5e rules I should pay attention for and non-book sources

[BloodSnake'sCha]

Hello guys :)

I am new to 5e and in my new group I am going to be the rules guy.

I am looking for rules that hard to understand or rules whith more then one way to read them in order to make sure everyone in my group understanding them right.

I am also looking for sources I should know about that aren't in the books.

[Kadesh]

There aren't many. The biggest one is that if you cast a spell of level 1 of higher as a bonus action, you can't use an action in the same turn to cast another levelled spell.

The other one is more good roleplay, which is what we are here for after all: describe your actions, and let your DM award you a check. Don't ask to make a stealth check, say you are going to move slowly and quietly over to try and put the bushes in between yourself and the goblins, etc.

As long as everyone is having fun, and the DM is consistent, you'll be good.

[Reynaert]

Surprise is also one that many people get wrong, although most of those are people who played earlier editions where it worked differently.
Still, it's not easy to wrap your head around.
Also in the same vein, initiative; as soon as somebody decides they want to attack, you roll initiative. Not after the first shots even in an ambush or surprise attack.

Basically, when anybody decides they want to attack, everybody rolls initiative.
"But we're not fighting and I just want to shoot that guy, so how can he have a higher initiative than me, that's unfair!" you hear your players cry.
Well, that's what surprise is for. If the other guy didn't see it coming, he is surprised (see surprise rules) so he doesn't get to act on his first turn.
But if he rolled high enough on initiative, he does get to REact, that's what he rolled high for.

[Unoriginal]

There is no skill checks. There is ability checks, with skill proficiency as modifiers.

It's important, because you don't need the skill proficiency to attempt anything. You need proficiency in Thieves' Tool to unlock something, but that's it.

[MrStabby]

Light, darkness, magical light,magical darkness, daylight, dim light and darkvision can get a bit unintuitive or at least complicated.

Rules on hiding and what you can reasonably do to someone that is hiding vs invisible both in and out of combat can get controversial.

For both of these I would suggest sitting down with you table and working out how you want to play it, rather than agonising over RAW. The rules are a bit of a mess with odd edge cases and this can detract from play.



As for other content in the books - yes. Use the errata to the player's handbook. Some people use twitter as an "official" source as well, but I don't advise it - not least as it can be impossible as it is self contradictory at times.

One thing you may need to decide on is the role of things like the Monster Manual in your campaign. If there are spells like conjure animals or conjure elemental... what elementals and animals exist in your world to be conjured? What creatures can PCs polymorph into. It is perfectly reasonable to have a world in which bears don't exist so a druid can't have seen one and cannot turn into one. It is probably not reasonable to decide this after character creation. If the MM is an "official" book for your campaign it can have a big effect - just be clear with your players either way.

[Scripten]

There aren't many. The biggest one is that if you cast a spell of level 1 of higher as a bonus action, you can't use an action in the same turn to cast another levelled spell.


This is one that's confused a few people at my table. So far as I've parsed the rule, this means that you can cast a (non-cantrip) spell as your Action and then also cast a (non-cantrip) spell as your Reaction, as your Reaction is happening during the same Round but not on your Turn.

[PhoenixPhyre]

This is one that's confused a few people at my table. So far as I've parsed the rule, this means that you can cast a (non-cantrip) spell as your Action and then also cast a (non-cantrip) spell as your Reaction, as your Reaction is happening during the same Round but not on your Turn.

It's actually more specific than that.

If
* you cast a spell (cantrip or not) as a bonus action
Then
* you may only cast a cantrip until your present turn ends, so no jump + feather fall or provoke AO and shield on your turn. After that, Reactions are as normal.

Casing a non-cantrip spell as a reaction imposes no constraints on what you can do. Casting a non-cantrip spell as an Action imposes no constraints. The only constraint is on bonus action casts.

[Scripten]

It's actually more specific than that.

If
* you cast a spell (cantrip or not) as a bonus action
Then
* you may only cast a cantrip until your present turn ends, so no jump + feather fall or provoke AO and shield on your turn. After that, Reactions are as normal.

Casing a non-cantrip spell as a reaction imposes no constraints on what you can do. Casting a non-cantrip spell as an Action imposes no constraints. The only constraint is on bonus action casts.

Ah, right. I'd missed that additional part. Thanks!

[qube]

There is no skill checks. There is ability checks, with skill proficiency as modifiers.

It's important, because you don't need the skill proficiency to attempt anything. You need proficiency in Thieves' Tool to unlock something, but that's it.on that note - there are only three types of d20 rolls: attack rolls, saving throws and ability checks.

this is important because
a "+1 on all saving throws", also applies to death saving throws
the champion's "add half your proficiency bonus (round up) to any Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution check you make that doesn’t already use your proficiency bonus." applies to an initiative check

[leogobsin]

Another good general advice: if you've got a rule you're unsure of, google "5e Sage Advice [keywords about your question]".

[MrStabby]

Another good general advice: if you've got a rule you're unsure of, google "5e Sage Advice [keywords about your question]".

...and then do the opposite of what it recommends.



Actually it isn't quite that bad. It has helpful advice about 20% of the time.

[Pelle]

Another good general advice: if you've got a rule you're unsure of, google "5e Sage Advice [keywords about your question]".

Nah, just decide on something that works for your group instead.

[leogobsin]

...and then do the opposite of what it recommends.



Actually it isn't quite that bad. It has helpful advice about 20% of the time.

I mean jokes aside, I think the counter-intuitive Sage Advice rulings get a little overstated since they're the far more often discussed around the forums. I'm sure the number of genuinely helpful clarifications far outweighs the weird stuff.

[PhoenixPhyre]

To be quite honest, I've never (that I remember) read a Sage Advice that I didn't think was a reasonable (or even the primary) reading of the text. Doesn't mean I agree with it or would play that way (since RAW/RAI to me are pretty meaningless), but I've never really found them to be especially at odds with the text itself.

[MrStabby]

To be quite honest, I've never (that I remember) read a Sage Advice that I didn't think was a reasonable (or even the primary) reading of the text. Doesn't mean I agree with it or would play that way (since RAW/RAI to me are pretty meaningless), but I've never really found them to be especially at odds with the text itself.

There are a few where it has struck me as being really odd - even self contradictory. I think the ruling on shield mater bonus action order being one of these where SA has ruled it both ways (I think it was this one - slightly poor memory).

To be honest my criticism was pretty wildly off - 20% being right is too low. Much of it is just so simple (or at least seems that way) that it is just confirming the obvious, without a huge amount of utility. 20% is maybe what I think of as USEFUL - as in beneficial to games: fun, consistent, not raising weird side cases or generally raising more questions than it answers.

Generally sage advice is a snap opinion (and there is a use for such things). If WotC, on reflection want to stick by that interpretation it goes into the errata. If on reflection they think their SA judgement is wrong it gets left out.

[PhoenixPhyre]

There are a few where it has struck me as being really odd - even self contradictory. I think the ruling on shield mater bonus action order being one of these where SA has ruled it both ways (I think it was this one - slightly poor memory).

To be honest my criticism was pretty wildly off - 20% being right is too low. Much of it is just so simple (or at least seems that way) that it is just confirming the obvious, without a huge amount of utility. 20% is maybe what I think of as USEFUL - as in beneficial to games: fun, consistent, not raising weird side cases or generally raising more questions than it answers.

Generally sage advice is a snap opinion (and there is a use for such things). If WotC, on reflection want to stick by that interpretation it goes into the errata. If on reflection they think their SA judgement is wrong it gets left out.

The game is straight-forward enough that 90% of the questions asked have obvious answers if you read the text. That's a signal of good design in my book. The remaining 10% are more often things where there are multiple valid interpretations and you should pick the one that works best for your table.

Most SA is basically "yes, that's what the text says" or "yes, <page reference>." Reading through them mostly shows me that people ask really loaded questions (trying to prove someone right/wrong rather than asking honest questions), to which the answers are (correctly) pure facts. Is it useful? Yes, to somebody. To me? I don't have those questions--in fact, I don't have any of those type of questions because I'm willing to just rule it for myself without caring what RAW or RAI says. I find those terms to be more useful as weapons in internet debates than as at-the-table helps. But YMMV.

[kebusmaximus]

It's not difficult to understand, but in my experience, people constantly forget about concentration.

If you take damage while concentrating on a spell, you have to make a constitution saving throw with a DC of 10 or half the damage, whichever is higher. Also, you make a saving throw for each instance of damage.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

There aren't many. The biggest one is that if you cast a spell of level 1 of higher as a bonus action, you can't use an action in the same turn to cast another levelled spell.

The other one is more good roleplay, which is what we are here for after all: describe your actions, and let your DM award you a check. Don't ask to make a stealth check, say you are going to move slowly and quietly over to try and put the bushes in between yourself and the goblins, etc.

As long as everyone is having fun, and the DM is consistent, you'll be good.


Surprise is also one that many people get wrong, although most of those are people who played earlier editions where it worked differently.
Still, it's not easy to wrap your head around.
Also in the same vein, initiative; as soon as somebody decides they want to attack, you roll initiative. Not after the first shots even in an ambush or surprise attack.

Basically, when anybody decides they want to attack, everybody rolls initiative.
"But we're not fighting and I just want to shoot that guy, so how can he have a higher initiative than me, that's unfair!" you hear your players cry.
Well, that's what surprise is for. If the other guy didn't see it coming, he is surprised (see surprise rules) so he doesn't get to act on his first turn.
But if he rolled high enough on initiative, he does get to REact, that's what he rolled high for.


Light, darkness, magical light,magical darkness, daylight, dim light and darkvision can get a bit unintuitive or at least complicated.

Rules on hiding and what you can reasonably do to someone that is hiding vs invisible both in and out of combat can get controversial.

For both of these I would suggest sitting down with you table and working out how you want to play it, rather than agonising over RAW. The rules are a bit of a mess with odd edge cases and this can detract from play.



As for other content in the books - yes. Use the errata to the player's handbook. Some people use twitter as an "official" source as well, but I don't advise it - not least as it can be impossible as it is self contradictory at times.

One thing you may need to decide on is the role of things like the Monster Manual in your campaign. If there are spells like conjure animals or conjure elemental... what elementals and animals exist in your world to be conjured? What creatures can PCs polymorph into. It is perfectly reasonable to have a world in which bears don't exist so a druid can't have seen one and cannot turn into one. It is probably not reasonable to decide this after character creation. If the MM is an "official" book for your campaign it can have a big effect - just be clear with your players either way.


on that note - there are only three types of d20 rolls: attack rolls, saving throws and ability checks.

this is important because
a "+1 on all saving throws", also applies to death saving throws
the champion's "add half your proficiency bonus (round up) to any Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution check you make that doesn’t already use your proficiency bonus." applies to an initiative check
Tnx guys :)

And I only care about RAW in the group(not as a player) as my rule in the group will be taking care of the rules and helping the DM with RAW(he is the one who decide).

It's not difficult to understand, but in my experience, people constantly forget about concentration.

If you take damage while concentrating on a spell, you have to make a constitution saving throw with a DC of 10 or half the damage, whichever is higher. Also, you make a saving throw for each instance of damage.
I am there for the guys who forget stuff, I will make sure to remind it.

[visitor]

I think another example of especially poorly worded/tricky rules are AOE spells that can be moved: When a creature enters the spell's area for the first time on a turn or starts its turn there,...

I think the official RAI is still "When a creature enters" is meant as: the creature must move (either voluntarily or involuntarily) into the area of effect; the spell AOE does no damage being moved over the creature.

Also, even if a creature is moved involuntarily in and out of the spells AOE, damage occurs only once a turn.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

I think another example of especially poorly worded/tricky rules are AOE spells that can be moved: When a creature enters the spell's area for the first time on a turn or starts its turn there,...

I think the official RAI is still "When a creature enters" is meant as: the creature must move (either voluntarily or involuntarily) into the area of effect; the spell AOE does no damage being moved over the creature.

Also, even if a creature is moved involuntarily in and out of the spells AOE, damage occurs only once a turn.
Because the text say "for the first time" and there is "or" between the two options it can only be ones per turn.

This is pure RAW.

[WereRabbitz]

[QUOTE=PhoenixPhyre;23283845]It's actually more specific than that.

If
* you cast a spell (cantrip or not) as a bonus action
Then
* you may only cast a cantrip until your present turn ends, so no jump + feather fall or provoke AO and shield on your turn. After that, Reactions are as normal.

Casing a non-cantrip spell as a reaction imposes no constraints on what you can do. Casting a non-cantrip spell as an Action imposes no constraints. The only constraint is on bonus action casts.[/QUOTE

If I cast Any kind of spell as a Bonus Action, I am limited to only Cantrips for my regular action until my next turn.

Reactions spells are not affected by this.


Am I reading that right?


Thanks!

[PhoenixPhyre]

It's actually more specific than that.

If
* you cast a spell (cantrip or not) as a bonus action
Then
* you may only cast a cantrip until your present turn ends, so no jump + feather fall or provoke AO and shield on your turn. After that, Reactions are as normal.

Casing a non-cantrip spell as a reaction imposes no constraints on what you can do. Casting a non-cantrip spell as an Action imposes no constraints. The only constraint is on bonus action casts.

If I cast Any kind of spell as a Bonus Action, I am limited to only Cantrips for my regular action until my next turn.

Reactions spells are not affected by this.

Am I reading that right?


Thanks!

Mostly. The specific wording is that if you cast a spell using a bonus action, then


You can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.

Thus, you can't do any of the following on that turn:

* Cast a non-cantrip (of any kind) until the end of the turn in which you cast the bonus action spell. This includes spells with cast time of 1 reaction. So no casting shield on the same turn you cast misty step.
* Cast a cantrip with a casting time other than a single regular action. So no other bonus action or reaction cantrips (if such things exist).
* Begin or finish casting a spell with cast time longer than a single action.

This restriction is retroactive--if you cast a non-cantrip as an action (or any reaction spell), you can't cast a bonus action spell that turn.

However, once your turn ends and someone else's begins, you can cast reactions as normal (if you haven't spent it already). So you can cast shield or feather fall on the next person's turn, but not on your own. Concentration is unaffected by this restriction, just to be complete.

[sophontteks]

Lessor known fact with Bards. Jack of All Trades allows them to add half their proficiency to all ability checks. The obvious benefit is that you add a bit to any skill you aren't proficient in. The less obvious benefit is adding half proficiency to any raw ability checks including rolling initiative, using counterspell, using dispel magic, and using telekinesis.

Here's a weird one made to follow 5e's path toward simplicity. If you have 3 sources or disadvantage and one source of advantage, you roll normally. Multiple sources of advantage or disadvantage do not stack.

[Pex]

There aren't many. The biggest one is that if you cast a spell of level 1 of higher as a bonus action, you can't use an action in the same turn to cast another levelled spell.



This is tricky. It's not just that. You can cast a spell as a bonus action and another spell as an action in either order. The bonus action spell can be of level 1 or higher or a cantrip, but the standard action spell MUST BE a cantrip. You cannot cast a cantrip as a bonus action and a level 1 or greater spell as an action. Why they made that distinction I don't know. Off hand I can't think of a cantrip that is a bonus action to cast normally, except perhaps Grave Domain cleric casting Spare The Dying via class feature. In any case, the distinction is there. The spell cast as an action MUST BE a cantrip.

[McSkrag]

It's actually more specific than that.

If
* you cast a spell (cantrip or not) as a bonus action
Then
* you may only cast a cantrip until your present turn ends, so no jump + feather fall or provoke AO and shield on your turn. After that, Reactions are as normal.

Casing a non-cantrip spell as a reaction imposes no constraints on what you can do. Casting a non-cantrip spell as an Action imposes no constraints. The only constraint is on bonus action casts.

If I understand correctly, I CAN cast Misty Step (bonus action spell) then Fire Bolt (1 action cantrip). But CANNOT cast Misty Step then Fireball (1 action leveled spell) even thought I really really want to.

I also CANNOT cast Fireball centered on myself then cast Absorb Elements (reaction spell) no matter how much fun it would be.

Right?

[MrStabby]

Lessor known fact with Bards. Jack of All Trades allows them to add half their proficiency to all ability checks. The obvious benefit is that you add a bit to any skill you aren't proficient in. The less obvious benefit is adding half proficiency to any raw ability checks including rolling initiative, using counterspell, using dispel magic, and using telekinesis.

Here's a weird one made to follow 5e's path toward simplicity. If you have 3 sources or disadvantage and one source of advantage, you roll normally. Multiple sources of advantage or disadvantage do not stack.

Also - by my reading, you don't count as having either of advantage or disadvantage, not just the effects cancelling out. This is important for rogues sneak attack: if you had both advantage and disadvantage but their effects cancelled but you still counted as having both conditions then you wouldn't be able to.

[PhoenixPhyre]

If I understand correctly, I CAN cast Misty Step (bonus action spell) then Fire Bolt (1 action cantrip). But CANNOT cast Misty Step then Fireball (1 action leveled spell) even thought I really really want to.

I also CANNOT cast Fireball centered on myself then cast Absorb Elements (reaction spell) no matter how much fun it would be.

Right?

The first is correct. IF misty step THEN only 1-action cantrip that turn.

The second is incorrect. Fireball is an action, so it imposes no requirements on your reaction.

Only BONUS action spells impose any particular restrictions on what you can cast. Freely mix action/reaction spells in the same turn. Just not bonus action spells. They're special.

[McSkrag]

The second is incorrect. Fireball is an action, so it imposes no requirements on your reaction.

Only BONUS action spells impose any particular restrictions on what you can cast. Freely mix action/reaction spells in the same turn. Just not bonus action spells. They're special.

That makes sense. Thanks for the clarification!