Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

[Mr Adventurer]

A165
No, anything that would break concentration on a spell, such as Rage, breaks concentration on anything else that requires it, like Invoke Duplicity.

R165
Are you able to provide a rules reference for this? I haven't seen it as a general rule.

However, you still couldn't concentrate on Invoke Duplicity while Raging, because Invoke Duplicity says "your concentration (as if you were concentrating on a spell)", while Rage prevents you from concentrating on spells.

What I'm getting at is that I think each thing that takes concentration and isn't a spell specifies that it's "as if you were concentrating on a spell" to square off the edges.

[SpikeFightwicky]

Q166

There's a tower with a permanent Guards and Wards cast on it enough times to cover the entire tower. Upon reaching a door that is arcane locked, a player casts dispel magic on it.

If the dispel magic succeeds, does it remove the arcane lock for that one door (the specific effect on the door), or does it remove arcane lock from each door affected by the spell (the specific effect of the spell)?

[Narbaculus]

A166
Dispel magic states that if it is successful, "the spell ends." (PHB p.234) Guards and wards states that "dispel magic cast on a specific effect, if successful, ends only that effect." (PHB p.248) It lists the arcane lock effect on the doors as a single effect: "Doors." Therefore, a successful dispel magic should remove arcane lock from all doors affected by a single casting of guards and wards.

[dreast]

Q167

The villain, angered at the success of the (TCoE) blindfighting fighting-style paladin, casts invisibility on his pet basilisk and has it cuddle up to the paladin.

1. Can the paladin avert her gaze? Does she need to to avoid making the save? What effect would it have if she did?

2. Can the paladin cast compelled duel at the basilisk?

[Galithar]

Q167

The villain, angered at the success of the blindfighting fighting-style paladin, casts invisibility on his pet basilisk and has it cuddle up to the paladin.

1. Can the paladin avert her gaze? Does she need to to avoid making the save?

2. Can the paladin cast compelled duel at the basilisk?

A167

1. The paladin doesn't need to avert her gaze. The Basilisk AND it's target must be able to see each other. If either can't see the other the gaze doesn't work.

2. Yes. Compelled Duel requires you to see your target. Your Paladin can "see" with the blindsight granted by Blind Fighting.

[dreast]

A167

1. The paladin doesn't need to avert her gaze. The Basilisk AND it's target must be able to see each other. If either can't see the other the gaze doesn't work.

2. Yes. Compelled Duel requires you to see your target. Your Paladin can "see" with the blindsight granted by Blind Fighting.

I think you’re wrong on one. There’s no downside to doing it by the first sentence of the fighting style, but the third sentence makes it necessary.

[dreast]

Q168
The villain, angered at the success of the (TCoE) blindfighting fighting-style paladin, casts darkness over himself and the party.

Can the paladin cast compelled duel at the villain?

[Galithar]

I think you’re wrong on one. There’s no downside to doing it by the first sentence of the fighting style, but the third sentence makes it necessary.

R167 I'm not sure what point you are disagreeing with? The Basilisk is invisible and fighting a creature that it can't see. Both creatures must be able to see each other for it's petrifying gaze to work. In this case, neither creature can see the other, though RAW the Paladin can see the Basilisk through Blindsight the RAI would still give it protection from a gaze. Regardless the Basilisk cannot see the Paladin and therefore its gaze will not have a chance of affecting the Paladin

Q168
The villain, angered at the success of the (TCoE) blindfighting fighting-style paladin, casts darkness over himself and the party.

Can the paladin cast compelled duel at the villain?

A168
So long as the Paladin is within range to see the villain, which due to the magical darkness is 10' or less thanks to her blind sight.

[dreast]

R167 I'm not sure what point you are disagreeing with? The Basilisk is invisible and fighting a creature that it can't see. Both creatures must be able to see each other for it's petrifying gaze to work. In this case, neither creature can see the other, though RAW the Paladin can see the Basilisk through Blindsight the RAI would still give it protection from a gaze. Regardless the Basilisk cannot see the Paladin and therefore its gaze will not have a chance of affecting the Paladin

Why can’t the basilisk see the paladin?

[Galithar]

Why can’t the basilisk see the paladin?

Ahhh, I think I see the conflict. I was making an assumption that the "success of the blind fighting paladin" that angered the villain to begin with was doing so by using the fighting style.

So that part is out. The Paladin still wouldn't need to avert her gaze as the basilisk is invisible. That means the Paladin can't SEE the baslisk, though she can still "see" it with blind sight. This wouldn't trigger a gaze attack the same way tremor sense wouldn't. "Seeing" isn't always a visual thing when non visual senses come into play.

[dreast]

Ahhh, I think I see the conflict. I was making an assumption that the "success of the blind fighting paladin" that angered the villain to begin with was doing so by using the fighting style.

So that part is out. The Paladin still wouldn't need to avert her gaze as the basilisk is invisible. That means the Paladin can't SEE the baslisk, though she can still "see" it with blind sight. This wouldn't trigger a gaze attack the same way tremor sense wouldn't. "Seeing" isn't always a visual thing when non visual senses come into play.

Under blindsight rules, no. But the blind fighting ability has two more sentences after the first one. The third sentence controls this interaction:

Moreover, you can see an invisible creature within that range [10 feet], unless the creature successfully hides from you.

Blindsight RAW also won’t allow spellcasting that requires sight. (It allows perception, and thus eliminates adv. and disadv., but does not provide sight.) The second sentence of the blind fighting ability MIGHT overturn this, but it hinges on the word “effectively”. How that word is interpreted has major consequences for spellcasters with the fighting style.

[Samayu]

Q169

Cloudkill: When a creature enters the spell's area for the first time on a turn or starts its turn there, that creature must make a Constitution saving throw.

Must the victim make a save when the spell is cast, or only when he moves into it, or starts there?

[Narbaculus]

Q169

Cloudkill: When a creature enters the spell's area for the first time on a turn or starts its turn there, that creature must make a Constitution saving throw.

Must the victim make a save when the spell is cast, or only when he moves into it, or starts there?

A169
A creature must make a save when it enters the area (i.e. goes from being outside it to being inside it) or starts its turn in it. Neither of those criteria apply when the spell is cast.

[heavyfuel]

Q 170

Is Augury a Wizard spell?

This may seem like a silly question, but one online source I found refered to it as a Cleric/Druid/Wizard spell, even though the PHB says it's Cleric only.

Was it added to other spell lists in some random book? Or is the online source just wrong? Thanks!

[Emongnome777]

A170

Tasha's Cauldron of Everything added Augury to the druid spell list on pg. 35 and wizard spell list on pg. 75 as optional class features.

[Odessa333]

Q 171

When multiclassing, what happens if you would get the same armor proficiency? I have a Paladin multiclassing into a hexblade, getting a ton of weapon and armor they already have. I've read they get nothing, and I've read they get skills as per the phb. Is there an official ruling for this?

[Darzil]

Q 171

When multiclassing, what happens if you would get the same armor proficiency? I have a Paladin multiclassing into a hexblade, getting a ton of weapon and armor they already have. I've read they get nothing, and I've read they get skills as per the phb. Is there an official ruling for this?

A171

"pg 164 PHB - When you gain a levei in a class other than your first, you gain only some of that class's starting proficiencies, as shown in the Multiclassing Proficiencies table."

So you definitely don't get starting proficiencies, and nothing in there about getting something else if you get a duplicate (which would actually make taking a similar class into a skill build!)

[Zhorn]

Q172
Waking up from sleeping as a perception check; was there a rule in any of the official books that covered the DC for this?
(Looking for a page number specifically)

[Ortho]

Q172
Waking up from sleeping as a perception check; was there a rule in any of the official books that covered the DC for this?
(Looking for a page number specifically)

A 172:
Xanathar's Guide to Everything (pg 77) has rules and DCs in regards to being woken up from sleep via passive perception.

A sleeper with a passive perception of 20 will be woken up by a whisper within 10ft, and a sleeper with a passive perception of 15 will be woken up by normal speech within 10ft

[dreast]

Q173. An ankheg had a natural AC of 14 and a burrowing speed. If the ankheg only lets the top half of its body above ground (Baldur’s Gate style), does its AC rise to sixteen for half cover while it slashes with its claws? If it just pokes up its head to spit, does it rise to 19 for 3/4 cover? Does any creature with a burrowing speed get this advantage?

Edit: Just saw that the Ankheg’s AC is 11 when prone, which by the monster manual’s text is what happens when it has 3/4 cover (only antennas above ground). This would mean that in both cases listed its effective AC would be 16, which makes a lot more sense to me. So the answer would be yes, no (for this special AC reason), yes.

[NecessaryWeevil]

Q174:Animal Shapes lets you "Choose any number of willing creatures that you can see within range. You transform each target into the form of a Large or smaller beast with a challenge rating of 4 or lower. On subsequent turns, you can use your action to transform affected creatures into new forms."

a) Can I choose new willing targets on subsequent turns, or am I locked into the same ones I chose when casting the spell? I.e. is choosing something you do only once, when you cast the spell? Why or why not?
b) If the targeting criteria for subsequent turns is [only?] that I affected them earlier, what happens if they cease to be willing?

I assume RAI is that you can choose new targets in subsequent turns and they still need to be willing, but I wonder how you would read and apply the RAW.
Thanks!

[leogobsin]

Q174:Animal Shapes lets you "Choose any number of willing creatures that you can see within range. You transform each target into the form of a Large or smaller beast with a challenge rating of 4 or lower. On subsequent turns, you can use your action to transform affected creatures into new forms."

a) Can I choose new willing targets on subsequent turns, or am I locked into the same ones I chose when casting the spell? I.e. is choosing something you do only once, when you cast the spell? Why or why not?
b) If the targeting criteria for subsequent turns is [only?] that I affected them earlier, what happens if they cease to be willing?

I assume RAI is that you can choose new targets in subsequent turns and they still need to be willing, but I wonder how you would read and apply the RAW.
Thanks!

A174 The description says "transform affected creatures into new forms". The creatures you choose when you cast the spell are the ones "affected", those are the only creatures whose forms you can change.

[Narbaculus]

R174: This means you can alter the forms of those same creatures again on subsequent turns, even if they are no longer willing, or no longer in range.

[dreast]

Q175. My level 9 ranger casts Summon Fey and hands the fey (Dex 16, PB=Ranger’s) a +1 shortsword. Could the fey use that shortsword to make an offhand attack with its bonus action after making its multiattack?

Also, if so, what would that attack look like?

[Darzil]

Q175. My level 9 ranger casts Summon Fey and hands the fey (Dex 16, PB=Ranger’s) a +1 shortsword. Could the fey use that shortsword to make an offhand attack with its bonus action after making its multiattack?

RAW, no, that Bonus Action isn't listed. Monsters don't use Character rules.

[Chaos Jackal]

R175 Using a bonus action for two-weapon fighting requires someone to take the Attack action first, using a light melee weapon. Multiattack is a separate type of action. So you cannot use two-weapon fighting with a Multiattack.

In order for the Fey Spirit to take a bonus action for a shortsword attack, it would have to use the Attack action before, rather than multiattack, which means it would take only one attack, as it doesn't have the Extra Attack feature.

[LtPowers]

RAW, no, that Bonus Action isn't listed. Monsters don't use Character rules.

R175

Two-weapon fighting is a basic combat option, not a class feature. Combat options like attacks of opportunity, shoves, and Help are available to any creature.


Powers &8^]

[dreast]

R175 Using a bonus action for two-weapon fighting requires someone to take the Attack action first, using a light melee weapon. Multiattack is a separate type of action. So you cannot use two-weapon fighting with a Multiattack.

In order for the Fey Spirit to take a bonus action for a shortsword attack, it would have to use the Attack action before, rather than multiattack, which means it would take only one attack, as it doesn't have the Extra Attack feature.

Cast at level 3, as a level 9 ranger must, the fey spirit doesn’t have more than one attack anyway. So he ignores the multi attack and instead takes an attack action to make a single attack with his shortsword. The question stands: after using the attack action with its shortsword, what does the offhand attack look like?

[Dualswinger]

Q176: Is there an established order of effect for multiplication/division VS addition/subtraction for things like damage reduction?

Case in point, a Level 4 monk with the stoneskin spell and slowfall ability drops from a height of 80ft onto another creature that fails its dex save. There are 3 mitigating factors in this scenario.

A. The Monk takes half falling damage due to landing onto a creature
B. The Monk has resistance to the damage due to stoneskin
C. The Monk reduces the falling damage taken by 20 points due to slow fall.

[Galithar]

Q177
If I am on another plane of existence and am affected by the Banishment spell it returns me to my homeplane. If the spell is interrupted while the caster in concentrating I pop back to where I was, or the nearest unoccupied spot, on the plane I was banished from.

Can I cast dispell magic on myself to end the effects of Banishment while on my home plane?

If I can do I stay where I am? I have dispelled the magical effect that would have returned me. (I'm 99% sure this isn't the case but just want to clarify)
Or do I pop back where I was, or the nearest unoccupied space. (I'm equally sure that this would be the case, but again I'm trying to clarify)