D&D 5E Questions about 5thEd from a Noob

[ElterAgo]

Ok so I've played Pathfinder for years. So some of these questions are coming from that background, some are just some confusion with the system, some are making sure I read it correctly.

1) There are no 'monster knowledge' skills. So unless the players metagame from reading the monster manual or have already encountered a type of creature. There isn't anyway of knowing anything about them. How they act. What they can do. What they are resistant to. What they are vulnerable to. Etc... Is that right? That seems to be assuming the PC's are pretty damn stupid. So our group has just found there is a ghost in our house and are pretty much stuck just trying things at random to get rid of it. Because there is no way to know anything about them?!?

2) There doesn't seem to be much variation in some of the basic builds if you want to be effective. I've talked to a few people about their characters so far. All three of the archers I've seen are almost identical in what they have done so far and what they are planning to do with their build in the future. The few clerics, bards, and warlocks we've discussed are also pretty darn similar. Is this typical or just coincidence?

3) The only book caster is the wizard correct? So all these spellbooks we are finding are basically useless (no wizard in our group). True?

4) My wife is new to RPG's in general She loved the idea of the ranger's animal companion. But since it never advances in any respect, by the time you can get it or at least fairly soon thereafter is seems like it will be nearly unsurvivable and pretty ineffective. Then we read that having it do anything other than follow you around uses up the PC's action. Is that really correct? That seems way useless for a major feature of the class.

5) If I am reading this correctly, your 2 good saves will go up both with your proficiency bonus and because you will probably increase those stats. But your other 4 saves never increase at all. Really? That seems like just random chance with higher level enemies (with higher save DC's) you should be failing 2 out of 3 saves. Against any intelligent enemy, you should be failing almost every single save. Any wizard is going to throw a spell at your fighter that doesn't target Str or Con, so you are just screwed. Am I missing something here?

6) The wizard, cleric, and druid can change which spells they want to have ready each game day. The wizard is limited to what he has written in his spell book. The cleric and druid are not. Is this correct?

7) All the other casters have the same spells every game day once they have been chosen. Correct?

8) Ritual magic. Ok, each time I think I understand this, someone 'explains' it again and I am more confused than before. Can I get a clear explanation on what this is, how it is handled, and which characters can do it?

Thanks folks. I appreciate your time with any of this.

 

[Nagol]

1) Ask the DM what common knowledge exists for the critters.

2) There are a reasonable number of choices for individual classes/multiclass combinations, but there are only so many options and fewer great ones.

3) Warlock gets a tome, but finding them isn't particularly valuable.

4) Trap option, unfortunately. Not a terrible trap, but still a low ditch PCs fall into.

5) Yes; your off-saves will only increase if you increase the controlling ability or buy a feat to add proficiency. You're not missing anything.

6) Yes.

7) Some (all?) other classes, like the Sorcerer, can replace a spell when they level.

8) The basic idea is you can cast a ritual spell taking time instead of a spell slot. The different classes have different requirements about preparation. The Wizard needs no preparation other than having the spell in the spell book. Clerics need to have prepared the spell for the day. Read each class' abilities to determine what is necessary.

 

[leogobsin]

Only gonna answer a few of these cause some of them get into more design philosophy stuff but:
3)If a character takes the Ritual Caster feat or is a Warlock who takes the Book of Ancient Secrets eldritch invocation they can copy ritual spells from spellbooks, but other than that, nobody but a Wizard can really do anything with a spellbook, no.

4)You might look at using the Revised Ranger (https://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/downloads/UA_RevisedRanger.pdf), it makes Beastmaster a lot more viable.

6)Paladins also prepare spells and can change them, choosing from any spell on their list, but everything you said is correct.

7)If you're not a Cleric, Druid, Paladin, or Wizard, then you know the spells you know and don't prepare/change your list ever.

8)Bards, Clerics, Druids, and Wizards all have Ritual Casting as a class feature. What this means is: if a spell has (ritual) after its level and school in its description it can be cast as a ritual. Casting as a ritual means the casting time is 10 minutes longer than the time listed in the spell's description, but it does not use up a spell slot. If you're a Cleric or Druid, you need to have a spell prepared to cast it as a ritual, if you're a Wizard it needs to be in your spellbook, and if you're a Bard it needs to be a spell you know. There's also the Ritual Caster feat and the Warlock Eldritch Invocation Book of Ancient Secrets, which give you a Ritual Book containing spells that you can cast only as rituals.

 

[Oofta]

Pathfinder (and 3.5 D&D for that matter) have a fundamentally different approach. D&D 5E is much based around DM empowerment and rulings than rules. So there are some rules that are flexible so the DM can adjust to fit their style and their group.

Ok so I've played Pathfinder for years. So some of these questions are coming from that background, some are just some confusion with the system, some are making sure I read it correctly.

1) There are no 'monster knowledge' skills. So unless the players metagame from reading the monster manual or have already encountered a type of creature. There isn't anyway of knowing anything about them. How they act. What they can do. What they are resistant to. What they are vulnerable to. Etc... Is that right? That seems to be assuming the PC's are pretty damn stupid. So our group has just found there is a ghost in our house and are pretty much stuck just trying things at random to get rid of it. Because there is no way to know anything about them?!?

The DC is set by the DM. Orcs may be common as dirt in one campaign world and virtually unheard of in another.

2) There doesn't seem to be much variation in some of the basic builds if you want to be effective. I've talked to a few people about their characters so far. All three of the archers I've seen are almost identical in what they have done so far and what they are planning to do with their build in the future. The few clerics, bards, and warlocks we've discussed are also pretty darn similar. Is this typical or just coincidence?

Backgrounds can make a big difference, it depends on what you mean by "identical". There are also a variety of subclasses, feats and races.

However ... it depends on your focus. I agree that a lot of archers are going to take sharp-shooter and use long bows. Does that make them "identical"? I don't think so but others would disagree because they pursue the "optimal" build based on the spreadsheets that tell them that build "x" does average of .25 points of damage per round more. I'm also more about character and characterization than build so YMMV.

3) The only book caster is the wizard correct? So all these spellbooks we are finding are basically useless (no wizard in our group). True?

Other than for sale or trade? Yes. Personally I allow PCs to cast spells out of a book as if they were a scroll, but it's a house rule.

4) My wife is new to RPG's in general She loved the idea of the ranger's animal companion. But since it never advances in any respect, by the time you can get it or at least fairly soon thereafter is seems like it will be nearly unsurvivable and pretty ineffective. Then we read that having it do anything other than follow you around uses up the PC's action. Is that really correct? That seems way useless for a major feature of the class.

Yeah, animal companions don't work all that well. As a house rule I allow animal companions to gain levels (using the rules in the DMG for adding levels to beasts).

5) If I am reading this correctly, your 2 good saves will go up both with your proficiency bonus and because you will probably increase those stats. But your other 4 saves never increase at all. Really? That seems like just random chance with higher level enemies (with higher save DC's) you should be failing 2 out of 3 saves. Against any intelligent enemy, you should be failing almost every single save. Any wizard is going to throw a spell at your fighter that doesn't target Str or Con, so you are just screwed. Am I missing something here?

True, unless you multi-class or take the resilient feat. On the other hand, there are only a few "save or suck" spells in 5E.

6) The wizard, cleric, and druid can change which spells they want to have ready each game day. The wizard is limited to what he has written in his spell book. The cleric and druid are not. Is this correct?

Yep.

7) All the other casters have the same spells every game day once they have been chosen. Correct?

Yes, although they can be swapped out when you level depending on the class which varies.

8) Ritual magic. Ok, each time I think I understand this, someone 'explains' it again and I am more confused than before. Can I get a clear explanation on what this is, how it is handled, and which characters can do it?

Wizards can cast any ritual spell that they have in their book, clerics and other ritual casters can cast a spell they have prepared as a ritual. Rituals take an additional 10 minutes to cast.

Thanks folks. I appreciate your time with any of this.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

1) There are no 'monster knowledge' skills. So unless the players metagame from reading the monster manual or have already encountered a type of creature. There isn't anyway of knowing anything about them. How they act. What they can do. What they are resistant to. What they are vulnerable to. Etc... Is that right? That seems to be assuming the PC's are pretty damn stupid. So our group has just found there is a ghost in our house and are pretty much stuck just trying things at random to get rid of it. Because there is no way to know anything about them?!?

It's not that you can't know how they work. It's just that there's no formal system for using skills to figure things out. It's supposed to be up to the DM, whether they think you should be able to make a check. The DM isn't supposed to throw an invincible monster at you, if there's no way you could possibly guess how you're supposed to deal with it.

2) There doesn't seem to be much variation in some of the basic builds if you want to be effective. I've talked to a few people about their characters so far. All three of the archers I've seen are almost identical in what they have done so far and what they are planning to do with their build in the future. The few clerics, bards, and warlocks we've discussed are also pretty darn similar. Is this typical or just coincidence?

There are fewer decision points, since there are so few feats in the game (if you're even using feats). Basically, the character build isn't supposed to be such a big deal. The biggest difference between two archers will be in their race/background, and how the player chooses to play them.

3) The only book caster is the wizard correct? So all these spellbooks we are finding are basically useless (no wizard in our group). True?

Some warlocks can have a book of rituals, so if you find a spellbook with some ritual spells in it, they can copy the ritual spells. But pretty much, yeah, spellbooks are for wizards.

4) My wife is new to RPG's in general She loved the idea of the ranger's animal companion. But since it never advances in any respect, by the time you can get it or at least fairly soon thereafter is seems like it will be nearly unsurvivable and pretty ineffective. Then we read that having it do anything other than follow you around uses up the PC's action. Is that really correct? That seems way useless for a major feature of the class.

You add your proficiency bonus to its attack rolls, damage, and damage; its maximum HP are equal to four times your level. It's not entirely useless, but it isn't like adding another fighter to the party. The major class features are still just your weapon attacks and your spells (specifically, it's hunter's mark, which increases the damage of your weapon attacks).

5) If I am reading this correctly, your 2 good saves will go up both with your proficiency bonus and because you will probably increase those stats. But your other 4 saves never increase at all. Really? That seems like just random chance with higher level enemies (with higher save DC's) you should be failing 2 out of 3 saves. Against any intelligent enemy, you should be failing almost every single save. Any wizard is going to throw a spell at your fighter that doesn't target Str or Con, so you are just screwed. Am I missing something here?

No, that's just about right. If you're using feats, then you can take Resilient to gain proficiency in either Dex saves or Wisdom saves, but you're entirely out of luck if someone targets your dump stat.

Unlike Pathfinder, a natural 20 on a saving throw does not always succeed.

6) The wizard, cleric, and druid can change which spells they want to have ready each game day. The wizard is limited to what he has written in his spell book. The cleric and druid are not. Is this correct?

I think that's right.

7) All the other casters have the same spells every game day once they have been chosen. Correct?

I think that's also right.

8) Ritual magic. Ok, each time I think I understand this, someone 'explains' it again and I am more confused than before. Can I get a clear explanation on what this is, how it is handled, and which characters can do it?

I'll leave that to someone else.

 

[TwoSix]

1) There are no 'monster knowledge' skills. So unless the players metagame from reading the monster manual or have already encountered a type of creature. There isn't anyway of knowing anything about them. How they act. What they can do. What they are resistant to. What they are vulnerable to. Etc... Is that right? That seems to be assuming the PC's are pretty damn stupid. So our group has just found there is a ghost in our house and are pretty much stuck just trying things at random to get rid of it. Because there is no way to know anything about them?!?

In general, use Arcana, Religion, Nature, and possibly History for lore checks. Religion handles undead and extraplanar stuff, Nature handles beasts and maybe monstrosities, Arcana handles the weird stuff.

2) There doesn't seem to be much variation in some of the basic builds if you want to be effective. I've talked to a few people about their characters so far. All three of the archers I've seen are almost identical in what they have done so far and what they are planning to do with their build in the future. The few clerics, bards, and warlocks we've discussed are also pretty darn similar. Is this typical or just coincidence?

Pretty normal. Feats are rare, and there really aren't that many that fill a lot of basic niches. (If you're an archer, there's Sharpshooter and that's about it.) Granted, there are usually a fair amount of classes and subclasses that fill general concepts (an archer could be one of several different subclasses of Fighter, or a Ranger, or a Rogue). But yes, far fewer possible builds than in PF. (You can see the design goal thread going on right now about different takes on if that's good or bad.)

3) The only book caster is the wizard correct? So all these spellbooks we are finding are basically useless (no wizard in our group). True?

Anyone with Ritual Caster could theoretically make use of some of the spells, but mostly true.

4) My wife is new to RPG's in general She loved the idea of the ranger's animal companion. But since it never advances in any respect, by the time you can get it or at least fairly soon thereafter is seems like it will be nearly unsurvivable and pretty ineffective. Then we read that having it do anything other than follow you around uses up the PC's action. Is that really correct? That seems way useless for a major feature of the class.

It does scale somewhat (you add your proficiency bonus to most of its rolls, and its hit points are always a fraction of yours), and you can make it take attacks later on without using your entire action. But yes, BM ranger is notorious for being pretty underpowered.

5) If I am reading this correctly, your 2 good saves will go up both with your proficiency bonus and because you will probably increase those stats. But your other 4 saves never increase at all. Really? That seems like just random chance with higher level enemies (with higher save DC's) you should be failing 2 out of 3 saves. Against any intelligent enemy, you should be failing almost every single save. Any wizard is going to throw a spell at your fighter that doesn't target Str or Con, so you are just screwed. Am I missing something here?

There are some mitigating factors. There are plenty of spells and magic items and class features that can give save bonuses. There are very few true "save or screwed" spells in 5e, and a lot of them require maintenance of concentration. That being said, many people agree with you that high level saves are problematic.

6) The wizard, cleric, and druid can change which spells they want to have ready each game day. The wizard is limited to what he has written in his spell book. The cleric and druid are not. Is this correct?

Correct. This mimics Pathfinder, actually.

7) All the other casters have the same spells every game day once they have been chosen. Correct?

Full casters, yes. Technically, paladins can also change their prepared spells every long rest.

8) Ritual magic. Ok, each time I think I understand this, someone 'explains' it again and I am more confused than before. Can I get a clear explanation on what this is, how it is handled, and which characters can do it?

1) You can cast a ritual spell (to be clear, a ritual spell is any spell specified as a ritual at the top of its spell description) without expending a spell slot by spending ten minutes plus the normal casting time of the spell to cast it. You can also cast it using its normal casting time just like you would cast any other spell.
2) Casting a spell uses up your concentration, so you can't maintain concentration while casting the ritual.
3) Wizards can cast any ritual spell that is scribed in their spell book. Clerics and druids can cast ritual spells they have prepared for the day as rituals. Note that this means wizards have more flexibility with rituals, even though they have less flexibility than clerics/druids when preparing their daily spells. Other casters can cast a spell as a ritual if the spell is one of their spells known. I think tome warlocks cast rituals like a wizard if they take the special Tome invocation.

 

[Jester David]

1) There are no 'monster knowledge' skills. So unless the players metagame from reading the monster manual or have already encountered a type of creature. There isn't anyway of knowing anything about them. How they act. What they can do. What they are resistant to. What they are vulnerable to. Etc... Is that right? That seems to be assuming the PC's are pretty damn stupid. So our group has just found there is a ghost in our house and are pretty much stuck just trying things at random to get rid of it. Because there is no way to know anything about them?!?

Correct. This is not codified. The PCs can’t just throw a dice and recognize a brand new monster from the latest book along with their weaknesses,

If the DM rules, a character can make an Intelligence (Arcana) check, or Religion to identify a monster. But the DM sets the DC and decides what’s revealed.

2) There doesn't seem to be much variation in some of the basic builds if you want to be effective. I've talked to a few people about their characters so far. All three of the archers I've seen are almost identical in what they have done so far and what they are planning to do with their build in the future. The few clerics, bards, and warlocks we've discussed are also pretty darn similar. Is this typical or just coincidence?

5e is less based on “builds”.
Characters are differentiated by their personality, the random treasure they acquire, and how they are played. It’s much more like 1e D&D in that respect.

3) The only book caster is the wizard correct? So all these spellbooks we are finding are basically useless (no wizard in our group). True?

I’m not sure many spellbooks will be found. But, yes, they are useless. They might be sellable, though.

4) My wife is new to RPG's in general She loved the idea of the ranger's animal companion. But since it never advances in any respect, by the time you can get it or at least fairly soon thereafter is seems like it will be nearly unsurvivable and pretty ineffective. Then we read that having it do anything other than follow you around uses up the PC's action. Is that really correct? That seems way useless for a major feature of the class.

The ranger’s pet is really a helper, and not the equivalent of a character. It can’t solo a monster. The damage and attack bonuses scale pretty nicely.
It’s hit points are a bit low. I’d recommend adding it’s Con bonus to hp for each ranger level. And it really needs to gain bonus Hit Dice to allow more recovery during short rests.

5) If I am reading this correctly, your 2 good saves will go up both with your proficiency bonus and because you will probably increase those stats. But your other 4 saves never increase at all. Really? That seems like just random chance with higher level enemies (with higher save DC's) you should be failing 2 out of 3 saves. Against any intelligent enemy, you should be failing almost every single save. Any wizard is going to throw a spell at your fighter that doesn't target Str or Con, so you are just screwed. Am I missing something here?

Yes.
In general, the DC and numbers of 5e don’t go up. Your odds of success get better and better as your proficiency goes up.
Saves are an exception, as the DC or monsters abilities do go up. So your odds of succeeding a saves you’re proficient in stay the same, while everyone else gets worse.

But as there are few DCs above 20, you always have a chance for success. Which is boosted by items, class features that grant rerolls, advantage, etc. And most effects that shut you down typically grant a new save each round. And spells that stop characters often require concentration, so you can just smack the spellcaster and free the PC.
(This is also a high level issue. Above level 10 or even 15. It won’t affect the majority of play.)

6) The wizard, cleric, and druid can change which spells they want to have ready each game day. The wizard is limited to what he has written in his spell book. The cleric and druid are not. Is this correct?

Correct. Like Pathfinder, bards and sorcerer have a set list of known spells.
Actually, I believe Paladins are like clerics and know the whole list. Rangers have so many spells known.

7) All the other casters have the same spells every game day once they have been chosen. Correct?

Sorcerer, warlock, bard, ranger, eldritch knight, and arcane trickster, yes.

8) Ritual magic. Ok, each time I think I understand this, someone 'explains' it again and I am more confused than before. Can I get a clear explanation on what this is, how it is handled, and which characters can do it?

Some classes have the “ritual caster” feature. Bard, cleric, druid, and wizard. They can ritual cast spells of their class without using a spell close by spending 10 minutes casting.
The wizard can go up to gundred locked doors during and spend 10 minutes at each casting knock and still have spells left. Or they can burn a slot and cast it as an action like any other spell.
But it only works with spells called out as “rituals”.
Some classes also gain other spells as rituals. Which, again, let’s you cast the spell by spending 10 minutes casting. Often these are classes without spell slots, so they can only cast the spell as a ritual.

 

[Charlaquin]

Ok so I've played Pathfinder for years. So some of these questions are coming from that background, some are just some confusion with the system, some are making sure I read it correctly.

1) There are no 'monster knowledge' skills. So unless the players metagame from reading the monster manual or have already encountered a type of creature. There isn't anyway of knowing anything about them. How they act. What they can do. What they are resistant to. What they are vulnerable to. Etc... Is that right? That seems to be assuming the PC's are pretty damn stupid. So our group has just found there is a ghost in our house and are pretty much stuck just trying things at random to get rid of it. Because there is no way to know anything about them?!?

There are, however, knowledge-based skills - Arcana, Nature, Religion, History and good 'ol Intelligence checks. As with all actions, the DM determines if a roll is necessary to resolve the action, and if so, what the DC is.

2) There doesn't seem to be much variation in some of the basic builds if you want to be effective. I've talked to a few people about their characters so far. All three of the archers I've seen are almost identical in what they have done so far and what they are planning to do with their build in the future. The few clerics, bards, and warlocks we've discussed are also pretty darn similar. Is this typical or just coincidence?

Nope, this is an accurate observation, and a fairly common gievance those of us who like a lot of crunch have with 5e.

3) The only book caster is the wizard correct? So all these spellbooks we are finding are basically useless (no wizard in our group). True?

Warlocks with the Pact of the Tome and the Book of Ancient Secrets Invocation can also copy ritual spells from any spell list into their book of shadows. But yeah, unless you have a Wizard or that specific build of Warlock in your party, you can't do much with those spellbooks.

4) My wife is new to RPG's in general She loved the idea of the ranger's animal companion. But since it never advances in any respect, by the time you can get it or at least fairly soon thereafter is seems like it will be nearly unsurvivable and pretty ineffective. Then we read that having it do anything other than follow you around uses up the PC's action. Is that really correct? That seems way useless for a major feature of the class.

Yep. The Beastmaster ranger is pretty bad.

5) If I am reading this correctly, your 2 good saves will go up both with your proficiency bonus and because you will probably increase those stats. But your other 4 saves never increase at all. Really? That seems like just random chance with higher level enemies (with higher save DC's) you should be failing 2 out of 3 saves. Against any intelligent enemy, you should be failing almost every single save. Any wizard is going to throw a spell at your fighter that doesn't target Str or Con, so you are just screwed. Am I missing something here?

There's a Feat that gives you Proficiency in a save of your choice. And there are magic items that can increase your saves.

6) The wizard, cleric, and druid can change which spells they want to have ready each game day. The wizard is limited to what he has written in his spell book. The cleric and druid are not. Is this correct?

Yes.

7) All the other casters have the same spells every game day once they have been chosen. Correct?

Yes.

8) Ritual magic. Ok, each time I think I understand this, someone 'explains' it again and I am more confused than before. Can I get a clear explanation on what this is, how it is handled, and which characters can do it?

Your Class will say if you can cast spells as rituals. If it does not, there is a Feat you can take that allows you to cast spells as rituals. If you can cast spells as rituals, you can cast any spell that has the ritual tag as a ritual. Casting a spell as a ritual increases its casting time by 10 minutes, and does not expend a spell slot.

 

[ElterAgo]

...
8)Bards, Clerics, Druids, and Wizards all have Ritual Casting as a class feature. What this means is: if a spell has (ritual) after its level and school in its description it can be cast as a ritual. Casting as a ritual means the casting time is 10 minutes longer than the time listed in the spell's description, but it does not use up a spell slot. If you're a Cleric or Druid, you need to have a spell prepared to cast it as a ritual, if you're a Wizard it needs to be in your spellbook, and if you're a Bard it needs to be a spell you know. There's also the Ritual Caster feat and the Warlock Eldritch Invocation Book of Ancient Secrets, which give you a Ritual Book containing spells that you can cast only as rituals.

Aha, I missed the Ritual Caster feat. So if my (for example) Eldritch Knight will be casting wizard spells with his spell slots. But he doesn't have a book and is stuck each day with the ones he knows. However, I can take the Ritual Caster feat and chose say cleric spells to write in his book. That would be assuming his wisdom was high enough to cast them. Correct?

 

[leogobsin]

Aha, I missed the Ritual Caster feat. So if my (for example) Eldritch Knight will be casting wizard spells with his spell slots. But he doesn't have a book and is stuck each day with the ones he knows. However, I can take the Ritual Caster feat and chose say cleric spells to write in his book. That would be assuming his wisdom was high enough to cast them. Correct?

That's basically correct, but his ability to cast Cleric ritual spells through Ritual Caster doesn't have anything to do with his wisdom score: if he has the 13 INT or WIS necessary to take Ritual Caster, then he can copy down any Cleric ritual spells he finds on scrolls as long as the level of the spell isn't higher than half his character level.