New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 3 of 34 FirstFirst 1234567891011121328 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 1014
  1. - Top - End - #61
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2018

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Quote Originally Posted by Dmdork View Post
    Q23 I rage and dodge. Next round I attack a cleric. She has sanctuary up. I fail. There's no other targets so my attack is lost. Do I lose my rage?
    A23
    Unless you have taken damage, or have another feature that would prevent it's loss, yes you would stop raging at the end of the turn in which you made no attack.

  2. - Top - End - #62
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    BarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Prime Material Plane

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Quote Originally Posted by Galithar View Post
    A23
    Unless you have taken damage, or have another feature that would prevent it's loss, yes you would stop raging at the end of the turn in which you made no attack.
    R23: In the example, "I rage and dodge," the rage would have ended after the barbarian dodged since it was that same turn in which the barbarian didn't take or do damage.

    That's the reason entering a rage is a bonus action. You therefore still have your action in which to attack after raging.
    Last edited by E’Tallitnics; 2020-05-18 at 05:05 PM. Reason: Spelling.

  3. - Top - End - #63
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2018

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Quote Originally Posted by E’Tallitnics View Post
    R23: In the example, "I rage and dodge," the rage would have ended after the barbarian dodged since it was that same turn in which the barbarian didn't take or do damage.

    That's the reason entering a rage is a bonus action. You therefore still have your action in which to attack after raging.
    R23 I suppose it would, but there is still the possibility that he's taken damage since the previous turn. I was imagining that they are in combat and got hit prior prompting the need to dodge. So assuming the Barbarian hasn't taken damage before the turn in which they activated rage, then it would indeed end at the end of the same turn it was activated.

  4. - Top - End - #64
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2019

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    A22:

    thanks for the input/answer, but can you provide a D&D reference - where can I find the RAW D&D definition?

  5. - Top - End - #65
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    BarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Prime Material Plane

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Quote Originally Posted by da newt View Post
    A22:

    thanks for the input/answer, but can you provide a D&D reference - where can I find the RAW D&D definition?
    R22: I'm sorry that I was more clear before but there is no RAW reference for "creature" due to it (for the most part) being a common use word.

  6. - Top - End - #66
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Ceric's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    GMT -8:00
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Q24. Can a wizard cast Shield on their familiar as the wizard's reaction to the familiar getting hit?

    I know wizards could share self-range spells in 3.5e but I don't know if they can in 5e as well. And even if so, I'm not sure if Shield can only be triggered if the wizard themselves took the hit instead of the familiar.

  7. - Top - End - #67
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    BarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Prime Material Plane

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Quote Originally Posted by Ceric View Post
    Q24. Can a wizard cast Shield on their familiar as the wizard's reaction to the familiar getting hit?

    I know wizards could share self-range spells in 3.5e but I don't know if they can in 5e as well. And even if so, I'm not sure if Shield can only be triggered if the wizard themselves took the hit instead of the familiar.
    A24: You’re last sentence is a correct assumption. The reaction to cast the spell is only granted if the Wizard is hit.

  8. - Top - End - #68
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    The Land of Cleves
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    R 24:

    Further, you can't share spells with a familiar any more. You can cast a touch spell through your familiar, such that only the familiar needs to touch the target, not you. You can also share spells with a creature you summon via the paladin spell Find Steed, if you are mounted on the steed.

    A paladin with access to the Shield spell somehow (such as via the Magic Initiate feat or multiclassing) who is hit by an attack could cast Shield and share it with her mount, and both would then benefit from the +4 to AC for the spell's duration, but said paladin could still not cast Shield in reaction to the mount being hit.
    Time travels in divers paces with divers persons.
    As You Like It, III:ii:328

    Chronos's Unalliterative Skillmonkey Guide
    Current Homebrew: 5th edition psionics

  9. - Top - End - #69
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2018

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Quote Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
    R 24:

    both would then benefit from the +4 to AC for the spell's duration, but said paladin could still not cast Shield in reaction to the mount being hit.
    Just wanted to point out what I assume is just a typo. Shield is +5 AC not +4

  10. - Top - End - #70
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Ceric's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    GMT -8:00
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Thank you all!

  11. - Top - End - #71
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2019

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Q25. Is there anything preventing a creature from repeatedly taking 5 ft long jumps to avoid the movement penalty in an area of Plant Growth? For example, instead of using using 20 ft of movement to walk 5 ft, jump 5 ft four times. This is assuming the creature has at least 10 strength to take a 5 ft long jump without a running start.

    What about for difficult terrain (putting aside the DC 10 acrobatics check each time to avoid falling prone)?

  12. - Top - End - #72
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Millstone85's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Paris, France
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    A25 The movement penalty isn't limited to walking. So, where you would normally jump 5 ft, difficult terrain would have you jump 2 ft, and plant growth would have you jump 1 ft.

  13. - Top - End - #73
    Troll in the Playground
     
    RFLS's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Spring, TX
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Q26: Is there a way, without multiclassing, for a Druid to access the Fireball spell?

  14. - Top - End - #74
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2018

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Quote Originally Posted by RFLS View Post
    Q26: Is there a way, without multiclassing, for a Druid to access the Fireball spell?
    A26 Not in the core rules. (Barring magic items such as a Necklace of Fireballs) The UA Wildfire Druid has access to it though.

  15. - Top - End - #75
    Orc in the Playground
     
    OrcBarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2014

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Q27 Does a 3rd level spiritual weapon give more damage?

  16. - Top - End - #76
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2018

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Quote Originally Posted by Dmdork View Post
    Q27 Does a 3rd level spiritual weapon give more damage?
    A27
    No. Spiritual Weapon increases damage by 1d8 for every TWO levels above second. It's still 1d8 at 3rd level but 2d8 at 4th and 5th, 3d8 at 6th and 7th, and 4d8 at 8th and 9th.

  17. - Top - End - #77
    Orc in the Playground
     
    OrcBarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2014

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Q28 are cantrips level dependent in regard to their damage?

  18. - Top - End - #78
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Chimera

    Join Date
    Aug 2008

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Q29 Can I intentionally fail a check? More specifically can I have my Imp familiar fail an Investigation check to detect a real vs. Illusory Darkness spell?

  19. - Top - End - #79
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2018

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Quote Originally Posted by Dmdork View Post
    Q28 are cantrips level dependent in regard to their damage?
    A28
    Yes that are. Cantrips increase in damage according to the spell description. They follow a pattern of increasing at levels 5, 11, and 17. Usually by increasing the number of damage dice rolled by one. At least one (magic stone) doesn't increase, so be sure to consult the spell description.

    Edit: Note that these scale by character level, not class level. A Wizard 2/Fighter 3 has cantrips as if they are 5th level, typically 2 damage dice.
    Last edited by Galithar; 2020-05-22 at 05:02 AM.

  20. - Top - End - #80
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    The Land of Cleves
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    A 29:

    You never need to fail a check. If for some reason you would want to, you simply don't do whatever it is that would call for a check. In this situation, you could simply tell your familiar not to investigate.

    Though I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish, here: An imp could see through both real darkness or a recognized illusion of darkness.
    Time travels in divers paces with divers persons.
    As You Like It, III:ii:328

    Chronos's Unalliterative Skillmonkey Guide
    Current Homebrew: 5th edition psionics

  21. - Top - End - #81
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Chimera

    Join Date
    Aug 2008

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Quote Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
    A 29:

    You never need to fail a check. If for some reason you would want to, you simply don't do whatever it is that would call for a check. In this situation, you could simply tell your familiar not to investigate.

    Though I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish, here: An imp could see through both real darkness or a recognized illusion of darkness.
    R29: oh yeah, if you know it to be an illusion, then it looks semitransparent to you. An imp would see through it yet still see the illusion and could call it out as one. In was trying to solve the problem of a DM using fire against fire if I were to fake a Darkness spell using Silent Image.

  22. - Top - End - #82
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2019

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Q30

    Life Cleric + Goodberry

    I've seen many posts about Life Clerics and Goodberry combining for extra healing. Is this RAW?

    Disciple of life states: Whenever you use a spell to restore HP to a creature, the creature regains additional hp = to 2+ the spell's level.

    When you cast goodberry you create 10 goodberries, when a creature eats a GB it restores 1 hp ... Casting the spell creates GBs, but it doesn't heal anyone directly, that happens later when someone eats the GB.

    Is there a JC tweet about this one or something?

  23. - Top - End - #83
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2005

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    A30

    The RAW are as you've stated them.

    Designers have tweeted that the benefit applies to each goodberry as eating a goodberry counts as using a spell to restore HP.

    Personally, I'm with you. The spell has a duration of Instantaneous, not 24 hours, so how can a spell that's long since ended be what's restoring the HP?


    Powers &8^]

  24. - Top - End - #84
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2013

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Q31

    If I cast Elemental Weapon on a magic weapon that I have which has a +3 bonus, does the total bonus to hit using that weapon increase to +4?

  25. - Top - End - #85
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Millstone85's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Paris, France
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    A31 You can not cast elemental weapon on a magic weapon.

  26. - Top - End - #86
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Q32

    Is a polymorphed Mimic an object? It says the statistics remain the same with the only exclusion being the size but it also says the mimic turns into an object.

  27. - Top - End - #87
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Oct 2016

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Q33
    If a creature attempts to change to a different plane while grappled, does the plane-change succeed, and does the creature escape the grapple?

  28. - Top - End - #88
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Yora's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Germany

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    A33: The grappled condition only sets the movement speed to 0. Changing planes does not involve movement, so it is not impeded by being grappled. If the grappling opponent is transported as well depends on the specific ability or spell that is being used, and probably up to GM judgement. (Though I would generally say no.)
    We are not standing on the shoulders of giants, but on very tall tower of other dwarves.

    Spriggan's Den Heroic Fantasy Roleplaying

  29. - Top - End - #89
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2007

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Q34
    A mount is directed to take the "Disengage" action and moves to within 5 ft of an orc. The rider takes his attack and the mount moves 30ft away. Does the rider provoke an opportunity attack for leaving the orc's 5ft reach range, or does he share the mount's disengage?
    D20 Modern Complete HTML SRD
    (Contains D20 Modern (core), Urban Arcana, d20 Future and d20 Modern Menace Manual -> In a fun format)

  30. - Top - End - #90
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back

    Quote Originally Posted by SpikeFightwicky View Post
    Q34
    A mount is directed to take the "Disengage" action and moves to within 5 ft of an orc. The rider takes his attack and the mount moves 30ft away. Does the rider provoke an opportunity attack for leaving the orc's 5ft reach range, or does he share the mount's disengage?
    A34

    In essence, yes the rider "shares" the disengage but it's a bit deeper than that. An opportunity attack only activates when you move out of reach while using your movement, action, or reaction. It doesn't activate when something else moves you.

    When the horse moves out of reach, it could trigger an opportunity attack but since it disengaged, that's not possible. The rider can't be targeted either. Therefore, your mount disengaging makes both you and your mount immune to opportunity attacks.

    A hit-and-run tactic is perfectly possible with a mount.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •