Commonly misunderstood rules

[col_impact]

Not at all. Illusory Reality can make one and only one object created by an illusion of 1st level or higher become real for 1 minute. It cannot make creatures become real. It cannot make alterations to your appearance become real (though you could arguably try to use disguise self to make cosmetic prosthetics rather than illusory different face, and make the prosthetics real). It also only works once per illusion spell.

It's powerful, but in this particular case, just casting alter self will be better if you want physical transformation.

Now, you can use alter self for one of its non-"different look" effects and disguise self to make yourself look different.

What about disguise self, illusory reality, malleable illusion and you give yourself a single suit of studded leather?

[Segev]

What about disguise self, illusory reality, malleable illusion and you give yourself a single suit of studded leather?

Absolutely doable. Though you'll need to be proficient with it to be able to cast any more spells until the minute ends. Or you take the armor off, which I think takes a minute. (I forget if there's anything about the object-made-real taking damage causing it to vanish; I know it isn't allowed to CAUSE any damage.)

[col_impact]

Absolutely doable. Though you'll need to be proficient with it to be able to cast any more spells until the minute ends. Or you take the armor off, which I think takes a minute. (I forget if there's anything about the object-made-real taking damage causing it to vanish; I know it isn't allowed to CAUSE any damage.)

Could I use silent image to put plate armor on a wizard with illusory reality or do I need Xray vision to be able to target within the wizard body?

[Segev]

Could I use silent image to put plate armor on a wizard with illusory reality or do I need Xray vision to be able to target within the wizard body?

Most DMs probably wouldn't let you place it precisely enough with the wizard not cooperating.

That said, you could do it with seeming.

[TheUser]

The biggest problems I see are when the rules must be interpretted incorrectly because RAW it's either broken or dumb.

Uncommon offenders:

Bear Totem Spirit: You can rage in heavy armour and still have damage resistance to all but psychic.

Wall of Fire (level 4 spell) - 5d8 fire damage is dealt twice to creatures ending their turn inside the 1ft thick wall.

Inured to Undeath (Necromancer) - Temporary boosts to max HP become permanent.

Sculpt Spells (Invoker) - You must include the maximum amount of targets to automatically save or not use the feature at all.


There are loads of others (is passive investigation a thing?!). I assume WotC has a legal team? Why aren't they playtesters as well!?!?

EDIT: if you want to abuse Illusory Reality consider that the creation spell has a caveat that it cannot be used to create spell components and Ilusory Reailty lacks this clause.

[EggKookoo]

The biggest problems I see are when the rules must be interpretted incorrectly because RAW it's either broken or dumb.

Uncommon offenders:

Bear Totem Spirit: You can rage in heavy armour and still have damage resistance to all but psychic.

Wall of Fire (level 4 spell) - 5d8 fire damage is dealt twice to creatures ending their turn inside the 1ft thick wall.

Inured to Undeath (Necromancer) - Temporary boosts to max HP become permanent.

Sculpt Spells (Invoker) - You must include the maximum amount of targets to automatically save or not use the feature at all.

Yeah, the wording on some of these are... strange. But all of them can be easily fixed with a dose of common sense.

Bear Totem Spirit: Assume the heavy armor restriction applies to all rage benefits.
Wall of Fire: This one's confusing but it's all there. You don't take damage from the "hot" side if you're inside the wall, so only one 5d8 roll. Unless I'm missing what you mean there.
Inured to Undeath: The rule is your max HP can't be reduced, but temp HP don't increase your max HP. They just stack on top. This is more a problem of understanding temp HP than this feature.
Sculpt Spells: Yeah, that should really say "up to" not "equal to."

[Willie the Duck]

Yeah, the wording on some of these are... strange. But all of them can be easily fixed with a dose of common sense.

Bear Totem Spirit: Assume the heavy armor restriction applies to all rage benefits.
Wall of Fire: This one's confusing but it's all there. You don't take damage from the "hot" side if you're inside the wall, so only one 5d8 roll. Unless I'm missing what you mean there.
Inured to Undeath: The rule is your max HP can't be reduced, but temp HP don't increase your max HP. They just stack on top. This is more a problem of understanding temp HP than this feature.
Sculpt Spells: Yeah, that should really say "up to" not "equal to."

Not to pretend that these things don't exist (I'm not sure on these specific instances, I mean these little poorly worded rules conflations and the connotations of various phrases not having been completely thought through), but I don't see them as all that important. This is 5e's 'drown healing*' They are clearly flaws. Vaguely cute little discussion points. Evidence that the rules could use a fine toothed combing or two, but other than that I've never figured out what they supposedly proved.
*For those who skipped 3e, the rules for drowning had a point in the process where a drowning PC's hitpoints went to 0, apparently neglecting to contemplate the possibility that someone might start drowning with negative hp and that going to 0 might be a form of healing. No, no one considered it a reasonable form of character healing, but boy if you listened to some people on the Wizards forums in about 2004, it was absolute proof that the game was 'broken' (somehow).

Would I rather the game be free of these? Probably. Are they as big a deal as the wonky vision and stealthing and rules and what-is-an-attack ambiguity? Not by a country mile, IMO.

[Galithar]

...
Inured to Undeath: The rule is your max HP can't be reduced, but temp HP don't increase your max HP. They just stack on top. This is more a problem of understanding temp HP than this feature.
...

This has nothing to do with temp HP. There are effects that increase your max HP. For example Aid grants up to 3 targets an increase of 5 (or more if upcast) to their current AND max HP. This is not temp HP. It is an actual increase to your maximum hit points. Very strict, to the letter, reading of this interaction makes Aid a permanent effect. Once the spell increases your maximum hit points then Inured to Undeath prevents them from decreasing from that amount.

[TheUser]

Yeah, the wording on some of these are... strange. But all of them can be easily fixed with a dose of common sense.

My point is that the rules should just work. "Common sense" isn't quite as common as you might think...Like now I have to explain how words work...which I thought was common sense.

Wall of Fire: This one's confusing but it's all there. You don't take damage from the "hot" side if you're inside the wall, so only one 5d8 roll. Unless I'm missing what you mean there.

...
One side of the wall, selected by you when you cast this spell, deals 5d8 fire damage to each creature that ends its turn within 10 feet of that side or inside the wall. A creature takes the same damage when it enters the wall for the first time on a turn or ends its turn there. The other side of the wall deals no damage.
...

Pretty cut and dry. You end inside the 1ft thick wall you take 5d8 twice. Makes sense thematically too; the wall would be hotter inside than 5ft away.

Inured to Undeath: The rule is your max HP can't be reduced, but temp HP don't increase your max HP. They just stack on top. This is more a problem of understanding temp HP than this feature.

I am afraid it is you who is misunderstanding as you have misread what I wrote. I wrote temporary maximum HP boost (think the aid spell) not temporary HP. Common sense amiright?
The interaction, to be explicit, is that when the aid spell ends it is technically reducing your max HP and so Inured kicks in and says "can't be reduced" and you now have a permanent boost to your max HP.

[EggKookoo]

Pretty cut and dry. You end inside the 1ft thick wall you take 5d8 twice. Makes sense thematically too; the wall would be hotter inside than 5ft away.

Wouldn't people on the non-selected side also take damage then? Where does it say which direction from the selected side is effected?

The implication of the wording is only people on the other side of the selected wall take damage, otherwise standing 1 foot away from the wall on the non-selected side still puts you 2 feet from the selected side. If the wall itself doesn't block that damage (and therefore damages the creature inside the wall) then it would also damage someone standing close to the non-selected side. I mean it just compounds the problem but it also makes the concept of selecting a side almost worthless.

I am afraid it is you who is misunderstanding as you have misread what I wrote. I wrote temporary maximum HP boost (think the aid spell) not temporary HP. Common sense amiright?
The interaction, to be explicit, is that when the aid spell ends it is technically reducing your max HP and so Inured kicks in and says "can't be reduced" and you now have a permanent boost to your max HP.

Ok, I see. I tripped up over the word "temporary."

[TheUser]

Wouldn't people on the non-selected side also take damage then? Where does it say which direction from the selected side is effected?

The implication of the wording is only people on the other side of the selected wall take damage, otherwise standing 1 foot away from the wall on the non-selected side still puts you 2 feet from the selected side. If the wall itself doesn't block that damage (and therefore damages the creature inside the wall) then it would also damage someone standing close to the non-selected side. I mean it just compounds the problem but it also makes the concept of selecting a side almost worthless.

How are you envisioning the wall of fire?
Is it a 11ft thick band or a 1ft thick wall with heat radiating out to 1 side?

<-Safe side
| | <- Wall (1ft thick)
| | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
| | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
| | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
| | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
| | <Danger side> (10ft)

| | - this is the wall, this is the space where you take 5d8 twice if ending your turn here. It is visible to the enemy.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - this is the 10ft radiating out from the danger side. It's not visible or tangible except for the heat one would presumably feel when getting close or entering the area. The enemy doesn't know this exists until they enter the area (presumably).

[EggKookoo]

How are you envisioning the wall of fire?
Is it a 10ft thick band or a 1ft thick wall with heat radiating out to 1 side?

| | Wall (1ft thick)
<Safe side
| | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
| | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
| | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
| | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Danger side> (10ft)

| | - this is the wall, this is the space where you take 5d8 twice if ending your turn here. It is visible to the enemy.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - this is the 10ft radiating out from the danger side. It's not visible or tangible except for the heat one would presumably feel when getting close or entering the area. The enemy doesn't know this exists until they enter the area (presumably).

Sorry, you're right. I missed "The other side of the wall deals no damage" at the end of the spell description. So the wall blocks its own radiating damage, basically.

[col_impact]

Unattunement requires short rest.

[Luccan]

You can identify items without a spell. This is more one people seem to forget exists and I'm actually glad of it. Kinda removes the point of a spell to identify items if all your 5int, 8wis barbarian needs to figure out exactly what a magic item does and how is an hour of staring at it.

[Witty Username]

You can identify items without a spell. This is more one people seem to forget exists and I'm actually glad of it. Kinda removes the point of a spell to identify items if all your 5int, 8wis barbarian needs to figure out exactly what a magic item does and how is an hour of staring at it.

I like a house rule that if you identify it during a short rest you automatically attune to it if its a cursed item. Just to keep people from using that with impunity.

[Chronos]

Then again, the Identify spell also requires touching the target for the entire casting time, which will also often trigger curses or other negative effects.

[Segev]

Then again, the Identify spell also requires touching the target for the entire casting time, which will also often trigger curses or other negative effects.

Not usually. Most cursed items require use or atunement. Casting identify is neither.

[TheUser]

Not at all. Illusory Reality can make one and only one object created by an illusion of 1st level or higher become real for 1 minute.

It can make one object -per spell- real.
So if you have multiple illusions from multiple spells you can make one real per minute.
You can also make the same object real over and over again.

All in all you can have 10 real objects concurrently.

When you cast an illusion spell of 1st level or
higher, you can choose one inanimate, nonmagical
object that is part of the illusion and make that object
real. You can do this on your turn as a bonus action
while the spell is ongoing. The object remains real for
I minute.

There is no listed limitation on the number of objects you can make real using this feature only on the limit to one object per spell. Nor does it limit the use of the feature to once on a given object per spell.

[Keravath]

Not usually. Most cursed items require use or atunement. Casting identify is neither.

However, identify does not reveal that an item is cursed nor does it reveal the properties of the curse. DMG p138/139

"Some magic items bear curses that bedevil their users sometimes long after a user has stopped using an item. A magic item's description specifies whether the item is cursed. Most methods of identifying items, including the identify spell, fail to reveal such a curse, although lore might hint at it. A curse should be a surprise to the item's user when the curse's effects are revealed. Attunement to a cursed item can't be ended voluntarily unless the curse is broken first, such as with the remove curse spell."

The effects of the curse are a surprise to the user when they are revealed. This means that if you have a cursed ring of protection that also makes you vulnerable to fire damage ... the vulnerable to fire damage property is not revealed when using the identify spell or by examining the item since the curse and its effects are not information available to the character through the use of examination or identify. It is up to the DM whether they want to hint at whether an item bears a curse or not since they are indistinguishable from other magic items.

[HappyDaze]

You can identify items without a spell. This is more one people seem to forget exists and I'm actually glad of it. Kinda removes the point of a spell to identify items if all your 5int, 8wis barbarian needs to figure out exactly what a magic item does and how is an hour of staring at it.

How detailed is that supposed to be? If it tells you that an item requires a command word, does it provide you with that command word? With an item that has multiple functions with command words, does it accurately map each command word to a specific function?

[Luccan]

How detailed is that supposed to be? If it tells you that an item requires a command word, does it provide you with that command word? With an item that has multiple functions with command words, does it accurately map each command word to a specific function?

According to the DMG, pg. 136:

Alternatively, a character can focus on one magic item during a short rest, while being in physical contact with the item. At the end of the rest, the character learns the item's properties, as well as how to use them. Potions are an exception: a little taste is enough to tell the taster what the potion does.

It also doesn't say the identify spell is any more accurate, just faster.

[HappyDaze]

According to the DMG, pg. 136:



It also doesn't say the identify spell is any more accurate, just faster.

So learns "how to use them" means which of these?

A) It requires a command word to unleash effect X.
or
B) The command word to unleash effect X is !@$!#@%$%%.

[Luccan]

So learns "how to use them" means which of these?

A) It requires a command word to unleash effect X.
or
B) The command word to unleash effect X is !@$!#@%$%%.

Seems open to interpretation, but again given we aren't told it's definitely less accurate than identify and that the spell description doesn't actually tell you you learn command words, it's up in the air. It seems intended to be as accurate and informative as the spell, however you interpret that.

[Keltest]

So learns "how to use them" means which of these?

A) It requires a command word to unleash effect X.
or
B) The command word to unleash effect X is !@$!#@%$%%.

The latter, presumably. The intent, as I understand it, is that Identify shouldn't be a mandatory inclusion in every party everywhere at all times to make treasure usable. If you learn there is a command word without learning what it is, that rather defeats the purpose.

[HappyDaze]

The latter, presumably. The intent, as I understand it, is that Identify shouldn't be a mandatory inclusion in every party everywhere at all times to make treasure usable. If you learn there is a command word without learning what it is, that rather defeats the purpose.

Well, in the old days, we had to find the command word. Sometimes it was in an enemies journal, other times recorded in legend (perhaps accurately, perhaps not), and sometimes this was where spells were used. 5e certainly puts this into easy mode, and whether that's a feature or a bug is a matter of personal preference. I think it is a little too easy. I would prefer if there were certain skill checks that could be performed for such things (many of the Int-linked proficiencies might be appropriate) rather than just an automatic thing that happens when you spend a snack break rubbing on the item.

[Keltest]

Well, in the old days, we had to find the command word. Sometimes it was in an enemies journal, other times recorded in legend (perhaps accurately, perhaps not), and sometimes this was where spells were used. 5e certainly puts this into easy mode, and whether that's a feature or a bug is a matter of personal preference. I think it is a little too easy. I would prefer if there were certain skill checks that could be performed for such things (many of the Int-linked proficiencies might be appropriate) rather than just an automatic thing that happens when you spend a snack break rubbing on the item.

In the Old Days, you also got XP based off of how many GP you could haul out of a dungeon, and low level wizards mostly played the game by watching their friends fight for them while they played cheerleader.

Certainly an int check could be appropriate, but again my understanding is that they don't want to force you to have a specific mechanism in a party, weather it be a caster with identify, a high int char, somebody who knows interpretive dance, or whatever, to access magic items.

[Segev]

I think you also attune the item in the Short Rest method of identifying it, so if it's cursed, you're cursed.

Items with specific command words can still be impossible to use. you discover HOW to use it. "You use this by saying the command word while pointing it at somebody" doesn't help if its command word is secreted somewhere else. This is mostly a DM call. It's there for when the DM wants there to be some plot behind finding it, while the ease-of-discovery-of-function is to aid the DM in letting the party just have some cool items they found.

[HappyDaze]

In the Old Days, you also got XP based off of how many GP you could haul out of a dungeon, and low level wizards mostly played the game by watching their friends fight for them while they played cheerleader.

Certainly an int check could be appropriate, but again my understanding is that they don't want to force you to have a specific mechanism in a party, weather it be a caster with identify, a high int char, somebody who knows interpretive dance, or whatever, to access magic items.

I'm certainly not saying all of the old ways were better, but in this case, I do prefer them to the "short rest, and a Clippy in my head tells me how it works" approach.

[Keravath]

Another commonly missed rule mentioned in another thread.

If you are multiclassing, you need to have the minimum stats for both the class you are currently in and the one you plan to mutliclass into. So a paladin/cleric mutliclass would require a minimum of 13 in str, cha and wis to multiclass from paladin to cleric or cleric to paladin.

[Pleh]

I think you also attune the item in the Short Rest method of identifying it, so if it's cursed, you're cursed.

This is definitely the kind of rule players need to make an informed decision about. If you forget to mention this ruling at session zero, you need to bring it up the first time they go to identify something, before allowing them to do it, giving them the, "are you sure?"

Further, since the rules are intentionally vague to allow DMs to give rulings rather than rules, I'd feel it best to add the houserule that characters can try to research magic items from arcane libraries if they suspect an item is cursed (bonus points to players who have the Researcher perk from the Sage background). If their check is successful, they may learn the curse and effect of an item that matches their item's decription.

I am totally thinking about how we see Gandalf researching the ring of power in Gondor's library and refusing to touch the ring directly at all because he can't risk getting cursed just for examining it to verify it is what he thinks it is.

This way, players get to play a bit of a mini game where they have agency to choose caution or recklessness. Use the power of the magic item now and risk unexpected downsides, or wait til you get back to town and get all the info you can to avoid unlucky surprises.