning how to do math or how to write a constructive paragraph. Learning how to DM is like learning how to play football, you're going to end up knocked on your butt a few times before you get really good at it, and even when you are really good at it you are still going to get knocked on your butt.

The reason it is unimportant to tell them x is x because of y is because none of that actually matters once we are in the table. All that matters at that point is numbers 1 2 and 3 from above. If the RAW is holding up one of those three points, will eff it make something up, and if that new ruling stops working try something else out. Make sure your players are okay with how things are working and just keep going. Eventually you will figure out what works for you and your table.

I've seen a million different house rules, some I'm down for and some I'd never play with, but someone does play with those house rules and they ostensibly either enjoy those house rules greatly or can tolerate it enough to keep playing with it in place (otherwise no one would be paying with that house rule). At that point out comes down to properly communicating your feelings and the guides aren't big enough to cover how to do that.

 

[Minigiant]

Learning by failure is how you learn in school it's why they teach you the same thing over and over again and give you a chance to fail at it in homework. Also, and again, learning how to DM isn't like learning how to do math or how to write a constructive paragraph. Learning how to DM is like learning how to play football, you're going to end up knocked on your butt a few times before you get really good at it, and even when you are really good at it you are still going to get knocked on your butt.

The reason it is unimportant to tell them x is x because of y is because none of that actually matters once we are in the table. All that matters at that point is numbers 1 2 and 3 from above. If the RAW is holding up one of those three points, will eff it make something up, and if that new ruling stops working try something else out. Make sure your players are okay with how things are working and just keep going. Eventually you will figure out what works for you and your table.

I've seen a million different house rules, some I'm down for and some I'd never play with, but someone does play with those house rules and they ostensibly either enjoy those house rules greatly or can tolerate it enough to keep playing with it in place (otherwise no one would be paying with that house rule). At that point out comes down to properly communicating your feelings and the guides aren't big enough to cover how to do that.

That's harsh.

You shouldn't have shoving tests in a DM's face and hope they eventually get it right as the first option. Teachers don't hand out the final on day one and just repeat that the whole course til people pass.

The reason why there are so many questions on D&D is because people weren't taught how the game works.

With little stuff, its fine.

But when the group is upset and the issue is big and gamechanging, if the DM doesn't now why the game's out of whack then it might take many sessions of no fun to fix. Or the adventure ends in an anticlimactic easy wipe of one of the side because of an I'll measured tweak.

And these is bad if the solution is something simple they overlooked or never realized because no one knew the guts of the game. Because the solution is usually something dumb like "not enough fights" or "you forget this" or "that is bad, you have to compensate for that" or "the game assumes that"..

 

[Athinar]

Can a bonus action be used as an action or vice versa? For example, can a bard use a bonus action to grant a Bardic Inspiration die and an action to cast healing word?
No. Actions and bonus actions aren’t interchangeable.

at first I thought it said Action first then bonus Action second

I think I was reading this wrong, it is the Bonus Action "Name" and Action "Name", (i.e. Attack action and Second Wind, you can not Second Wind as a Action and then Attack Action as a bonus action)

PHB
You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn, unless the bonus action’s timing is specified, and anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action.

 

[Flamestrike]

I'm not fine with a mobile rogue keeping up with a mounted horseman indefinitely or, if a wood elf, outpacing said horse.

They cant. They cant run any faster than anyone else, they're just able to use what speed they do have better in combat situations.

A characters speed in combat has nothing to do with his flat out running speed. A rogue runs just as fast as anyone else, and certainly cant outrun a horse.

If players were bound to combat speed, then it takes a hasted 20th level Monk to run as fast as Usaun Bolt, and your average Commoner or PC's top speed is limited to what you and I can do as a slow jog.

That's what I find cheesy. A burst of speed once per short rest or on spending inspiration I'm fine with. It's the ability to outpace pursuers or fleeing enemies at-will that I have an issue with. That's not particularly rogue-like. It's a cheesy side-effect.

He cant outrun pursuers. If he runs off and someone chases him, it becomes a chase and not tactical combat movement anymore.

 

[brehobit]

Because Mary jumped the gun and didnt ready a Fireball when her initiative result came up (triggered to go after Bob shoots his bow) like she was supposed to.



Because Mary didnt wait. She acted before Bob shot. Fractionally before, perhaps imperceptively before . But before. She doesnt have to lob it first, if she beats Bobs inititive score, she can ready a fireball instead if she wants. She could also take the dodge action or the hide action while she waits for Bob to act (keeping her head down).

Mary didn't wait because she wanted to go when things were surprised. Or she was maintaining concentration on a spell and so couldn't ready.

The rules for making attacks are clear as day in the book man. Allowing attacks outside of initiative order is a house rule (not that there is anything wrong with that). Attacking = combat.

If your character and my character are standing 30' away from each other and you suddenly decide to draw a gun and shoot me, you dont get a free round of combat or an infinite initiative score simply on account of you declaring it first.

Instead we roll initiative. An opposed Dex check to test our reflexes. I may even be quick enough to notice you go for your gun, and be able to draw and shoot you before you get to pull the trigger on yours.

When you are sneaking up on someone they won't hear or see you _until_ you decide to pull the trigger? That decision, before you even shoot, triggers initiative and if they win that initiative they know you are there before you even pull the trigger? Irrelevant of the situation (hidden from 100 meters away), it's just an initiative check? May be RAW (though I disagree), but it certainly isn't reasonable.

 

[JohnLynch]

If you go by the Sage Advice you're effectively making a sneaking character to make two Dexterity checks to ensure they remain stealthy. If the enemy doesn't spot you on their Wisdom check, then they very well might on their Dexterity check. You on the other hand, are stuck with just making Dexterity checks. Would you make a wizard cast a spell twice (take the worst result) in order to cast a spell? If not, why is it acceptable to make the sneaky character do it? If you're best answer is "because that's what the rules say" then chances are I'm not going to enjoy gaming at your table (which is okay because I'm pretty sure no-one in my group posts onto Enworld ).

 

[Flamestrike]

Mary didn't wait because she wanted to go when things were surprised.

So mary jumps the gun, and doesnt wait. She wasnt forced to; the player elected to pull the trigger first to take advantage of surprise, and not follow the plan.

When you are sneaking up on someone they won't hear or see you _until_ you decide to pull the trigger? That decision, before you even shoot, triggers initiative and if they win that initiative they know you are there before you even pull the trigger? Irrelevant of the situation (hidden from 100 meters away), it's just an initiative check? May be RAW (though I disagree), but it certainly isn't reasonable.

All initiave 'is' is a test of the reflexes of the people involved in the combat. If you have lightning reflexes, then yes, you might be able to avoid being caught by surprise.

Eample; Assasin hidden in bush shoots at a Wizard 30' away (triggering combat. Initiative is rolled)

If the Assasin beats the Wizard:

The Wizard is too slow to react to the sound of a bowstring being pulled, or the arrow in flight, and gets attacked before his turn. He cops an assasinate attack (auto crit). It is then his turn (he can do nothing aside from look down in shock at the arrow protruding from his chest). Its now the assasins turn again, and he fires again. Now however the Wizard can react (with a shield spell for example)

If the Wizard wins initiative:

The Wizard hears the sound of a bowstring being pulled back, or catches the glint of the arrow tip sticking out of the bush, or catches it in flight in the corner of his eye, however he can't act on his turn as he is surprised (and in shock, processing what is occuring). However the Wizard has just enough time (as he beat the Assasin with a Dex check via Initiative) to use his reaction to try and deflect the arrow at the last minute with his shield spell.

What about these examples are you struggling with?

 

[Flamestrike]

If you go by the Sage Advice you're effectively making a sneaking character to make two Dexterity checks to ensure they remain stealthy.

No youre not. You stay stealthy and hidden. The Dex (initiative) check is to determine if you can use Assasinate, or to attack before your enemy get the chance to use a reaction (such as monks deflect arrows, or the shield spell, or the BM's parry)

 

[JohnLynch]

No youre not. You stay stealthy and hidden. The Dex (initiative) check is to determine if you can use Assasinate, or to attack before your enemy get the chance to use a reaction (such as monks deflect arrows, or the shield spell, or the BM's parry)

How is a battlemaster going to parry if he doesn't have a weapon in hand? Will the sword teleport into his hand just or does parry function exactly like deflect arrows.

So you're saying it's not two Dexterity checks. People have been saying "the NPC hears or sees something that causes them to be suspicious and alert for trouble" which is in effect saying "the assassin makes two Dexterity checks, with the first opposed by Wisdom and the second opposed by Dexterity." If you're now saying "well, the NPC only sees something if the assassin attacks" will you force the assassin to attack? Or can they say "screw it. I'm just going to walk away and not bother this time"? If the assassin (who could be invisible and silenced) can just walk away, it means the person got "alert" for no reason (certainly no in-game reason) and therefore people in this world must all have a spider-sense. Who knew there were so many radioactive spiders crawling around in D&D.

 

[Hriston]

Here's how it works. When combat starts, everyone acts. Whoever has the higher initiative, that person's action is resolved first. If that person is surprised then the "action" they take is being surprised, which is resolved, i.e. ends, first, before the resolution of the attack that started combat. It's the initiation of the attack that begins combat, not it's resolution.