Results 61 to 90 of 263
Thread: New Sage Advice
-
2020-10-01, 07:17 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2019
Re: New Sage Advice
I don't think so, because the bullet point indicating the "moving towards the source of the fear" doesn't have the same limitation as the disadvantage needing to have them in line of sight. That means even closing your eyes might not give you disadvantage on ability checks, but you still can't move toward them. In fact, even if your eyes were open but the source of fear was invisible, you couldn't move towards them, because you just simply can't. What, do you just innately know where the source of fear is, even when you can't see them, and that's why you can't move closer to them? Then why doesn't the source impose disadvantage still?
I hope you don't think I am being aggressive here, but I really don't like the Sage Advice ruling here.
-
2020-10-01, 07:18 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2019
Re: New Sage Advice
AL DM's are NOT required to use Sage Advice
-
2020-10-01, 07:43 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2017
Re: New Sage Advice
As far as AL DMs go, it is exactly the opposite. They can ignore ANY other source of rules clarifications except the rule books and official errata.
These are from the season 9 FAQ but they haven't released a complete FAQ for season 10.
"What Rules Do I Use?
All Adventurers League games are played using the fifth edition Dungeons & Dragons rules—house rules and Variant and optional rules, except those listed below, aren’t permitted for use. As an Adventurers League Dungeon Master, you are empowered to adjudicate the rules as presented by the official materials (PHB, DMG, MM, etc.). Run the game according to those rules, but you are the final arbiter of any ambiguities that might arise in doing so. House rules aren’t permitted for use in play; the campaign uses the rules as presented in the PHB."
"Official Rule Sources
Rules from an official D&D Adventurers League source, such as the ALPG, the ALDMG, or this FAQ establish the boundaries for our current campaign.
As a general rule, the admins don’t issue official rulings on general rules questions unless it’s directly affected by the scope and purpose of the program.
Sage Advice/Twitter. Sage Advice (SA) and tweets from the Wizards of the Coast staff are a great barometer for the ‘rules-as-intended’, in any case. The DM can choose to utilize them at their discretion for rules adjudication."
An AL DM can make their own rulings based on the content of the PHB. They do not need to heed Sage Advice unless they want to.
-------------------
The shield ruling derives from a strict reading of the DMG. It doesn't make any sense to me as a DM and I won't be using it. I am guessing they just didn't want to issue errata for the DMG though they are for some of the other answers so I don't really understand this one.
Shield +X in the DMG says:
"While holding this shield, you have a bonus to AC determined by the shield's rarity. This bonus is in addition to the shield's normal bonus to AC."
All of the shields I have looked at in the DMG only require you to hold them to gain their benefits. Animated shield, sentinel shield, shield +X etc.
Does this mean a wizard can hold a +3 shield and get +3 to their AC even if they can't actually wield a shield? It would seem so.
-------------------
This is a pithy answer :)
"[NEW] What happens if I’m polymorphed or Wild Shaped into a creature with fewer than 100 hit points and then I’m targeted by power word kill? You die."
-
2020-10-01, 08:10 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2019
Re: New Sage Advice
Is it just me or do sage advice rulings get worse every year? 5e was written in Natural language. The amount of hyper literal parsing they are doing more and more of is going to lead to all kinds of contradictions as we are beginning to see.
Last edited by Frogreaver; 2020-10-01 at 08:13 PM.
-
2020-10-01, 08:18 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2014
-
2020-10-01, 08:22 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2020
-
2020-10-01, 09:06 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2017
Re: New Sage Advice
Well if they want to implement this houserule there is no issue, but the 5e shield is quite literally strapped to your arm. Can't drop it any easier than you can drop your sky boots.
I can understand the feeling, but do you have the same problem with the PCs avoiding getting petrified by a Medusa by looking away?Last edited by Unoriginal; 2020-10-01 at 09:08 PM.
-
2020-10-01, 09:10 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2017
- Gender
-
2020-10-01, 09:16 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2019
-
2020-10-01, 09:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
-
2020-10-01, 09:57 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2015
Re: New Sage Advice
According to the rules for stacking effects, holding multiple +x shields provides no more bonus to AC than holding a single +x shield, same as wearing a dozen Rings of Protection gives no more bonus AC than one. There is probably a workaround for this with specific magical shields.
The answer about divine smite is based on the latter part of the ability. You can use divine smite after you hit with an unarmed strike (a melee weapon attack), but it will deal no radiant damage because the attack does no weapon damage. The radiant damage is in addition to the weapon's damage. It's like the answer for Savage Attacker. It doesn't work because the ability requires a weapon.
As a personal anecdote, my Paladin grappled a dragon and I had to choose between keeping my shield on, or doffing my shield so I could use my Dragon Slayer sword. Broadly, anytime a paladin grapples they'd have to make a decision between wielding a shield or a weapon in the other hand, and if they choose the shield, they could smite with the improvised shield attack or not smite with the proficient unarmed strike.
I don't think there is any statistically demonstrable trend towards more literal rules answers. It has always been my experience that SAC answers are "That is literally what the book says," as much as possible.
-
2020-10-01, 10:06 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2020
-
2020-10-01, 10:14 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
Re: New Sage Advice
-
2020-10-01, 10:37 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2019
Re: New Sage Advice
Last edited by Frogreaver; 2020-10-01 at 10:49 PM.
-
2020-10-01, 11:01 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2015
- Location
- Finland
- Gender
Re: New Sage Advice
You can use Divine Smite with unarmed strike.
The class feature requires a melee 'weapon attack', which unarmed strike is, NOT an 'attack with a weapon', which unarmed strike isn't.
'weapon attack' ≠ 'attack with a weapon'
Both are common rules terms used in various places in the rules, and are different in meaning, even when they may refer to same action.
The difference is subtle, but it's still a difference.
I'm not saying it's not stupid. It is. But it's the rules we have. If you deliberately wish to make your paladin player sad and houserule that you can't smite with your fist, it's perfectly within your rights as a DM, but don't claim it's anything else than a houserule, because it is.
Edit: If I had my way, I'd just ditch one or the other everywhere in the rules and let the one that I left to apply to all instances the other appeared in. And, to be honest, I think I'd drop the latter.Last edited by Arkhios; 2020-10-01 at 11:30 PM.
-
2020-10-01, 11:16 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2020
Re: New Sage Advice
So if the party Capt America holds out his arm with his magic shield, and the whole party holds onto the edge..does the whole party get the Magic Bonus to AC?
A +1 to +3 Magic Shield does not require Attunement.
Theoretically you could grapple an opponent by grabbing their shield, and get an AC boost.
The numerical bonuses from magic weapons I treat like HP, game abstractions that can be described in many different fashions.
A magic shield doesn't automatically break down into the physical shield and then the enchantment, which according to Sage Advice, now has Star Trek like deflection properties. A magic shield can also be described as being made with preternatural skill, and outperforms even well made shields.
The whole Paladin can't Divine Smite with unarmed attacks/ monks unarmed attacks are weaponless melee attacks is clearly niche protection and flavor protections.
Paladins can't Smite/Super punch...monks can't have Elemental Weapon cast on their left foot.
Treating these restriction in a manner akin to the Druid metal armor prohibition, would have been the better move, I think.
A Paladin of Tyr that wants to strike with the "missing hand of god" and fist smite isn't game breaking, and plenty flavorful....with the downside that a Paladin's Hodukun punch might be better then a monk's....hence why the rules are as they are.Last edited by Satori01; 2020-10-01 at 11:22 PM.
-
2020-10-01, 11:19 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2016
-
2020-10-01, 11:56 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2013
- Location
- Somewhere
- Gender
Re: New Sage Advice
Paladin: While Divine Smite always worked off melee weapon attack, IMPROVED Divine Smite required melee attack with a weapon. Perhaps the confusion comes from there?
It's not that different from the old trick of a monk who attune Shield of Missile Attraction to become ranged attack magnet for Deflect Arrows, then puts it away to get rid of the attunement but keeping the curse.It's Eberron, not ebberon.
It's not high magic, it's wide magic.
And it's definitely not steampunk. The only time steam gets involved is when the fire and water elementals break loose.
-
2020-10-01, 11:59 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2015
-
2020-10-02, 12:46 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Gender
Re: New Sage Advice
I think it is a ascetics thing, like with rogue's sneak attack. Why does it matter that they can only sneak attack with weapons that have the finesse or ranged properties, because they are making rules to make what they think the rogue should be visually (daggers, hand crossbow, light armor dex build). Though this lens, unarmed strikes are not intended to be used by most classes (maybe because they think it is silly or steps on the toes of the monk or something).
My sig is something witty.
78% of DM's started their first campaign in a tavern. If you're one of the 22% that didn't, copy and paste this into your signature.
-
2020-10-02, 01:01 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2016
- Location
- The Old West
Re: New Sage Advice
I actually think there's an argument that it's more about balance on the subject of the Rogue's sneak attack limits and armor proficiency, though it seems doubtful it would be game breaking. Meanwhile an unarmed Paladin build would be weaker than a GWF Paladin. I'm also not sure why an edition that won't prevent you from playing a Paladin that sneaks around and kills unaware foes (ala the once-popular Paladin/Assassin builds) would object to you Kirk-hammering with holy fury in open combat.
Avatar by linklele
Spoiler: Build Contests
E6 Iron Chef XVI Shared First Place: Black Wing
E6 Iron Chef XXI Shared Second Place: The Shadow's Hand
-
2020-10-02, 02:16 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2019
Re: New Sage Advice
No, that’s part of the legend of Medusa. It’s true to the myth, so the mechanics correctly express the story you’re telling with that creature.
And let’s keep in mind that some fear effects are magical, but Frightened is not a magical condition. Battlemasters can inflict it with Menacing Strike, for example. The condition is intended to represent debilitating terror, and the mechanics don’t really do that. We’re getting kind of off topic though, I was only commenting here because I previously would have assumed being invisible doesn’t invalidate other creatures being frightened because... obviously. Then I just started imagining how i would design it to maintain verisimilitude.Last edited by Evaar; 2020-10-02 at 02:17 AM.
-
2020-10-02, 03:02 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2017
Re: New Sage Advice
Not all fear effects are magical, but all fear effects are fantastic al (and in my previous posts I was talking about all fear effects, not just magical ones).
Menacing Strike, being a special combat move that can only be used a few times a day and which creates irrational panicon the target, is fantastical. The Frightened condition isn't just fear, it actively impose limits on what a character can do.
A bunch of goblins might not want to face a Paladin of the Ancient who one-shot their leader because of fear, but that wouldn't be the Frightened condition. If the goblins have to fight the Paladin anyway, they would not be hindered by their fear like a Frightened creature would. Now if they were fighting a Paladin of Conquest, they would certainly have to deal with the Conqurst Oath's fantastical, fear-fabricating phenomenons.
-
2020-10-02, 07:09 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2015
Re: New Sage Advice
Well, if unarmed is separated from weapons, that would mean that things like immunities and resistances to damage queued off of weapon damage would not apply to unarmed attacks. Without looking this up I believe this would mean for example that you can't kill a werewolf with a non magic and non-silver dagger, but you could beat one to death in a bar fight.
I am the flush of excitement. The blush on the cheek. I am the Rouge!
-
2020-10-02, 07:52 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
- Gender
Re: New Sage Advice
The curious part is unarmed strikes not being weapons, but natural weapons are.
Yep, I finally have an idea for a Paladin, and it's an Ancients Paladin Lizardfolk. Light's Might Smite Bite.
If the RAI is for smites to require weapons besides fists and foreheads, then the PHB needs to use the phrase "attack with a melee weapon" (which requires an item), rather than the attack matrix "melee weapon attack". They've had this distinction... well, in the same class's features (Improved Smite), but I think was pretty well codified with SCAG (the X-blade cantrips).
-
2020-10-02, 08:21 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2015
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Re: New Sage Advice
*giggle* That seems pretty clear. The only exception that I can think of is one of the variant Fire Giants in Volo's Guide to Monsters, and that's a monster not a PC thing. I have the same feeling.
The game has always attracted folks like that; the war games before D&D also did. (Tim Kask used to refer to them as Twitchers in the context of historical table top miniatures battles)
While I think you meant aesthetics, I caught your drift.Avatar by linklele. How Teleport Worksa. Malifice (paraphrased):
Rulings are not 'House Rules.' Rulings are a DM doing what DMs are supposed to do.
b. greenstone (paraphrased):
Agency means that they {players} control their character's actions; you control the world's reactions to the character's actions.
Second known member of the Greyview Appreciation Society
-
2020-10-02, 08:32 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2018
Re: New Sage Advice
I think this is the most incredible result of 5e's "weapon" legalese I've seen yet. Feels like an indication that they probably weren't really thinking about being so legalistic about weapon phrasing when they first wrote a bunch of the parts, and later decided it should be hard coded without really doing a thorough check of how things had been written.
edit: oh someone below pointed out this was errata'd. sad.Last edited by OvisCaedo; 2020-10-02 at 08:40 AM.
-
2020-10-02, 08:38 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2013
- Gender
Re: New Sage Advice
I know you weren't asking me, but the Medusa thing seems perfectly logical. You have to look at it to be turned to stone, so looking away or closing your eyes makes sense as a defence (though obviously it makes fighting more awkward).
In contrast, not seeing something tends to make the thing more frightening, not less. Especially if you know (or believe) that it is still close by.
-
2020-10-02, 08:39 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2015
- Location
- Paris, France
- Gender
-
2020-10-02, 08:40 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2015