Unseen melee combatants: one has the alert and grappler feats

[viaFAMILIAR]

I'll be playing a shadow monk soon, and thought the only way to benefit from fighting in magical darkness is with the warlock's invocation devil's sight. Upon going over some feats, it seems there are ways to go about this other than multiclassing.

Say if I took the alert feat, negating their advantage, they'd be attacking me with disadvantage, is this correct?

And If I took the grappler feat, I'd be attacking my grappled target with advantage in the same situation, is this also correct?

Now without these feats, if my grappled target were prone in the same situation, they'd be attacking me with disadvantage, and I with advantage, is this correct?

[Man_Over_Game]

I'll be playing a shadow monk soon, and thought the only way to benefit from fighting in magical darkness is with the warlock's invocation devil's sight. Upon going over some feats, it seems there are ways to go about this other than multiclassing.

Say if I took the alert feat, negating their advantage, they'd be attacking me with disadvantage, is this correct?

And If I took the grappler feat, I'd be attacking my grappled target with advantage in the same situation, is this also correct?

Now without these feats, if my grappled target were prone in the same situation, they'd be attacking me with disadvantage, and I with advantage, is this correct?

All of those are correct.

You probably are already aware, but an enemy that's prone and grappled can't stand back up (can't spend the movement) without first breaking the grapple, so if your grapple was particularly strong (like from a Raging Barbarian with a Rogue level), then combining both grappling and a prone effect is incredibly debilitating. A Barbarian with Tavern Brawler is a scary thing.

[viaFAMILIAR]

All of those are correct.

You probably are already aware, but an enemy that's prone and grappled can't stand back up (can't spend the movement) without first breaking the grapple, so if your grapple was particularly strong (like from a Raging Barbarian with a Rogue level), then combining both grappling and a prone effect is incredibly debilitating. A Barbarian with Tavern Brawler is a scary thing.

Word homie.

[JackPhoenix]

Correct on the first. Alert removes the advantage unseen attackers normally get, meaning they attack with disadvantage.

Incorrect on the second one. Alert doesn't negate disadvantage you get when you attack unseen targets, and advantage and disadvantage negate each other. It doesn't matter how many sources of either you have, as long as you have at least one source of advantage and at least one source of disadvantage, you get neither. You attack normally, the enemy attacks you at disadvantage.

For the same reason, if neither of you can see, you attack each other normally. it doesn't matter if the target is prone, poisoned and who knows what else, as single disadvantage is enough to negate any number of advantages.

[CheddarChampion]

The first is correct.

The second: you would get advantage because of the feat and again because of attacking an opponent that doesn't see you, but you get disadvantage because you can't see them. So 2 advantage, 1 disadvantage, and because of the rule about how advantage and disadvantage stack you would attack normally (just 1d20). Your opponent has disadvantage against you,same as #1.

The third is the same as #2 for you.

[Nagog]

Correct on the first. Alert removes the advantage unseen attackers normally get, meaning they attack with disadvantage.

Incorrect on the second one. Alert doesn't negate disadvantage you get when you attack unseen targets, and advantage and disadvantage negate each other. It doesn't matter how many sources of either you have, as long as you have at least one source of advantage and at least one source of disadvantage, you get neither. You attack normally, the enemy attacks you at disadvantage.

For the same reason, if neither of you can see, you attack each other normally. it doesn't matter if the target is prone, poisoned and who knows what else, as single disadvantage is enough to negate any number of advantages.

I gotta say I disagree with this one on terms of personal preference, and the lack of RAW presented in your argument. Granted, at tables I DM, I'd allow such a thing even if RAW said otherwise, but that's just me. If there is RAW for it, please present it and allow others to know what is and is not the official ruling on it.

[CheddarChampion]

I gotta say I disagree with this one on terms of personal preference, and the lack of RAW presented in your argument. Granted, at tables I DM, I'd allow such a thing even if RAW said otherwise, but that's just me. If there is RAW for it, please present it and allow others to know what is and is not the official ruling on it.

It is indeed RAW.

Page 173 of the PHB:
If circumstances cause a roll to have both Advantage and Disadvantage, you are considered to have neither of them, and you roll one d20. This is true even if multiple circumstances impose disadvantage and only one grants advantage or vice versa. In such a situation, you have neither advantage nor disadvantage.

[Rukelnikov]

I gotta say I disagree with this one on terms of personal preference, and the lack of RAW presented in your argument. Granted, at tables I DM, I'd allow such a thing even if RAW said otherwise, but that's just me. If there is RAW for it, please present it and allow others to know what is and is not the official ruling on it.

Which part do you think ain't RAW?

n advantages are cancelled by a single disadv and vice versa.

[Rukelnikov]

All of those are correct.

You probably are already aware, but an enemy that's prone and grappled can't stand back up (can't spend the movement) without first breaking the grapple, so if your grapple was particularly strong (like from a Raging Barbarian with a Rogue level), then combining both grappling and a prone effect is incredibly debilitating. A Barbarian with Tavern Brawler is a scary thing.

Maybe you didn't read it properly MOG, he said if he's grappling a target inside darkness, without any feat, adv/disadv would cancel

[viaFAMILIAR]

How is grappling affected by 'blind' fighting? Is it an ability check that requires sight?

[Keravath]

1) Alert: "Other creatures don’t gain advantage on attack rolls against you as a result of being unseen by you”

In darkness ...

You: You you can't see them - disadvantage - they can't see you - advantage: Result straight roll for you.
Them: They can't see you - disadvantage - You can't see them - NO effect.

Result: You have a straight roll and they roll with disadvantage.

2) Grappler: "You have advantage on attack rolls against a creature you are grappling."

In darkness ...

You: You can't see them - disadvantage - they can' see you - advantage - grappler - advantage: Result straight roll

Multiple instances of advantage do NOT cancel disadvantage. No matter how many advantage/disadvantage conditions are stacked up the result is always that they cancel out resulting in a straight roll.

Basically, grappling in darkness when no one can see offers no benefit.

3) If you add in prone to grappled in darkness when no one can see then the result is still the same - straight roll for everyone involved since the various advantage/disadvantage conditions cancel.


This cancellation applies to barbarian reckless attack advantage, use of ranged weapons against adjacent targets or use of ranged weapons against long range targets.

The DM can house rule whatever makes sense to them but RAW one instance each of advantage and disadvantage will cancel out any number of other effects providing the condition.

[viaFAMILIAR]

1) Alert: "Other creatures don’t gain advantage on attack rolls against you as a result of being unseen by you”

In darkness ...

You: You you can't see them - disadvantage - they can't see you - advantage: Result straight roll for you.
Them: They can't see you - disadvantage - You can't see them - NO effect.

Result: You have a straight roll and they roll with disadvantage.

2) Grappler: "You have advantage on attack rolls against a creature you are grappling."

In darkness ...

You: You can't see them - disadvantage - they can' see you - advantage - grappler - advantage: Result straight roll

Multiple instances of advantage do NOT cancel disadvantage. No matter how many advantage/disadvantage conditions are stacked up the result is always that they cancel out resulting in a straight roll.

Basically, grappling in darkness when no one can see offers no benefit.

3) If you add in prone to grappled in darkness when no one can see then the result is still the same - straight roll for everyone involved since the various advantage/disadvantage conditions cancel.


This cancellation applies to barbarian reckless attack advantage, use of ranged weapons against adjacent targets or use of ranged weapons against long range targets.

The DM can house rule whatever makes sense to them but RAW one instance each of advantage and disadvantage will cancel out any number of other effects providing the condition.

I reread the dis/adv rules. And yea, I'll definitely dip 2 levels in warlock for devil's sight.

[GlenSmash!]

A Barbarian with Tavern Brawler is a scary thing.

I like to single class if I can so Prodigy for Athletics Expertise makes this my absolute favorite style of character.