Rulings Forum

Just thought I'd start this so we can settle plans like this outside of the game and not bog down game time with figuring out rules and such. We can discuss our arguments for and against here, and DM Rob can make the final ruling based on the evidence provided. So the inaugural post, The way it sounds to me, Darkness says that "a creature with darkvision can't see through this darkness, and nonmagical light can't illuminate it." In the rules set for light in page 183 of the PHB, "Darkness creates a heavily obscured area. Characters face darkness outdoors at night(even most moonlit nights),within the confines of an unlit dungeon or a subterranean vault, or in an area of magical darkness. Still on the same page but a little higher, heavily obscured is defined as and area "such as darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage, blocks vision entirely. A creature in a heavily obscured area effectively suffers from the blinded condition. Now in Appendix A, blinded is given 2 properties. 1) A blinded creature can't see and automatically fails any ability check that requires sight. 2) Attack rolls against the creature have advantage, and the creatures attack rolls have disadvantage. Now seeing as how gaining both advantage and disadvantage negates the two conditions, it seems to me that one blinded creature inside of darkness can attack another blinded creature inside of darkness and the attack will function as normal, but any creatures attacking from the outside wouldn't be able to see into the sphere of darkness and so couldn't attack using say a crossbow or the firebolt spell. What do you guys think the ruling should be on this?

Here's my rulings: 1. If inside the sphere of darkness, you always attack with disadvantage, unless you're attacking another creature inside the darkness too, in that case you attack as normal (but still can't see) and must still guess at the creature's location. 2. If outside the darkness, you can only fire blindly into the darkness, with disadvatage, and a 50% chance of hitting any allies within, on a miss. In addition, even though it doesn't let you see even with darkvision, I'll rule that magical darkvision cast by the caster would let the caster see in his own darkness -- this is a homebrew "rule of cool". I picture Tarnach, when he gets 4 ki points to spend, to be able to cast darkness and then cast darkvision to see inside it, and lure unsuspecting enemies into it, only to slit their throats.

After thinking it out, the way I plan to rule on this in my other game is as follows. one creature (inside or outside) attacking another (inside or outside) does so at disadvantage because it is blind or unable to visually identify their target. The advantage for the target being blind doesn't come into play because the attacker cannot see the target to gain advantage in the first place. This also negates needing to separate player knowledge from character knowledge of where a target is.

I love that ruling Rob. I always felt that a natural darkvision should trump natural darkness, and so magical darkvision should trump magical darkness.

Another new ruling: Each session, at the end, the group decides one character to be rewarded inspiration based on the character's action in the session. This will be the only inspiration awarded each session, but it will be awarded each session. It's up to a vote and in your hands!

I'm liking that decision.

Another new ruling (which got top post on /r/dndnext subreddit) <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/2oxw5u/variant_lingering_injuries_as_a_choice_over_death/" rel="nofollow">http://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/2oxw5u/variant_lingering_injuries_as_a_choice_over_death/</a>

To make things interesting, you could also modify the death saves so that death occurs at 2 failed saves rather than 3. So when we drop to 0 hitpoints, we would have to make the decision of either risking a semi-permanent injury or possible instant death.

Just looked at that injury table! That's rough. At least I plan to have some magical healing, albeit of lower level.

Darvin (Christopher D.) said: Just looked at that injury table! That's rough. At least I plan to have some magical healing, albeit of lower level. It's only rough if you choose that route, the idea behind it is that sometimes you may want to stay up and lose a limb rather than drop during a fight.

Tarnach would definitely worry about getting dropped, except for the fact that I've only been dropped once thank's to Orrin's negligence(lol) and the only time I came close to death was at level 1. I think I'll be fine.

Think for instance one of your companions will be killed on the next round and you get dropped to 0 HP. Instead you choose to roll on the injury table, and you end up sacrificing a leg. But you make it to your ally's side and heal him, saving him from certain death. Then, he casts a spell that kills the remaining enemies. After the battle, you are missing a leg for some time, but you eventually find the person who can cast regenerate and restore your leg. In the end, the outcome is better, but the risk is great for the reward.

Are you planning on adding prosthetic replacements? I read that someone had that in that thread you posted.

No, that's too "futuristic". Wooden peg leg, maybe. This would only happen if you choose

If anyone looses a limb, I'll write another poem about you!

I was perusing the PHB and as I was reading over the Warlock info, I noticed that they have an Invocation called Devil's Sight ,which grants its user the ability to see in normal and magical darkness. At first, I thought that this would conflict with the earlier ruling on seeing in magical darkness, but after rereading what Rob said above, he only granted the one casting Darkness the ability to see in it with magical dark vision, so these rules aren't at odds.

Rob said: I was perusing the PHB and as I was reading over the Warlock info, I noticed that they have an Invocation called Devil's Sight ,which grants its user the ability to see in normal and magical darkness. At first, I thought that this would conflict with the earlier ruling on seeing in magical darkness, but after rereading what Rob said above, he only granted the one casting Darkness the ability to see in it with magical dark vision, so these rules aren't at odds. So do you think I should have let Tarnach see in the magical darkness of a foe's creation? Or should he only be able to see in magical darkness of his own creation? I admit I thought it was a bit silly that Tarnach could see in the drow's magical darkness, but the drow couldn't ...

No, I think it works just as-is along side what the Warlock can do, so really, there's nothing to see here.

However the Warlock is required to cast a spell to do it, whereas I'm just allowing Tarnach to do it in that case... Meaning Tarnach is a little OP with that effect unless I limit it.. So I'm thinking Tarnach can see in one sphere of magical darkness once per long rest, unless it is his own magical darkness, in which case he can always see in it.

I guess that's fine, although it seems like a little too much micromanagement. How about I can see in my own magical darkness, whether with Darkvision cast or not is up to you, and if I want to disable someone else's darkness, which is what I would end up doing first anyway, then I can simply take an action to calculate the area of darkness so I can determine the point of origin, since I would know the intimates of the spell, including the area of effect. Then I can disable it next turn, effectively taking 2 turns to disable that. How does that sound?

I'll just rule that anytime you cast Darkvision you can see in magical darkness, yours or an enemies -- thus making it equivalent to a Warlock's Devil's Sight

I actually assumed that's how it was always ruled here. Marco, I hope you don't think I was trying to blow up your spot, I was just sharing something I ran across while looking over the classes.

No no by all means. While I'm not a rules Nazi, I firmly believe in rules to provide structure, especially in an inherently chaotic game like D&D where you can do anything your imagination can think of. That freedom can be jarring for people constrained to video games their whole lives. I'm playing D&D with my friends more regularly now and they're having a hard time figuring things out cause they're not used to making their own decisions as opposed to having options that the game outlines for you. But anyways, the point is I want to make sure everything is on the up and up. That's why I'm always interrupting in game when I think a calling or information is wrong. BTW Rob, have you decided to use any combat variants from the DM guide, like flanking?

No flanking :)

DM ROB! I'd like to inquire about advantage and disadvantage. I enjoyed the fight in the wind because it forced me to fight in a way that Orryn is only starting to become comfortable with. I am wondering aside from using stealth more (something I plan on using whenever possible), what sorts of things can we (me mostly) do to ensure advantage on not all, but a slightly more frequent basis? I ask because my sneak attack feature depends on Advantage as an alternative to having an ally adjacent to an enemy, and there are situations where attacking a lone enemy may be a more equitable use of my attack.

You can always try to search for a cloak of invisibility to augment the wand you're searching for. Maybe learn herbalism and alchemy to create your own potions of invisibility. Maybe something along the lines of "for 1 hour, you can go invisible as a bonus action."

Marco G. said: You can always try to search for a cloak of invisibility to augment the wand you're searching for. Maybe learn herbalism and alchemy to create your own potions of invisibility. Maybe something along the lines of "for 1 hour, you can go invisible as a bonus action." Good ideas Marco, I was however hoping for something that I could do more immediately. For example, the DMG has a small section on using Advantage/Disadvantage and I think mentions circumstances like having high-ground. Another situation I think it might apply are when I can surprise the target in some way, like by waiting around a corner and shooting them as they come around.

It's time to get creative with your cantrips. Minor Illusion is something I plan on taking advantage of.

That's a good point, I have had Minor Illusion since day 1 and have used it exactly 0 times. We'll have to find out what Rob will let us get away with using it.

If you have surprise on a creature you certainly would get advantage to the attack, but hiding during combat gets fishy and is really a common sense call based on the specifics of the event. Otherwise, I think sneak attack is already fucking strong and I'm not looking to hand out advantage willy-nilly. I encourage you to come up with tactical things and then convince me why it grants advantage. And no, not Flanking, sorry Marco -- they had flanking in 4e and it just stinks of 4e to me...

It's cool. I agree flanking is overpowered considering it's so easy to pull off, both for us and our enemies, but it's in the dungeon masters guide as an option for a reason. I plan on getting advantage constantly by ninja-ing myself all over the place with my shadow powers and minor illusions.

I am now implementing the following: 2 inspiration awarded per session: 1 to the character with the best combat perfomance 1 to the character with the best story/roleplay performance/milestone achievement voted on by the Players at the end of each session *let's not forget* Inspiration can now also be spent to gain a variant of a plot point The plot point must tie into your character's backstory, or future goals, in some way. It must make sense in whatever current setting but can be added at any time. Having a god come down and instantly level you up to 20 is NOT the intent of this. DM reserves the power to veto a plot point that I view as too OP. It should not be stat-based, such as "i find a +3 longsword". It should be PLOT based, hence "plot point." We will also be using this from the dmg: THE PLOT THICKENS Whenever a player spends a plot point, the player to his or her right must add a complication to the scene. For example, if the player who spends the plot point decides that her character has found a secret door, the player to the right might state that opening the door triggers a magical trap that teleports the party to another part of the dungeon. Since there is no person to your right, I will randomly determine the person who thinks up the complication with a roll.

So this plot point spending could be used to find the location of someone or something we're searching for?

Also in this case, I think Vetari should get the role play inspiration and Orryn should get the combat inspiration.

Answer to your first question: could be, as long as it makes sense. They/it don't just appear out of thin air but perhaps your plot point gives you a really solid clue of your creation. I'm trying to put more of the story telling into your hands without going overboard. 2nd answer: this is starting tomorrow so it doesn't apply retroactively.

Last game, when I tried to pick up that bird as it slept, I had to roll an Animal Handling check and when I failed, it awoke. Is this the way I should expect the spell Sleep to work form now on? The spell reads, each creature affected by this spell falls unconscious until the spell ends, the sleeper takes damage, or someone uses an action to shake or slap the sleeper awake . I don't think any of those requirements were met, but if casual handling of sleeping creatures can wake them, I'll adjust my expectations and spells I use accordingly.

Rob said: Last game, when I tried to pick up that bird as it slept, I had to roll an Animal Handling check and when I failed, it awoke. Is this the way I should expect the spell Sleep to work form now on? The spell reads, each creature affected by this spell falls unconscious until the spell ends, the sleeper takes damage, or someone uses an action to shake or slap the sleeper awake . I don't think any of those requirements were met, but if casual handling of sleeping creatures can wake them, I'll adjust my expectations and spells I use accordingly. Hmm, good clarification, Rob. I was going off of what I thought would be logical, but I'm focusing here on the "uses an action to shake" part. It seems like the way it is worded you have to deliberately shake it, forcefully, to wake it. In that case I would have ruled differently. Thus the blood hawk would still be sleeping. Thanks for your clarification there.

So I've been rereading crafting rules for Potion of healing and this is what I have so far: 1) They are common magical items (page 135 DMG) 2) Per Crafting Magical Items (DMG 129): To craft the item, you need a formula of its construction, must have the spell slots and cast any spells the item produces (in this case Cure Wounds), you must meet its level requirements and you must pay the gold(cost subject to DM discretion) and time. 3) They are listed in Adventuring Gear (PHB 150) 4) Under Downtime Crafting (PHB 187): You can craft nonmagical objects, including adventuring equipment and works of art. You must be proficient with tools related to the object you are trying to create (typically artisan’s tools).......you must expend raw materials worth half the total market value. If something you want to craft has a market value greater than 5 gp, you make progress every day in 5-gp increments until you reach the market value of the item Can this be interpreted as all nonmagical items + adventuring equipment + works of arts are able to be crafted via this method? 5) Mike Mearls says that potions of healing are alchemical in nature and don't require anything outside of Herbalism proficiency. <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/comments/2l69tp/ama_mi" rel="nofollow">http://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/comments/2l69tp/ama_mi</a>... So there are 2 issues: 1- What are the requirements to create a potion of healing? 2), 4), and 5) conflict with one another. Can Belanor make potions of healing or can't he? 2- How much time/gold does this take? 2) states it takes 100gold (which is stupid since it's worth 50g) and takes 4 days. 4) states is takes 25 gold and 10 days. For our last session, I blended 2) and 4) together and we got 25g/days increments with potions costing 25g (half of market value) What's your ruling on this DM Rob?

I wanted to brush on that but I didn't want to side track our downtime planning. I was under the impression the 5gp cost per day rule applied, which is why I asked DM Rob whether he wanted to update what he charged me in the character arc forum. I was also under the impression that the only thing that made healing potions magical was that their ingredients were magical, not that you brewed a soup and then cast cure wounds into it to make a potion.

I'd rule anything that appears in PHB Adventuring Gear does not apply to the magic item creation rules 5 gp per day increments? Didn't you tell me 25 gp per day increments during the game, which was why I ruled 2 days for the healing potion (50 gp)? 5 gp a day is stupid. I'm sticking with 25 gp per day. I'll just allow less "downtime" because I like a sense of urgency in my campaigns...so there's less "time" but you can craft quicker = same thing, different style In sum, this is why I wanted to and we did do downtime in-game. The rules in the PHB and DMG are just guides to give you an idea of how downtime can work. At the end of the day, it's whatever makes sense for the setting, the timing, etc... Something that takes 2 days to craft in one town could take 4 days in a smaller town where ingredients are harder to come by ...and likewise could take 1 day but cost 2x more in a ritsy city. So basically, whatever I say goes for downtime and that's why we do it together. Use the PHB/DMG as inspiration for your downtime but it's whatever makes sense. Hope that helps!

In that case Rob, I was wondering what your ruling would be for light crafting or learn G during long rests. For example, smiting a new sword or armor is hard work, but brewing a potion can be as simple as throwing some ingredients into a pot and going to sleep while they brew. There's also learning something new like a language. Would you allow these activities to be done during long rests as long as they're not labor intensive?

Also I was wondering whether you wanted to do research via the PHB or your own ruling. Before you said one day of research would require a successful check, as well as 5gp per day and living expenses, but the PHB only requires 1gp per day as well as living expenses.

Marco G. said: In that case Rob, I was wondering what your ruling would be for light crafting or learn G during long rests. For example, smiting a new sword or armor is hard work, but brewing a potion can be as simple as throwing some ingredients into a pot and going to sleep while they brew. There's also learning something new like a language. Would you allow these activities to be done during long rests as long as they're not labor intensive? Nope, still 25 gp per day towards total item value learning a language, def not a long rest, but not as long as it says in the book. I'm saying 15 days (doesn't have to be consective) + the costs of a fluent trainer.

Marco G. said: Also I was wondering whether you wanted to do research via the PHB or your own ruling. Before you said one day of research would require a successful check, as well as 5gp per day and living expenses, but the PHB only requires 1gp per day as well as living expenses. I assume you're referring to what I said here: "Finding an enchanter requires 5 successful DC 15 Persuasion or Investigation checks, each success awards 1 Day of Research to the goal of 5, and costs an additional + 5 Gold + lifestyle costs. A failure on the rolls do not add a success to the pot, but still cost the 5 Gold + lifestyle costs." This won't be a problem if you find Darvin's uncle, but if you want to find one before then, we'll play it by ear when that situation comes if you decide to go that route.

I just realized I was allowing Marit's bardic inspiration to recharge on short rests. It's actually long rests per page 33 of the PHB. Sorry guys, less d6s on your rolls! *evil DM sneer*

When we get stuck: <a href="http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/philosophy-behind-rules-and-rulings" rel="nofollow">http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/philosophy-behind-rules-and-rulings</a>

After last session I did some reading about jumping, falling, etc... bc you never know when it might come up in my game and I enjoyed how DMRob just kept the game moving. I thought how I would have gotten bogged down because I wasn't strong on my knowledge of the basic jumping mechanics - great job Rob! Falling is 1d6 per 10' fallen, which we all knew, but the PHB states any fall that you suffer damage from results in you landing prone - interesting, I did not know that! We don't have any monks in my game so no fall damage immunity, so this is good to know. Additionally, long jumps that land in difficult terrain require a DC 10 Dexterity (Acrobatics) check or you land prone! I did not know that either! I had a player in my own game make a long jump onto some rubble and didn't catch it! No biggie but I'm learning every day!

Those are both good things to know. Thank you Trace!

I found a great podcast where they do very brief 15 minute breakdown of 5E rules ... the one I'm linking is about the Ready Actions and Reactions . My mouth is on the floor - I thought I had this stuff sorted out, but I learned a couple things and I think anyone who plays or DM's would enjoy this one in particular. <a href="http://www.thetomeshow.com/e/the-ready-action-and-other-reactions-bonus-action-005/" rel="nofollow">http://www.thetomeshow.com/e/the-ready-action-and-other-reactions-bonus-action-005/</a>

<a href="http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/modifying-classes" rel="nofollow">http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/modifying-classes</a>

DM Rob, at the end of last session I took the cross bow expert feat with the intention of dual wielding hand cross bows. Though, it seems that may not be allowed or it may change: <a href="https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/5859937" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/5859937</a>... If the ruling (not as of yet fully clarified) does not allow dual wielding, that would definitely mess with how I envisioned using it. Should I change the feat now, stick with it regardless of ruling, worry about the ruling later, stick and disregard ruling, etc. Just wanted your input. Thanks!