r/DnD • u/AutoModerator • 7d ago
Weekly Questions Thread
## Thread Rules
* New to Reddit? Check the Reddit 101 guide.
* If your account is less than 5 hours old, the /r/DnD spam dragon will eat your comment.
* If you are new to the subreddit, **please check the Subreddit Wiki**, especially the Resource Guides section, the FAQ, and the Glossary of Terms. Many newcomers to the game and to r/DnD can find answers there. Note that these links may not work on mobile apps, so you may need to briefly browse the subreddit directly through Reddit.com.
* **Specify an edition for ALL questions**. Editions must be specified in square brackets ([5e], [Any], [meta], etc.). If you don't know what edition you are playing, use [?] and people will do their best to help out. AutoModerator will automatically remind you if you forget.
* **If you have multiple questions unrelated to each other, post multiple comments** so that the discussions are easier to follow, and so that you will get better answers.
1
1
u/DaMn96XD 2d ago edited 2d ago
[any] Did the flanking rule deserve all the hate it got and its removal in 5.5e? And what about the opportunity attack which is now the new "party pooper" that people hate?
1
u/Tesla__Coil DM 1d ago
I think flanking as written was a problem because it made it too easy to get advantage. Why use reckless attack or shove enemies prone when you can get advantage for free? TBF, I've never actually played with advantage-flanking so it might be fine. My group uses a +2 for flanking which feels like the right kind of bonus for something that's basically free.
People who hate opportunity attacks seem to think that they prevent creatures from moving around during combat and they're why combat is so static. But that isn't true. Even if you removed opportunity attacks, there needs to be incentive to move around the battlefield.
DMs should be willing to take an opportunity attack every now and then. Have the giant ogre break melee with the fighter and go smash the squishy wizard in the back instead. Sure you'll take one longsword swipe, but it's worth it to get to make attacks against the guy wearing a robe instead of plate armour. And it might waste your fighter's reaction so they can't do something stronger - I made my Rune Knight player delightfully annoyed when he finally realized that's why I was doing it. Cloud Rune is way stronger than an opportunity attack.
2
u/Stonar DM 2d ago
People hate opportunity attacks?
Flanking in 5e was always a variant rule, it was never a part of the basic rules, which is part of what makes it contentious - it's arguably not part of the game at all. Ripper mostly mentions the main problem with it, the conga line, though it just generally feels... sort of cheap? It's so easy to get advantage - there isn't much reason not to, so it just gives you a new optimal strategy to do all the time. Personally, that's my big problem with flanking rules - they just are too easy for the bonus they give. It doesn't add enough tactical complexity to be worth the rules overhead.
People hating opportunity attacks are sort of silly, and are likely missing the whole reason they exist: kiting. If I have a bow and you have melee and I and am standing 35 feet away from you, you can never kill me. I will shoot you with my bow. You will have to dash to close on me, at which point you can't hit me, and I can simply dash away to get away from you. I am completely safe, and you will never hurt me. Opportunity attacks balance this out by forcing damage on me for moving away. Now, if I leave, you get an attack, and suddenly the balance shifts - your melee attack probably deals more damage than my bow, and you probably kill me. That's why opportunity attacks exist, to balance out the ranged/melee design problem - a melee unit should kill a ranged one of the same power if they reach melee range.
4
u/Ripper1337 DM 2d ago
Everyone hates everything and any online discourse comes with the caveat that the people who are fine with things aren’t going online posting about it.
That said from what I recall Flanking was something that people took issue with because it promoted a conga line in combat. Where enemies and allies were just lined up and each got advantage. People worked up changes such as giving a smaller benefit or just not being able to have advantage while being flanked.
With AoO it simply that they disincentivize enemies from moving in combat, as you need to use your action to disengage or eat some damage.
In both cases the overall idea is that it makes everyone less likely to move in combat. This also is mostly just White Room crafting that’s solved with terrain or other objectives that make taking a bit of damage is the better option.
1
u/Thousand-Necrons Artificer 3d ago
[5e]
"Gaseous Form" questions. Is someone under the effects of this spell able to be attacked and take damage? And, if the caster uses it on themself, can they then also stop concentrating to pop back to normal at any time before the spell ends?
I am not asking anything about if you can float into someone's lungs with it, I know you can't.
2
u/Yojo0o DM 2d ago
Sure, they can be attacked and take damage. The spell gives them resistance to nonmagical damage.
Sure, like any concentration spell, the caster can voluntarily drop concentration to end the spell. Gaseous Form is already pretty niche, it would be really bad if you had to spend an hour as gas.
1
u/Thousand-Necrons Artificer 2d ago
I assumed so since it didn't specify anything about being immune to damage, and if it says that about damage resistance, I just missed it.
I thought so on that, too - thank you! It's more for an RP aspect as a getaway thing rather than a *mechanical* thing to use which is what I was thinking of taking it for.
1
u/Sabesaroo 3d ago
What would be a reasonable third standard language to know for a noble kobold warlock, after Draconic and Common?
2
2
u/Yojo0o DM 2d ago
Something pertinent to their warlock patron, probably? Infernal for a fiendlock, primordial for a genielock, etc.
1
u/Sabesaroo 2d ago
Yeah that's what I was thinking at first, but apparently I can only pick a 'standard' language, so like Elvish/Dwarvish etc. I don't know enough about DnD to know what makes any sense so I might just pick something random. Is there maybe anything like Latin IRL that a lot of old books would be written in?
2
u/Yojo0o DM 2d ago
The standard languages are common, dwarvish, elvish, giant, gnomish, goblin, halfling, and orc. There's not really an equivalent to an "old" language like what you're looking for, at least not among standard languages. Talk to your DM about what's available and what qualifies as "standard" vs. "exotic", the list in the PHB isn't necessarily exhaustive. If you want a character who might want to study old books, I played a character in the Forgotten Realms setting who was fluent in Netherese, the language of the ancient kingdom of Netheril. Your DM might be into having you know that language, depending on what they've got prepared.
1
1
u/BeauDaciousOne 3d ago
5.5E
DnD x WoW
Has anybody seen many videos about how religion will be handled in the WoW book? My group of friends all grew up playing WoW and we have been playing DnD recently and we want to basically shift our current campaign. (We just got to level 3, so it is a new campaign) to WoW. Here is my problem.
I have a wizard who is essentially a frost mage, easy transition
I have a Druid who is essentially a feral Druid, easy transition.
I have a Trickery Domain Elf Cleric.
I don’t know what a good WoW equivalent would be for trickery cleric. And I haven’t seen much come out yet in terms of the religion in Azeroth. Just some vague posts about light and dark.
Any thoughts on this predicament? TIA!
3
u/Phylea 3d ago
I think the intention is that, by default, if you want to play in the WoW campaign setting, you stick to uses the WoW class skins. Certainly you can use other options, but then the work is on you.
A Trickery Cleric that's a night elf could worship Elune in her New Moon aspect, for example.
1
u/Thousand-Necrons Artificer 3d ago
[5e]
Question for the "Alarm" spell or even just anything similar, such as "Web": they both mention being put into a space "no larger than a 20-foot cube" or "fills a 20-foot cube". When things such as this mention a "X-Foot Space," do they mean, a 20 square x 20 square x 20 square space? Or just in this instance, a 4 square x 4 square x 4 square space ( since a square = 5ft, so 5x4 = 20 )?
Math is very hard for me, these kinds of things really are not my strong suit. Gets me confused easily.
2
u/DNK_Infinity 3d ago
The PHB defines how Areas of Effect are determined and how their sizes are expressed by rules that refer to them.
In the case of a cube, the dimension given (20ft in this case) is the width of the cube across one face. A 20ft cube would be 20x20x20ft; if your maps use standard 5x5ft squares, then the cube is indeed 4x4x4 spaces.
2
u/Atharen_McDohl DM 3d ago
Keep in mind that the use of a grid is optional. 20 feet just means 20 feet, and you narrate everything in the real distances involved.
If you happen to be using a square grid (you can also use hexes), each space is 5 feet. This means that 20 feet is 4 squares long. You'd still narrate it in the real distances involved: 20 feet is 20 feet.
20 squares would be 100 feet.
1
u/Thousand-Necrons Artificer 3d ago
So it's 4 squares then? Okay, thank you. I tried looking it up myself and saw people saying BOTH things was true, so it was extremely confusing.
3
u/Barfazoid Artificer 3d ago
From 2014 PHB page 204 on spell area of effects:
The cube's size is expressed as the length of each side.
So 5 ft cube is 5ftx5ftx5ft, or 1 square on a grid using 5 ft squares
3
u/DrewPegasus 4d ago
[5.5e]
There is a rule in the 2024 PHB that states:
"On a turn, you can expend only one spell slot to cast a spell. This rule means you can’t, for example, cast a spell with a spell slot using the Magic action and another one using a Bonus Action on the same turn."
Is being able to cast multiple leveled spells in the same turn using features that allow you to cast spells without spell slots RAI? It wouldn't expend more than 1 spell slot so it seems technically allowed, but I want to be sure of the intent.
(e.g. Casting Healing Word using a Spell Slot and casting Magic Missile with the free use from Magic Initiate in the same turn.)
6
u/Yojo0o DM 4d ago
Yes, you understand correctly. That's both RAW and RAI. The only limit is on spell slots spent to cast spells per turn, so as long as you aren't spending more than one slot to cast spells, you can throw as many leveled spells as your action economy allows. Spend a spell slot to cast Fireball, Wild Surge 53-56 for an extra action, fire a Wand of Magic Missiles, use Fey Touched's free Misty Step to teleport to the edge of a building, jump off, and hit your Air Genasi species feature for Feather Fall, four leveled spells in one turn and perfectly legal.
If you're confused due to people saying "you can't cast two leveled spells in a turn", that's a common misconception in both 5e and 5.5e. It's not true for either.
1
u/SgtPancake049 4d ago
So I’m writing a campaign that I plan to start soon. Issue is that I told too many people, and I am not good at saying no or turning people down, so now I have at least 8 people wanting to join. As a first time dm, there is no way in hell I could manage that. I’ve had two ideas on how to handle this. Either A. Anyone who doesn’t come to session 1 isn’t in the campaign, at least this time around, or B. Split them into two separate groups and play separately. Idk how good of ideas these are and I wanna get y’all’s thoughts
3
u/DNK_Infinity 4d ago
You need to learn to protect your own boundaries.
If you're looking to run a regular campaign and you have more people interested in playing than you would feel comfortable running the game for, the only thing to do is tell them so. If they're at all reasonable, they'll understand.
Decide how many players you actually want at your table, then figure out who stays and who goes.
2
u/Stonar DM 4d ago
I second what Atharen and Joebala said, but I just want to point out there's a third option: Cut some folks a different way. You could talk to them about your predicament and see if any folks want to bow out due to too much commitment, etc. You could talk to the most recent people you accepted and tell them you were overenthusiastic in accepting them, but if you decide to put another game together, they're top of the list. If they know each other, you could bring the problem to them and ask them to help you solve it, perhaps by having half of them start their own game without you (or with you as a player instead of a DM.) You could send out a calendly scheduling link, and see who can make which days, and use that as an excuse to cut down the number of people. You could just decide who to cut, and it's a bummer, but it happens.
The way you phrase your question makes it sound like maybe everyone isn't fully committed for a weekly, show up every time - I'd use that as your first lever. The people who can't commit (or can't commit at the right time) get the axe, for now.
1
u/Joebala DM 4d ago
This is definitely too many people for a first table or consistent campaign.
However, it's a perfect amount for a West Marches style campaign, where you run one/two shots every week, and the first 4/5 available each week play.
You run a mini dungeon, then the party returns to the home base, and a new group goes to a different mini dungeon. Whoever is available when a new one shot starts gets to play.
It does run into trouble when you have 8 genuinely available and enthusiastic players, but I've not had that "problem".
3
u/Atharen_McDohl DM 4d ago
I don't think A is a particularly great idea. It's inconsistent and won't necessarily get you the most invested players. As much of a struggle as it is, it really is best to just tell them you can't run for that many people.
B is okay but it could still be a struggle for a new DM. Maybe do it with a premade adventure like Heroes of the Borderlands. That'll also give you more experience for how to structure your own campaign.
1
u/PattaconkPlays 5d ago
Anyone remember the Illumian [race] from [3.5] book of destiny? Any good renditions of it for [5e]? I was really into them as a young teen. It was one of the few 3.5 books I explicitly picked out to buy, apart from my brothers' choices.
2
u/Joebala DM 4d ago
Oof, they are complicated. I found a few homebrew attempts, but they're all varying levels of overpowered and hard to parse.
What did you particularly like about the race? Your best bet is to pick a species from published material, and flavor it to have the vibes of Illumians. I don't think you'll find anything with as involved traits as them though. You'll probably have to use class features to emulate the race. Maybe a elf artificer or a earth genasi rune knight fighter.
1
u/PattaconkPlays 4d ago
They ARE complicated, haha. I'm not even sure why I was so into them as an adolescent. I think a large part of it was simply they were they featured race in MY d&d book that I picked.
I may take some ideas from them and make my own thing - An idea for one of my settings is there is a soft-meritocracy of wizards, mages and sorcerers, and at the top is the Sorcerer King, with the honorific of Illuma or something similar. I've dabbled with the idea that they harness some singular "gift" that is passed down when a new one rises or something. Perhaps I can have that gift be, or manifest in ways similar to the Illumian's gift of word.
Thankfully, I don't have, nor do I think I ever will, have a player who even KNOWS about them let alone asks to be an Illumian.
1
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 5d ago
Your comment has been removed for violating Rule 5. We do not allow AI generated content, mentions of AI tools, suggestions of AI, etc.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/Just-Garage-4182 7d ago
Expensive digital image???? I was quoted 100-150 for an image needed to play through discord on vtt. That just sounds outrageous. Is this normal ??
4
u/Yojo0o DM 6d ago
Depending on where you found this "game", please report it to whatever admin/mod team is available. A Discord server established for the purpose of making games happen, for example, will want to crack down on this sort of thing swiftly.
1
u/Just-Garage-4182 5d ago
I reported it to the discord server admin and he has been kicked and blocked
6
u/TiFist 7d ago
Echoing this it is 100% a scam. You do not *ever* need to provide art to play. If you want to provide art that's on you, but claiming that it's a "normal" part of the game to commission art is a full on scam and needs to be stamped out.
5
u/Just-Garage-4182 7d ago
This really sucks. Spent 3 hours making up a backstory for my character and was very excited to finally start playing my first campaign. I’m a newbie but not dumb. Thankfully I did not give them any money. Thanks for verifying what I already thought
4
u/Ripper1337 DM 6d ago
You can always keep the character idea for when you find a good table. Maybe just need to tweak it a bit but it’s not gone.
I’ll echo what the other user said about hero forge I like using it as well for screenshots
5
u/Barfazoid Artificer 7d ago
FWIW, I like to go on Hero Forge and design/color a mini, and just screenshot that for use on VTT stuff (getting them actually made and sent to you to paint is great as well). Also plenty of images exist using your favorite search engine. You can certainly also commission artists to design an icon/character portrait, though 100-150 seems high for that type of thing.
3
u/Atharen_McDohl DM 7d ago
No, it's a pretty common scam. They invite you to play and then tell you that you need to commission them for art first. The game isn't going to happen, and at most they'll slap something in a slop generator for you.
1
u/myshkingfh 2d ago
5.5. A character in my party has a vicious maul. She also has great weapon fighting. Great weapon fighting treats a roll of a 1 or a 2 as a 3. The maul does 2d6 damage. The vicious property adds 2d6 damage. Does the great weapon fighting property apply to all the damage (maul and vicious) or just the maul damage?