-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr Adventurer
Q48
Ugh, might have already asked this and lost the answer and if so apologies, but:
If a monster/NPC entry says "humanoid (any)", should I apply the racial ability score adjustments to the monster's stat block? E.g. Thugs have listed ability scores of STR 15, DEX 11, CON 14, INT 10, WIS 10, CHA 11. If I put a Human Thug into my encounter, should I increase each of its ability scores by 1 - and thereby increase the creature's attack and damage roll, AC, and Intimidation skill (plus other ability checks that are not noted)?
A48: No. There are no RAW that burden the DM with overlaying stat bumps on the fly.
Edit: By the way where are you seeing this? It’s not in the MM.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Re 48
From MM342, top left corner:
Customizing NPCs
There are many easy ways to customize the NPCs in this appendix for your home campaign.
Racial Traits. You can add racial traits to an NPC. For example, a halfling druid might have a speed of 25 feet and the Lucky trait. Adding racial traits to an NPC doesn't alter its challenge rating. For more on racial traits, see the Player's Handbook.
To answer Mr. Adventurer, there is no need to adjust an NPC's ability scores. You should only do so if you feel the change would make a meaningful difference in the NPC's impression upon the characters.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
E’Tallitnics
A48: No. There are no RAW that burden the DM with overlaying stat bumps on the fly.
Edit: By the way where are you seeing this? It’s not in the MM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
No brains
Re 48
From MM342, top left corner:
Customizing NPCs
There are many easy ways to customize the NPCs in this appendix for your home campaign.
Racial Traits. You can add racial traits to an NPC. For example, a halfling druid might have a speed of 25 feet and the Lucky trait. Adding racial traits to an NPC doesn't alter its challenge rating. For more on racial traits, see the Player's Handbook.
To answer Mr. Adventurer, there is no need to adjust an NPC's ability scores. You should only do so if you feel the change would make a meaningful difference in the NPC's impression upon the characters.
FWIW:
I wouldn't be doing this on the fly: I prepare my encounters.
This isn't about need, it's about 'should'. Applying any racial traits to a "humanoid (any)" creature would be a straight upgrade, since they otherwise have no additional ability score points nor racial powers.
But at this point I think we are beyond the purpose of this thread.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Can you use the "Shape Water" cantrip to "waterbend," so to speak?
The Shape Water cantrip has a few different effects, including freezing water, changing the color of water, etc.
It also lets you move water, but states that the amount of water you move has to fit within a 5' cube.
Q49 Can this be used to take an amount water out of a larger body of water? For example, can I use this cantrip to lift a few tablespoons of water out of the ocean?
Q50 Can the water that is moved with the spell be moved outside of the original 5' cube? For example, can I take those few tablespoons and move them 10' into the air?
The wording of the spell is a little confusing, because it separates "instantaneously" moving the water from "animating" the water into simple shapes.
At the same time, it's probably worded ambiguously so that players can have a lot of leeway in how they use the spell.
Thank you all!
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr Adventurer
Q48If a monster/NPC entry says "humanoid (any)", should I apply the racial ability score adjustments to the monster's stat block? E.g. Thugs have listed ability scores of STR 15, DEX 11, CON 14, INT 10, WIS 10, CHA 11. If I put a Human Thug into my encounter, should I increase each of its ability scores by 1 - and thereby increase the creature's attack and damage roll, AC, and Intimidation skill (plus other ability checks that are not noted)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
E’Tallitnics
A48: No. There are no RAW that burden the DM with overlaying stat bumps on the fly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
No brains
Re 48
From MM342, top left corner:
To answer Mr. Adventurer, there is no need to adjust an NPC's ability scores. You should only do so if you feel the change would make a meaningful difference in the NPC's impression upon the characters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr Adventurer
This isn't about need, it's about 'should'. Applying any racial traits to a "humanoid (any)" creature would be a straight upgrade, since they otherwise have no additional ability score points nor racial powers.
Re 48
To give a bit more info which is relevant and might be useful: DMG, page 279-282. It expands upon npc creation and modification, including racial trait inclusion.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Strudel1000
Can you use the "Shape Water" cantrip to "waterbend," so to speak?
The Shape Water cantrip has a few different effects, including freezing water, changing the color of water, etc.
It also lets you move water, but states that the amount of water you move has to fit within a 5' cube.
Q49 Can this be used to take an amount water out of a larger body of water? For example, can I use this cantrip to lift a few tablespoons of water out of the ocean?
Q50 Can the water that is moved with the spell be moved outside of the original 5' cube? For example, can I take those few tablespoons and move them 10' into the air?
The wording of the spell is a little confusing, because it separates "instantaneously" moving the water from "animating" the water into simple shapes.
At the same time, it's probably worded ambiguously so that players can have a lot of leeway in how they use the spell.
Thank you all!
A49: Yes. A few tablespoons, “…fits within a 5-foot cube.”
A50: Yes, but you can only move it, “..up to 5 feet in any direction.”
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Q51
I guess this is more of an opinion issue, but would an earth elemental be allowed to attack from underground without ever resurfacing? It's got the reach, tremorsense and a burrow speed, so would its Earth Glide also allow it to punch through a few feet of mud without ever making itself visible to an enemy?
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Q52
Am I correct in my reading a Rod of Absorption can only ever absorb 50 levels of spells? That using the absorbed spell levels does not give back levels of absorption?
Q53
Am I correct that a Staff of the Magi does not have the hard limit of only absorbing 50 levels of spells ever? That casting spells out of it gives you back levels to use in absorption?
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Chaos Jackal
Q51
I guess this is more of an opinion issue, but would an earth elemental be allowed to attack from underground without ever resurfacing? It's got the reach, tremorsense and a burrow speed, so would its Earth Glide also allow it to punch through a few feet of mud without ever making itself visible to an enemy?
A51: Yes. It’s one of my favorite attack vectors for these creatures.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
No brains
Q52
Am I correct in my reading a Rod of Absorption can only ever absorb 50 levels of spells? That using the absorbed spell levels does not give back levels of absorption?
Q53
Am I correct that a Staff of the Magi does not have the hard limit of only absorbing 50 levels of spells ever? That casting spells out of it gives you back levels to use in absorption?
A52: Yes, both of those statements are true.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
E’Tallitnics
A51: Yes. It’s one of my favorite attack vectors for these creatures.
I think this isn't clear from the RAW. Earth Glide doesn't reference attacks, only movement.
Personally as a DM, I would rule that at best the elemental could leave part of its body underground, gaining a degree of Cover.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr Adventurer
I think this isn't clear from the RAW. Earth Glide doesn't reference attacks, only movement.
Personally as a DM, I would rule that at best the elemental could leave part of its body underground, gaining a degree of Cover.
R51: Their description specifically states, “Earth elementals glide through rock and earth as though they were liquid.” Therefore the Underwater Combat rules would apply since water is a liquid. With all of the stipulations that those rules require.
They would indeed also have cover unless their attacker had a way of ignoring cover and treating earth as a liquid.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Q54 I have one first level spell left. We long rest. Just before my long rest is done, can I cast Mage armor, then finish my long rest and get all my spells back, giving myself Mage armor for the beginning of my day, with a full spell bank?
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dmdork
Q54 I have one first level spell left. We long rest. Just before my long rest is done, can I cast Mage armor, then finish my long rest and get all my spells back, giving myself Mage armor for the beginning of my day, with a full spell bank?
A54: No. “If the rest is interrupted by a period of strenuous activity — at least 1 hour of walking, fighting, casting spells, or similar adventuring activity — the characters must begin the rest again to gain any benefit from it.”
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
E’Tallitnics
A54: No. “If the rest is interrupted by a period of strenuous activity — at least 1 hour of walking, fighting, casting spells, or similar adventuring activity — the characters must begin the rest again to gain any benefit from it.”
Contesting 54
Yes, it is possible, assuming a character can know when spell slots will be refreshed at all to begin with.
"1 hour of" - list. If "1 hour" didn't apply to anything that is separated by the comma (ending in ", or") a different timeframe would be needed, like a new verb would be needed to change what action is applied to that particular element of the list: "Walking on brick roads, catwalks, or carpets causes ..." is different from "Walking on roads, climbing on catwalks, or caressing a carpet all carry the same risk of ...".
There is no other dependency to rest on: for example: "a period of strenous activity - at least ??? fighting" just doesn't work.
"A period of strenous activity - fighting" while correct and working as a phrase, changes the meaning that the presence of "1 hour of" clearly defines: that that part of the text is there to make explicit how long the "period" is. Thus such a meaning is not reasonable conclusion for intended reading: it's not just a list of activities.
Even if we were to take it as correct there's no defined period: it would still be incorrect to say "No" as a RAW answer. It would simply be "undefined".
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ThePolarBear
Contesting 54
Yes, it is possible, assuming a character can know when spell slots will be refreshed at all to begin with.
"1 hour of" - list. If "1 hour" didn't apply to anything that is separated by the comma (ending in ", or") a different timeframe would be needed, like a new verb would be needed to change what action is applied to that particular element of the list: "Walking on brick roads, catwalks, or carpets causes ..." is different from "Walking on roads, climbing on catwalks, or caressing a carpet all carry the same risk of ...".
There is no other dependency to rest on: for example: "a period of strenous activity - at least ??? fighting" just doesn't work.
"A period of strenous activity - fighting" while correct and working as a phrase, changes the meaning that the presence of "1 hour of" clearly defines: that that part of the text is there to make explicit how long the "period" is. Thus such a meaning is not reasonable conclusion for intended reading: it's not just a list of activities.
Even if we were to take it as correct there's no defined period: it would still be incorrect to say "No" as a RAW answer. It would simply be "undefined".
R54
You are parsing the rules in a way that most people wouldn't. Discussing this would go beyond the scope of this thread, but OP or you can create a new one if you would like to further discuss this.
Casting spells during a rest interrupts it. This is why Sorcerers often use Extend metamagic with left over slots to do the same thing. An extended Mage Armor would last for 16 hours, after 8 hours of rest this results in the same effect as OP was asking about while abiding by the rules.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Re 54:
To interpret the rules in that way would imply that characters sometimes spend a full hour, 600 rounds, in combat or spellcasting. As this is something that is not in any way supported by the game system, this interpretation must be incorrect. It is, however, quite possible for characters to spend that amount of time walking.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Chronos
Re 54:
To interpret the rules in that way would imply that characters sometimes spend a full hour, 600 rounds, in combat or spellcasting. As this is something that is not in any way supported by the game system, this interpretation must be incorrect. It is, however, quite possible for characters to spend that amount of time walking.
I agree with you but several spells have a casting time of an hour or longer.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Q55
Are Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade legitimate subjects of the War Caster feat cast-as-Reaction benefit? Is Booming Blade a legitimate subject of Twin Spell metamagic?
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr Adventurer
Q55
Are Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade legitimate subjects of the War Caster feat cast-as-Reaction benefit? Is Booming Blade a legitimate subject of Twin Spell metamagic?
A55: Yes! You’re Casting a Spell that affects 1 person.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
A 55 correction:
Booming Blade is a spell that affects only one creature. Green Flame Blade, however, can affect two creatures.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Q56
Do all constructs wink out of existence in an Antimagic Field, since they were created by magic? If not, where can I read about this?
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr Adventurer
Q56
Do all constructs wink out of existence in an Antimagic Field, since they were created by magic? If not, where can I read about this?
A56: Depends on the construct. Some are created by magic, while others are naturally occurring.
From the PH (Antimagic Field):
Creatures and Objects. A creature or object summoned or created by magic temporarily winks out of existence in the sphere. Such a creature instantly reappears once the space the creature occupied is no longer within the sphere.
From the MM (Creature Types):
Constructs are made, not born. Some are programmed by their creators to follow a simple set of instructions, while others are imbued with sentience and capable of independent thought. Golems are the iconic constructs. Many creatures native to the outer plane of Mechanus, such as modrons, are constructs shaped from the raw material of the plane by the will of more powerful creatures.
So a golem (creature type: construct; description: “Stone golems are magical constructs..." [Basic Rules, p.154]) would wink out of existence within the field, but a modron (creature type: construct; description: "...a new modron is created by Primus…" would not.
That being said, it's generally good advice to talk over any spell and especially a high level spell, with your DM to see how it works at their table.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr Adventurer
Q56
Do all constructs wink out of existence in an Antimagic Field, since they were created by magic? If not, where can I read about this?
A56 Certain constructs (the 3 animated objects) have a trait called Antimagic Susceptibility which says they are incapacitated inside an Antimagic Field. I would think from that we can assume any creature that doesn't have a similar trait isn't affected by Antimagic Field (unless they've been summoned by a spell).
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
E’Tallitnics
A56: Depends on the construct. Some are created by magic, while others are naturally occurring.
[...]
So a golem (creature type: construct; description: "…are magical constructs...") would wink out of existence within the field, but a modron (creature type: construct; description: "...a new modron is created by Primus…" would not.
That being said, it's generally good advice to talk over any spell and especially a high level spell, with your DM to see how it works at their table.
Contesting 56:
I can't find any mention of the golem being "magical" anywhere in the text. The highlighted part, as far as i know, doesn't exist. Golems are no more "magical" than a weapon created with the Fabricate spell as far as the text goes. By what you provided as quotes for the types, there's no mention of them being magical, as there isn't in their own description.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ThePolarBear
Contesting 56:
I can't find any mention of the golem being "magical" anywhere in the text. The highlighted part, as far as i know, doesn't exist. Golems are no more "magical" than a weapon created with the Fabricate spell as far as the text goes. By what you provided as quotes for the types, there's no mention of them being magical, as there isn't in their own description.
R56: I’ve updated my answer to this text: “Stone golems are magical constructs..." [Basic Rules, p.154]).
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
E’Tallitnics
R56: I’ve updated my answer to this text: “Stone golems are magical constructs..." [Basic Rules, p.154]).
Thanks for the quote. An interesting difference between the BRs and the MM. Note, however, that your conclusion is still lacking: Stone Golems are magical constructs. Other golems still are not. "So a golem" only works for Stone Golems.
(Notice: i'm completely disregarding the "or created by magic" approach, here. Just want to make sure it is known that RAW i could agree that golems DO disappear because of that, but not for the reasons you bring forward. But that's a whole other can of worms, for which we do have RAI: not meant to.)
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Re 56:
There might also be a distinction between "created by magic" and "animated by magic". Even the constructs that are known to be susceptible to an Antimagic Field don't wink out of existence; they simply cease to be animated.
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Q57
Is the creature affected by a vengeance paladin’s Abjure Enemy still frightened if the paladin goes unconscious?
-
Re: Simple RAW for 5e V: The Disadvantage Strikes Back
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Cizak
Q57
Is the creature affected by a vengeance paladin’s Abjure Enemy still frightened if the paladin goes unconscious?
A57
To my knowledge, there's no need for a feared creature's target to be conscious in order for the fear effect to stay in place. Abjure Enemy has no pseudo-concentration mechanic, so I don't see any reason why the effect wouldn't last for the full minute, even if the paladin falls unconscious.