Merudo's Unofficial Errata & Compendium

[Merudo]

WARNING: This material is not endorsed or created by WotC!

The following document aims to help DMs become aware of the ambiguities present in the rulebooks, and to resolve these ambiguities through gaining a deeper understanding of the intent (RAI) behind the rules.


The unofficial Errata (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?583036&p=23869581&viewfull=1#post23869583) aims to change the rules so that the written text (Rules as Written, or RAW) aligns more closely with the intent of the text (Rules as Intended, or RAI). It is offered as a supplement to the official Errata (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/sage-advice/errata-november-2018).
The unofficial Compendium (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?583036&p=23869581&viewfull=1#post23869586) is a collection of Jeremy Crawford's clarifications regarding the rules, together with further analysis from forums & the RPG stack exchange. It is offered as a supplement to the official Compendium (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/sage-advice/sage-advice-compendium).


As much as possible, I try to stick to the interpretation from the lead rules designer, Jeremy Crawford. I will not attempt to fix "rules imbalance", or to provide RAW/RAF answers.

Table of Content:

Unofficial Errata (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?583036&p=23869581&viewfull=1#post23869583)


Rage (p.48)
Evasion (p.79 & 93)
Divine Smite (p.85)
Aura of Courage (p.85) & Aura of Devotion (p.86)
Careful Spell (p.102)
Wild Magic Surge (p.104)
Pact of the Blade (p.107)
Book of Ancient Secrets (p.110)
Overchannel (p.118)
Arcane Focus (p.151)
Polearm Master (p.168)
Shield Master (p.170)
War Caster (p.170)
Vision and Light (p. 183)
Resting (p. 186)
The Order of Combat - Dropping an Item (p.190)
Opportunity Attacks (p. 195)
Grappling (p. 195)
Temporary Hit Points (p. 198)
Targets (p.204)
Blink (p.219)
Evard’s Black Tentacles (p.238)
Freedom of Movement (p.244)
Revivify (p.272)
Sacred Flame (p.272)
Simulacrum (p.276)
Wall of Fire (p.285)


Unofficial Compendium (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?583036&p=23869581&viewfull=1#post23869586)


Melee Attacks Classification
Flat Damage & Damage Roll
Critical Hits & Saving Throws
Long Rest & Spell Slots
Undead & Resurrection
Spells Learnt by a Non-Spellcaster
Casting Two or More Spells per Turn
Dragon's Breath
Find Steed
Leomund’s Tiny Hut
Magic Missile
Mind Blank
Nystul's Magic Aura
Shadow of Moil
Unseen Servant


Unresolved Questions (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?583036&p=23869581&viewfull=1#post23869588)


Wand and Counterspelling
Darkness
Magic Missile

[Merudo]

Unofficial Errata


Rage (p.48)

The first sentence of the second paragraph is replaced by:


While raging, you gain the following benefits:

The following sentence is added at the end of the second paragraph:


If you are wearing heavy armor, you gain no benefits from your rage.

Problem: By RAW, you can rage in heavy armor and gain some benefits from it. Yet, the RAI intent (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/801126631926468608) is that rage & heavy armor are incompatible.

Solution: The rage now can't give any benefits if the Barbarian is wearing heavy armor.


Evasion (p.79 & 93)

This sentence is added to the paragraph:


You can't benefit from this feature while incapacitated.

Problem: By RAW, you can still benefit from Evasion while Paralyzed or Incapacitated. By RAI, you shouldn't be able to do so (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/981244206835408896).

Solution: The feature can no longer be used while incapacitated.


Divine Smite (p.85)

The first sentence is replaced by


Starting at 2nd level, when you hit a creature with a melee attack using a weapon, you can expend one spell slot to deal radiant damage to the target, in addition to the weapon’s damage.

Problem: The text of Divine Smite says it works with a "melee weapon attack", which includes Unarmed Strikes. Yet, the same sentence refers to the "weapon's damage", which implies it works only if you use a weapon.

Jeremy Crawford said (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/905511898938003456) the following:


Divine Smite is intended to be used with a weapon.

Solution: I corrected the text to explicitly require a melee attack using a weapon.


Aura of Courage (p.85) & Aura of Devotion (p.86)

The first sentence of Aura of Courage is replaced by the following:


Starting at 10th level, you and friendly creatures within 10 feet of you cannot become frightened, and effects causing a friendly creature to be frightened are suppressed while they are within 10 feet of you. You must be conscious to grant these benefits.

Similarly, the first sentence of Aura of Devotion is replaced by the following:


Starting at 7th level, you and friendly creatures within 10 feet of you cannot become charmed, and effects causing a friendly creature to be charmed are suppressed while they are within 10 feet of you. You must be conscious to grant these benefits.

Problem: The RAW is quite imprecise regarding these abilities - it is not clear if an aura prevents a condition, suppresses it, or does both.

The intent (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/722860204459630592) is clearer:


RAI is that being charmed is precluded/suspended while you're in the aura.

Solution: I make it explicit that the condition is both prevented and suppressed while in the aura.


Careful Spell (p.102)

The last sentence is changed:


On the turn the spell is cast, a chosen creature automatically succeeds on its saving throws against the spell.

Problem: The Careful Spell description is ambiguous - a strict reading could have a protected creature succeeds on all saving throws against the spell.

However, according to Jeremy Crawford (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/840017588746768384):


Careful Spell is used the turn you cast a spell and is intended to affect saving throws made that turn

Solution: I make it explicit that Careful Spell only works on the turn the spell is cast.


Wild Magic Surge (p.104)

The effect for a dice roll of 57-58 is replaced by the following:


For the next minute, any flammable object you touch that isn’t being worn or carried by a creature bursts into flame.

Problem: By RAW, all of the Sorcerer's worn & carried possessions burst into flame when he rolls this.

Solution: I replace "by another creature" to "by a creature" so that the Sorcerer's own items are safe.


Pact of the Blade (p.107)

The following is added after third sentence of the third paragraph:



You can't change the form the weapon takes when you create it, and you do not become proficient with it by wielding it.


Problem: The feature says you can choose the form of your pact weapon and that you automatically become proficient with it:


You can choose the form that this melee weapon takes each time you create it [...]. You are proficient with it while you wield it.

However, Jeremy Crawford says (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/834850395553816576) the intent is for the above to not apply to a magic weapon turned into a pact weapon:


Pact of the Blade neither requires nor grants proficiency with a magic weapon that you turn into your pact weapon.

Solution: I explicitly forbid the feature from working with a magical weapon turned into a pact weapon.


Book of Ancient Secrets (p.110)

The following is added after the last sentence:


If you replace your Book of Shadows, the new book contains all the rituals that appeared in the previous book.

Problem: The PHB doesn't say if the rituals you acquire in your travels are lost if you get a new Book of Shadows.

However, the intent (https://twitter.com/SaunaNotSawna/status/723972214123454464) is clear: the book comes back with all of the rituals/cantrips still in it.

Solution: I explicitly say that the replacement book contains the same rituals.


Overchannel (p.118)

The following is added at the end of the first paragraph:


If the spell has a duration of 1 turn or more, it keeps dealing maximum damage until the beginning of your next turn.

Problem: By RAW, the spell does maximum damage over for the entire duration. However, the intended effect (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/798281206622060544) is for the damage to maximized for one round only:


By RAW, it works as long as the spell lasts. Not exactly the intent (works only on the first turn)

Solution: I make it explicit that the spell only does maximum damage for 1 round.


Arcane Focus (p.151)

The following is added after the first sentence:


Unless the item's description says otherwise, a magical rod, staff, or wand is considered an arcane focus.

Problem: The RAW text makes it unclear if all magical rods, staves & wands can be used as an arcane focus, or if these items need to be specifically created for this purpose.

The intent (https://twitter.com/cisko/status/694972043884785664) appears to be that all such magical items should qualify as foci,


Can a wizard use a magic wand (e.g. wand of Magic Missile) as her arcane focus? Yes.

Solution: I make it explicit that such magical items qualify unless otherwise noted.


Polearm Master (p.168)

The third bullet point is replaced by:


While you are wielding a glaive, halberd, pike, or quarterstaff, other creatures provoke an opportunity attack from you when they enter your reach with that weapon.

Problem: The original text lets you take an opportunity attack with a non-polearm weapon.

The intent (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/580139521498480640) is different:


The intent is that any OA triggered because you're wielding a polearm is then made with that polearm.

Solution: I make it so the OA triggeed from Polearm Master can only be taken by the polearm.


Shield Master (p.170)

The first bullet point is replaced by the following:


If you took the Attack action on your turn, you can use a bonus action to try to shove a creature within 5 feet of you with your shield. If your Attack action includes more than one weapon attack, you can use this bonus action between those attacks.

Problem: The interpretation of Shield Master is highly controversial, and Jeremy Crawford himself gave contradictory (https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/status/557816721810403329?lang=en) tweets (https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/status/994993596989300736?lang=en) on the subject.

However, his current interpretation (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1105204044610428929) is the following:


The simple by-the-book way (RAW) to determine whether you've completed an action is to finish the whole action.

Yet you fulfill our design intent (RAI) with the Attack action if you make at least one attack with it, since that is how we define the action in its basic form.

Solution: I explicitly allow the bonus action shield bash after one Attack from the Attack action.


War Caster (p.170)

The following is added at the end of the third bullet point:


For the purpose of this benefit, you cannot add the additional reach of a reach weapon.

Problem: By RAW, you can use combine War Caster with a polearm to cast a spell at an enemy if they move to 15 ft.

The intent (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/580139521498480640) however is different:


The intent is that any OA triggered because you're wielding a polearm is then made with that polearm.

Solution: I explicitly forbid the use of reach weapon to work with War Caster.

https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/55808/war-caster-a-whip-and-a-dagger-and-provoking-opportunity-attacks
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/129311/can-you-combine-polearm-master-with-war-caster-to-cast-booming-blade-as-enemies?noredirect=1&lq=1



Vision and Light (p. 183)

The second sentence of the second paragraph is replaced by the following:


A lightly obscured area, such as dim light, patchy fog, or moderate foliage, gives disadvantage to Wisdom (Perception) checks relying on sight and made to spot something inside the area.

Problem. The definition of a "lightly obscured area" has a similar problem to the pre-errata definition of heavily obscured area:


A character in dim light has disadvantage on Perception checks even if looking into a bright area.
A character in bright light suffers no disadvantage while looking into a lightly obscured area, such as an area covered by the Web spell.


Solution: To make the definition of lightly obscured area more logical and consistent with the one for heavily obscured area, I changed the definition so that the penalty occurs when a creature looks into the "lightly obscured area".
The two following sentences are added after the third paragraph:


An area may be obscured because of materials or effects that physically block sight, such as a smoke screen or a curtain. Looking beyond such an obscured area is difficult; a creature attempting to do so suffer the same penalties as if it were looking into the obscured area.

Problem: By RAW, a heavily obscured area only blinds characters who attempt to see something inside the obscured area.

This leads to some absurd results, for example with the Fog Cloud spell:


A character in the middle of a Fog Cloud can see perfectly well as long as they are looking at objects outside of the cloud.
A character outside the cloud can't see inside the Fog Cloud - but they can see what's behind it!


Solution: I explicitly state that if an area is obscured because of something physically blocking sight, then the areas behind it are themselves considered obscured to a creature. This doesn't occur if the obscuration is caused by mudane darkness, in which case the creature can see behind the obscured area; for example, a character can stand in darkness but see a torch in the distance.
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?471937-Heavily-Obscured-Areas
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/86453/does-this-errata-allow-vision-out-of-an-area-of-darkness
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/122315/interaction-between-fog-cloud-and-new-vision-errata-rule


Resting (p. 186)

The following sentence is added to the end of the second paragraph:


A short rest and a long rest cannot overlap; if a character gains the benefits of a short rest, the time that was spent resting does not count toward a long rest.

Problem: By RAW, it is not clear if the same period of downtime can count toward both a short rest and a long rest.

However, Jeremy Crawford made clear (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/07/27/can-a-pc-benefit-from-short-rests-during-a-long-rest/) that RAI, the two rests can't overlap:


The intent is that you can't take a short rest and a long rest at the same time.

Solution: I added a sentence to clarify that taking two rests at once is not possible.
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/07/27/can-a-pc-benefit-from-short-rests-during-a-long-rest/
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/983848232777170944
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/983508494421655552
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/121865/can-you-short-rest-during-a-long-rest
https://theangrygm.com/hitting-the-rest-button/
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?551238-Can-an-interrupted-long-rest-be-treated-as-a-short-rest




The Order of Combat - Dropping an Item (p.190)

The following section is added after the Reactions subsection:


DROPPING AN ITEM

At any point during your turn or on someone else’s, you may drop an object that you are holding. Dropping the object costs no action and can be done instantly. A worn shield still has to be doffed before it can be dropped.

Problem: By RAW, there is no special provision for dropping a weapon. Dropping a weapon therefore uses up the "free object interaction action" described in the section "Other Activity on Your Turn".

However, according to Jeremy Crawford (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/03/29/what-are-the-rules-on-dropping-weapons/), by RAI dropping an item costs nothing:


The intent is that letting go of something requires no appreciable effort. But picking it up does.

Solution: I made it explicit that dropping an object is free and can be done at any time.
https://twitter.com/DnDMontreal/status/584404987293396992
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/70237/is-dropping-a-weapon-free


Opportunity Attacks (p. 195)

The following is added at the end of the second paragraph:


If you want to make an opportunity attack with a reach weapon, such as a glaive or a halberd, you can do so when a creature leaves the reach you have with that weapon.

Problem: The text is unclear on how opportunity attacks work when you have weapons with different reach.

Solution: I add the Compendium text to the rule Errata.


Grappling (p. 195)

The following paragraph is added after the second paragraph:


A creature may be able to grapple another from afar through an appendage, such as a tentacle. The grappling creature can be attacked by targeting the appendage located in the space of the grappled creature.

Problem: By RAW, a creature grappling for afar (such as a Giant Octopus) cannot be attacked in melee by the grappled creature.

However, this goes against the intent (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/618276037122658304) of the rules,

> A creature grappled by a giant octopus can attack the octopus via the grappling tentacle.

Solution: I explicitly allow targeting of the grappling appendage.


Temporary Hit Points (p. 198)

The second sentence of the first paragraph is changed to



Temporary hit points aren’t actual hit points; they are a buffer against a reduction of hit points.


Problem: The PHB says the following:


Temporary hit points [..] are a buffer against damage

This implies that THP prevent damage, which would for example reduce the DC of a concentration check. However, according to Jeremy Crawford (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/503958007177166848),


When temporary hit points absorb damage for you, you're still taking damage

Solution: I remove the problematic "buffer against damage" phrase.


Targets (p.204)

The following is added at the end of the first paragraph:


Any creature or object affected by a spell effect is considered a target of the spell.

Problem: The rule is unclear on whether spells such as Dragon's Breath or Green-Flame Blade target the enemies that receive damage from the spell.

The intent (https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/status/852697741968818176?lang=en) is for "targeted" and "affected" to be synonymous.

Solution: I make it clear that every affected creature is considered a target


Blink (p.219)

The fourth sentence of the first paragraph is replaced by the following:


If no valid space can be chosen, you appear in the nearest unoccupied space (chosen at random if more than one space is equally near).

Problem: A strict reading of the spell could trap the caster in the Ethereal Plane if they cannot choose a space, for example if they are blind or unconscious.

Solution: If there is anything preventing a valid space to be selected, the caster is pushed out in the nearest unoccupied space.


Evard’s Black Tentacles (p.238)

The last line of the second paragraph is replaced by the following:


A creature that starts its turn in the area and is already restrained by the tentacles takes 3d6 bludgeoning damage instead.

Problem: The description of the spell can be read to mean that a creature that starts its turn in the area and is already restrained could take the damage twice.

Solution: By adding the word "instead" at the end of the sentence, I make it clear that the spell can only cause damage once per turn.
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/145511/does-the-black-tentacles-spell-do-damage-twice-at-the-start-of-turn-to-an-alread



Freedom of Movement (p.244)

The first sentence of the second paragraph is replaced by the following:


The target can also automatically escape from nonmagical restraints, such as manacles or a creature that has it grappled. Doing so reduces its remaining speed by 5 feet.

Problem: It takes 5 feet of movement to escape from nonmagical restraint, but such restraints typically set the creature's speed to 0. It's unclear how a creature with 0 speed can spend 5 feet of movement, and so the ability appears impossible to use.

Yet, Jeremy Crawford said (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/12/15/is-freedom-of-movement-broken/) escaping Grapples with Freedom of Movement is possible:


Freedom of movement is an example of a feature (an exception) that lets you circumvent a general rule; it lets you spend 5 feet of movement to escape a grapple, even though your speed is 0.

Solution: I always allow a creature to escape nonmagical restraint, although doing so can reduce the creature's movement below zero.
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46612/is-freedom-of-movement-hampered-from-actually-working-to-escape-a-grapple


Revivify (p.272)

The second and third sentence are replaced by the following:


The death of the creature is undone, and it regains 1 hit point. This spell doesn't work on a creature that has died of old age, nor can it restore any missing body parts.

Problem: The description of Revivify state that it returns a creature to "life". This suggests that casting Revivify on a dead zombie would undo the zombification. However, the intent of the spell is different (https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/status/709791324656902144):


If you cast revivify on a zombie, the creature returns as a zombie.

Solution: The solution is to replace the ambiguous passage "return to life" with the better defined "undo death".


Sacred Flame (p.272)

The last sentence of the first paragraph is replaced by the following:


A creature can be targeted by this spell even if it is behind full cover, and the target gains no benefit from cover for the saving throw.

Problem: By RAW, a spell cannot target someone behind Full Cover (p.204):


To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover.

The Sacred Flame spell description does not mention that Full Cover can be ignored for targeting purposes: instead, it only prevents an already targeted creature from benefiting from partial cover.

Jeremy Crawford said (http://media.wizards.com/2017/podcasts/dnd/DnDPodcast_01_19_2017.mp3) (time: 32:60) that the intent of the spell was to ignore cover entirely:


So, they're getting no benefit from cover [...] and that includes total cover. So sacred flame is one of the few spells that allows you to target somebody even if they're behind total cover.

Solution: I make it explicit that Sacred Flame can target a creature behind total cover, if such creature can be seen.

https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115820/can-sacred-flame-target-someone-that-is-behind-total-cover



Simulacrum (p.276)

The last sentence of the second paragraph is replaced by the following:


The simulacrum lacks the ability to learn or become more powerful, so it never increases its level or other abilities. The simulacrum is unable to regain use of any of its features that it expends, such as spell slots.

Problem: By RAW the simulacrum can regain all expended features (Sorcery Points, Action Surge, etc.) except Spell Slot.

However, as Jeremy says (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1011342543873761280),


The creation is meant to be unable to regain use of any of its features that it expends (RAI)

Solution: I explicitly forbid the simulacrum from recovering expended features.

The following sentence is added at the start of the third paragraph:


A simulacrum cannot regain hitpoints through normal means.

Problem: The description of the Simulacrum spell does not formally prevent the Simulacrum from being healed through normal means.

It is however implied, and Jeremy Crawford (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/01/18/can-the-creature-created-by-simulacrum-be-healed-by-spells/) explicitly said:


To restore hit points to a simulacrum, you must use the costly alchemical procedure mentioned in the spell.

Solution: I clearly state that the usual healing methods don't work on the Simulacrum.
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/59781/can-the-creature-created-by-a-simulacrum-spell-be-affected-by-healing-magic


Wall of Fire (p.285)

The third paragraph of the spell is replaced by the following:


One side of the wall, selected by you when you cast this spell, deals 5d8 fire damage to each creature that ends its turn on that side of the wall and within 10 feet of it. A creature takes the same damage when it enters the wall for the first time on a turn or ends its turn there.

Problem: There is some ambiguity (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?586207-By-RAW-Wall-of-Fire-does-15d8-to-creatures-that-end-their-turn-within-the-wall) regarding how many time a creature can be damaged by the spell, and if it takes damage on both side of the wall.

Solution: I explicitly state that creatures on the other side of the wall don't take damage, and I delete the duplicated statement about creatures taking damage if they end within the wall.
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/145509/does-the-wall-of-fire-spell-damage-creatures-on-both-sides-of-the-wall

[Merudo]

Unofficial Compendium


Melee Attacks Classification

Melee Weapon Attack/Attack with Melee Weapon/Melee Attack/Natural Weapon/Unarmed Strike: What's the difference?


Attack with Melee Weapon: an attack made with a weapon classified as "melee" by the Weapons table in the PHB. Throwing a melee weapon qualifies, but not an Unarmed Strike or a Natural Weapon Attack (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/996549348140826624).
Melee Weapon Attack: a melee attack that allows you to hit a foe within your reach. Includes Unarmed Strikes & melee Natural Weapon Attacks.
Melee Spell Attack: a magic attack that allows you to hit a foe within your reach. Includes spells such as Contagion & Inflict Wound.
Melee Attack: a general class of melee attack including Melee Weapon Attacks, Melee Spell Attacks, and Special Melee Attacks such as Grapples & Shoves.
Natural Weapon Attack: an attack made with a weapon that is part of a creature's body. Does not include Unarmed Strikes unless specifically noted.
Unarmed Strike: a Melee Weapon Attack without a weapon. Natural Weapon attacks are not Unarmed Strikes unless specifically noted.



Flat Damage & Damage Roll

Does “flat” damage count as a “damage roll”?

No - you need to physically roll for damage. From the PHB (p. 196) description of a damage roll:


You roll the damage die or dice, add any modifiers, and apply the damage to your target.


Critical Hits & Saving Throws

A creature delivers a critical hit. Does the creature roll twice for all damage associated with the attack, including those requiring a saving throw, such as Poisonous Snake's DC10 Poison ?

No (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/615361420851478528). Only damage dice delivered by a critical hit—as opposed to a saving throw—are rolled twice.


Long Rest & Spell Slots

I cast a spell during a long rest. Do I get the spell slot back at the end of the long rest?

Yes (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/646383855964852224). You get all spell slots back at the end of a long rest.


Undead & Resurrection

If I get turned into an undead creature, how do I become normal again?

Only True Resurrection works.


Revivify: It can only turns a dead undead into an alive undead.
Reincarnate: Only works on an humanoid, and the undead aren't humanoids.
Raise Dead & Resurrection: Explicitly don't work on undead creatures.




Spells Learnt by a Non-Spellcaster

Sometimes a non-spellcaster gains the ability to cast a spell. What's the spell DC?

The DC (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1005997765158055936) is 8 + your proficiency bonus + any special modifiers. Your spellcasting ability modifier is 0.


Casting Two or More Spells per Turn

Can I cast more than one spell on my turn?

Yes. But if you cast a Bonus Action spell on your turn, all other spells have to be Cantrips with a casting time of 1 action.


Dragon's Breath

Can I twin the Dragon's Breath spell?

No (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/852697741968818176). Dragon's Breath has multiple targets (the creatures damaged by the breath) and so does not qualify.


Find Steed (p.240)

Can a mount obtained through the Find Steed / Find Greater Steed act as an independent mount?

Yes (https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/status/970111071955464198?lang=en). When you ride the mount in combat, you decide whether it follows the rules for a controlled or an independent mount.

Can spells such as Blinding Smite / Cone of Cold / etc be duplicated by the mount?

No (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1021074364832231424). These spells target enemies, and so do not qualify.


Leomund’s Tiny Hut (p.255)

Does Leomund's Tiny Hut have a floor?

Yes (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/823774362293542912). The spell creates an hemisphere, which includes the flat side.


Magic Missile (p.257)

How many dice do I need to roll for Magic Missile?

You roll one die (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/610955844918886400) for damage; all missiles do the same damage. If you have the Empowered Evocation feature, you add your Intelligence modifier to the damage of every missile.


Mind Blank (p.259)

Does Mind Blank spell protect from all the effects of Feeblemind spell?

Yes (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2019/03/03/does-mind-blank-spell-protect-from-all-the-effects-of-feeblemind-spell/). Feeblemind blasts the mind of a creature, and Mind Blank foils spells that affect the mind of a creature.



Nystul's Magic Aura (p.263)

Does the Identify spell reveal that Nystul's Magic Aura was cast on an item?

Yes (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/986038643448922112), it does. Casting Identify tells you what spells are affecting an item, regardless of its aura.

Can Nystul's Magic Aura be cast on a creature to bypass a creature type requirement/restriction?

No (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/986039209797419010), it can't. The creature type is a requirement for the item, feat, or spell to work.


Shadow of Moil

Can Darkvision & Truesight see through the heavy obscuration of Shadow of Moil?

No (https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/status/1084904730789212160?lang=en). The obscuration is due to "flame-like shadows", not the result of being in darkness.


Unseen Servant (p.284)

Does the servant counts as an ally?

No (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1006631165657169920). The servant is not a creature, but a force.

[Merudo]

Unresolved Questions


Wand & Counterspelling

Can a Wand used as a magical item be counterspelled?

This tweet from Jeremy Crawford (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/792412232432758784) implies the answers is yes.

However, there is the following problem:

A Wand doesn't use any spell component (DMG, p.141).
Spells without components are imperceptible (XGtE, p.85).
And imperceptible spells can't be counterspelled (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/694962397128163328).

This implies that a Wand can't be counterspelled, because it doesn't use spell components and thus the spell can't be perceived.


Darkness

Can I see what is behind a Darkness spell?

It's unclear.

One interpretation is that Darkness works like a opaque black sphere that blocks sight. Anything past the sphere is impossible to see.

Another interpretation: Darkness just creates an area of mundane darkness. You can still see lights in the distance through the Darkness area.


Magic Missile

Does casting Magic Missile at a creature with 0HP automatically kill it?

Unclear. Each missile is its own source of damage, but the missiles hit simultaneously. Contrarily to the Concentration Check rules (p. 203), there are no special provisions for damage caused by multiple sources.

[Merudo]

Reserved for later.

[Merudo]

Reserved for later. Please give your comments below.

[PhantomSoul]

(I don't have a chance to go through it yet, but some quick thoughts that jumped out when peering)

It would be nice to have a table of contents (ideally with links, but even if it doesn't have links it would be useful to have an easy reference to see the topics)

[Merudo]

It would be nice to have a table of contents (ideally with links, but even if it doesn't have links it would be useful to have an easy reference to see the topics)

I've added a Table of Content, but unfortunately I'm not able to create links to each subsection. Is there a way to do so?

[PhantomSoul]

I've added a Table of Content, but unfortunately I'm not able to create links to each subsection. Is there a way to do so?

Fantastic!

For links, I think the closest is linking to the post (e.g. http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=23869854&postcount=7), but even just having a table of contents is great :)

[MaxWilson]

I don't feel like I'm the target audience for this document, but I skimmed some of your Sage Advice answers. Well-written, nicely-reasoned and -explained. I wish WotC's Sage Advice were this quality.

Good luck with this.

[PhantomSoul]

Overall, really good -- and I like getting explanations and sources. (And wish that were the norm everywhere!)

Some quick thoughts:


Rage
- I'm not clear on what this change is granting; my PHB says "While raging, you gain the following benefits if you aren’t wearing heavy armor:", with all of the benefits listed thereafter (and the disadvantages being separate).

Resting
- Would you like to include the possibility of an interrupted long rest counting as a short rest? (It might be worth clarifying that case explicitly. I'd also be tempted to include what happens if you take a long rest, get interrupted, and then continue/restart: does the previous time resting count at all, and if so what limitations apply? These are more for completeness than anything else.)

Critical Hits & Saving Throws
- I would change "Any" to "Only" (possibly adding a qualifier like "solely" or a descriptor for the Saving Throw), e.g. "No. Only damage dice delivered by a critical hit — as opposed to a secondary or triggered saving throw — are rolled twice."

Magic Missile
- Just a typo: "dice" to "die".

[MaxWilson]

@PhantomSoul, RE: Rage, technically by RAW a barbarian can Rage and gain benefits from it while wearing heavy armor, as long as it's not one of the basic Rage benefits. E.g. a Bear Totem barbarian in plate armor can Rage and have resistance to everything, technically.

Merudo's errata makes it so this is illegal. You use up a Rage but you don't get the Bear Totem benefits, which is good.

[Merudo]

Rage
- I'm not clear on what this change is granting; my PHB says "While raging, you gain the following benefits if you aren’t wearing heavy armor:", with all of the benefits listed thereafter (and the disadvantages being separate).


MaxWilson gave a good explanation of the problem with the PHB text.



Resting
- Would you like to include the possibility of an interrupted long rest counting as a short rest? (It might be worth clarifying that case explicitly. I'd also be tempted to include what happens if you take a long rest, get interrupted, and then continue/restart: does the previous time resting count at all, and if so what limitations apply? These are more for completeness than anything else.)


If you get interrupted during a long rest, you do not have to start the rest anew unless the interruption was more than one hour long.

As for an interrupted long rest counting as a short rest, I'm not sure about this one, actually. And frankly I suspect nobody at WotC knows for sure either.

There is a tweet by Jeremy Crawford (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/983508494421655552) that seems to disallow it:


A short rest and a long rest are separate things in the D&D rules. You decide which one you're taking when you start the rest.

So according to this tweet there is a "long rest button" and a "short rest button", and the PCs need to press the correct one before resting or they gain no benefits from the rest.



Critical Hits & Saving Throws
- I would change "Any" to "Only"


Thank you for the advice - I updated the text.



Magic Missile
- Just a typo: "dice" to "die".


For a singular die, both "die" & "dice" are valid.

[Lyracian]

This is great; most is what I would expect the rules to say but nice to see where the holes in RAW are.

One question on Divine Smite you wrote “Paladin Spell Slot”; is this an extra change to stop multiclass shenanigans with spell slots?

[PhantomSoul]

@PhantomSoul, RE: Rage, technically by RAW a barbarian can Rage and gain benefits from it while wearing heavy armor, as long as it's not one of the basic Rage benefits. E.g. a Bear Totem barbarian in plate armor can Rage and have resistance to everything, technically.

Merudo's errata makes it so this is illegal. You use up a Rage but you don't get the Bear Totem benefits, which is good.


Ah, thanks -- I didn't think about benefits granted outside of those listed in the Rage feature itself.

[Merudo]

This is great; most is what I would expect the rules to say but nice to see where the holes in RAW are.

One question on Divine Smite you wrote “Paladin Spell Slot”; is this an extra change to stop multiclass shenanigans with spell slots?

That was a mistake from me. I copied the text from the PHB but forgot the official errata changed "paladin spell slot" to "spell slot".