Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 janosicek Apr 01, 2015 1:25:33	Majority of magic staves in DMG have a condition that only a spellcaster that can cast the spell the staff provides can attune to the staff.   However there are 2 staves in Mines of Phandelver that are not limit in attunement: Glass Staff of Defense (+1 AC, Mage Armor, Shield) and Spider Staff (+d6 poison damage, Web, Spider Climb)   Is it OK that anybody can use these bonuses? I have a Nature Cleric with AC 20 and using a quarterstaff. With Staff of Defense her AC would be 21 and she will have 3 uses of Shield per day. With Spider Staff her shillelagh will do d8+d6+4 damage.   If this is an error and the staves can be used by spellcasters that can cast these spells, then Staff of Defense is limited to Sorcerer&Wizard. Can Arcane Trickster use this staff? Spider Staff is then limited to Sorcerer&Wizard as well. However Warlocks can learn Spider Climb, can they attune? Underdark Druids can learn both spells, can they?
#2 RulesJD Apr 01, 2015 1:52:49	Anyone can attune to the Staffs.   Only classes with the spells on their class list may use the staffs to cast spells (so your Cleric could not use the staff for Shield).   As far as I know, there has not been a definitive ruling on what counts as being on a classes "Spell list" considering that any class could access any first level spell through the Magic Initiate feat.  My argument would be that it only counts as being on a class's spell list if the character actually has accessed that spell.  So an Arcane Trickster could use the staff, if they had used their "any school" slot for Shield.
#3 janosicek Apr 01, 2015 3:56:32	But if you read the magical staffs in DMG it specifically says that only some classes can attune.   Staff of Power: Requires att. by a sorcerer, warlock or wizard. Staff of Healing: Requires att. by a bard, cleric or druid. ...   And in the weapon description it does not mention attuenement at all. So either all functions require attuenement, or none.   For trickster/sorcerer -- I guess they would be screwed out of use of magic scrolls as well if you required them to have spells 'KNOWN'.
#4 Pauper Apr 01, 2015 5:14:27	Since Lost Mine of Phandelver came out long before the DMG, those staves are always going to be 'weird'. If it gets too confusing, simply using the versions out of the DMG is probably the best solution, though they are certainly usable 'as written' in the module.   As for Magic Initiate, the feat does not add the spell to your class spell list -- it simply allows you to cast it once per day (or once per long rest, to be precise). If the feat added the spell to your class spell list, it would say so.   -- Pauper
#5 QwertyAzerty Apr 01, 2015 5:15:23	Unless an errata is released, both staff from LMoP (staff of defense and spider staff) can be used by anyone. My sorcerer is useing the staff of defense, and the monk took the spider staff, adding +1d6 poison damage per attack made him a deadly. and at level 9 he'll be able to cast web, then run on the wall, wack the ennemy stuck int he wed and lend on the other side rinse and repeat.   untill they bring an errata out saying that the spider staff and the defense staff can only be used by specific class, then they are available to anyone.   They already errata 2 items that appeared after LMoP: the ring of evasion was WAY too powerfull so they nerfed it greatly, and the cloak of elven kind had the wrong description in the module and they reprint in the DMG.
(Reply to #5) Pauper	QwertyAzerty wrote:
#7 Skerrit Apr 01, 2015 5:52:57	QwertyAzerty wrote:
#8 Undrhil Apr 01, 2015 6:48:36	What is the endure elements quirk?  I've looked in the PHB for this and cannot find it.  Is it listed in the DMG somewhere?  Or do I need the module to find out what this does?
(Reply to #8) Pauper	Undrhil wrote:
#10 QwertyAzerty Apr 01, 2015 7:26:18	Skerrit wrote:
#11 ZHDarkstar Apr 01, 2015 7:52:56	Undrhil wrote:
#12 Skerrit Apr 01, 2015 7:50:29	Nearly half of the items in Expeditions/Epic adventures have quirks or minor properties that are detailed in the adventure. These are often added once we know what the adventure is about to better theme the item to the adventure, and thus are added long after the certificate has been printed for distribution. I would encourage DMs to make sure the player who takes the item is aware of the quirks/properties.   Greg Marks DnDAL Associate Resource Manager
#13 janosicek Apr 01, 2015 8:47:55	The staffs are just so inconsistent when compared to all DMG staffs... As I said, a Nature Cleric at my table will love the Spider Staff for the extra d6 damage to the Shillelagh. If she can also cast the spells from it... uh-oh
#14 Kalani Apr 01, 2015 9:33:21	janosicek wrote:
#15 Ainulindalion Apr 01, 2015 9:34:51	The staff descriptions, even the ones that do not require attunement by a specific class, that do allow you to cast spells, do require that the spell be on your class spell list (unless they specifically don't mention that requirement).  The two staves in LMoP do have that requirement.   Bards, Arcane Tricksters, Eldritch Knights, Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Rangers do not necessarily have to know the spell.  It just has to be on their list of options to know.   So, for the four spells granted by the two staves in LMoP, Shield, Mage Armor, Spider Climb, Web, the classes can cast:   Barbarian: None Bard:  None (unless they specifically add the spells to their list using the Magical Secrets feature) Cleric: None Druid: None Fighter (Eldritch Knight): Uses the Wizard list, so All. Fighter (Other): None Monk: None Paladin: None Ranger: None Rogue (Arcane Trickster):  Uses the Wizard list, so All. Rogue (Other): None (It is debatable whether or not a level 13+ Rogue (Thief) that 'ignores all class requirements' for the use of magical items can cast the spells or not) Sorcerer: All Warlock: Spider Climb Wizard: All
#16 QwertyAzerty Apr 01, 2015 9:58:24	can you tell me where you find that rule? I would like to show it to my DM
(Reply to #16) Ainulindalion	QwertyAzerty wrote:
#18 NamelessHero Apr 01, 2015 11:01:05	Skerrit wrote:
(Reply to #18) Pauper	NamelessHero wrote:
(Reply to #19) Ainulindalion	Pauper wrote:
(Reply to #20) Pauper	Ainulindalion wrote:
(Reply to #21) Ainulindalion	Pauper wrote:
#23 QwertyAzerty Apr 01, 2015 11:49:02	Ainulindalion wrote:
(Reply to #23) Ainulindalion	QwertyAzerty wrote:
#25 QwertyAzerty Apr 01, 2015 12:22:50	ok cool, thanks, I though there was an overall rules that govern all staff, so staff work like we believed they work.
(Reply to #24) Pauper	Ainulindalion wrote:
#27 Kalani Apr 01, 2015 12:29:55	Pauper wrote:
#28 Ainulindalion Apr 01, 2015 12:32:18	Actually, having looked through the DMG now, most of the staves don't say that the spells have to be on your class spell list.  They simply require attunement by classes for which the spells are already on the lists.
(Reply to #27) Ainulindalion	Kalani wrote:
#30 Kalani Apr 01, 2015 12:54:04	The admins don't want spoilers of the magic items listed. They have specifically asked us not to make lists of the items and which adventures contain what item for this very reason.   DMs are encouraged to give a complete description of the item to the player upon awarding it.
(Reply to #30) Ainulindalion	Kalani wrote:
#32 Kalani Apr 01, 2015 13:12:14	I didn't say I agreed with it - only that this is what we have been told. I do not pretend to know their reasoning for everything or to speak for them in that regard.   All I know is that someone created a list of the modules, with their associated magic items - and the admins politely asked us to not create such lists.
(Reply to #32) Ainulindalion	Kalani wrote:
#34 ZHDarkstar Apr 01, 2015 14:03:37	If the admins are worried about spoilers, stick the list in the resource center with each season's Expeditions/Encounters. That way only people with the password can access the list for that particular season. I understand the value of secrecy, but the measure of convenience that a simple document would provide cannot be understated. The reality is that the more seasons that go by, the higher the utility provided by the lists. There's no guarantee that every new AL DM will have access to past materials to verify the legitimacy of each magic item in AL history, increasing the likelihood of DMs disallowing the use of legally obtained items from earlier seasons.   However, the biggest gain is the amount of time saved to the DM. If I'm running a Tier 2 game in a 4 hour slot that playtested at closer to 5 hours, I don't have time to flip through a dozen pages to verify the legitimacy of a PC who's new to my FLGS. Having a centralized list allows DMs to cut verification times significantly.   The last argument I'll make about this subject here is this. The AL falls under the DCI banner. DCI has a level of transparency when it comes to letting MtG players and judges know about the legality of certain cards. Why is it so difficult for D&D DMs to receive our own "banned/restricted" list? Are we not also classified as judges in the eyes of the WER?   I'm not trying to sound ungrateful for the work done by AL staff. I am truly appreciative for everything they've done. I just wish that we didn't have to sacrifice organizational utility for purity of play. To put it bluntly, the players who want to know what magic items are in the adventures already have access to them. The EE password was already in the wild within a day of the pdfs going live.
#35 CahPahkah Apr 01, 2015 14:15:25	This work doesn't seem useful to me.   It's up to players to have documenation for their characters, and if they want to cheat, they will. It shouldn't be a DM's problem to get so into the weeds on every item on every PCs character sheet. This seems like a lot of hand-wringing over a "problem" that isn't actually a problem.
#36 RulesJD Apr 01, 2015 16:45:42	Pauper wrote:
(Reply to #36) Coredump00	RulesJD wrote:
(Reply to #36) Pauper	RulesJD wrote:
#39 QwertyAzerty Apr 02, 2015 6:33:24	considering that I was DMing season 1 I have access to the season 1 module, but many player wanted to try DMing so I let them DM season 2 and I'll gladly become a player in season2. Those new DM don'T have access to season1 stuff (and I don't ahve access to season 2 stuff) so when if I go back to be a DM in season 3 I will effectvelly have no access to season 2 material therefor I will be ignorant of all the bonus perks from the special item from season 2 (specially if we miss that item or if the new DM forget to tell us that the splintmail+1 is actually a splintmail+1 with orc detection abilities.
#40 RulesJD Apr 02, 2015 10:37:42	Coredump00 wrote:
#41 Pauper Apr 02, 2015 11:03:29	As Kalani would no doubt point out, the Magic Initiate feat makes no mention of adding the spell to your own class's spell list. This makes sense when you realize that a character can take this feat despite not having a class spell list.   In addition, the feat explicitly requires you to use the ability of the class you choose with the feat to cast the spell you gain -- if the spell became a class spell for you, this would not make sense, as you explicitly use your class's casting stat to cast spells from your class list, as noted under each class's Spellcasting Ability rules.   A DM could certainly allow a player to use spell slots to cast a Magic Initiate spell, but that opens up additional rules interpretation challenges -- for example, since the feat specifies that you must complete a long rest before you can re-cast the spell gained via Magic Initiate, what happens when a warlock uses a slot to cast a Magic Initiate spell, then completes a short rest that would normally recharge that slot? Does the slot not recharge? Does it recharge but is no longer eligible to cast the Magic Initiate spell? Do the rules for warlock spell slot recharge override the rule for Magic Initiate?   It is a simpler and more faithful interpretation of the rules to say that the spell gained by Magic Initiate does not use spell slots and is regained via the mechanic described in the feat itself, independent of any other spellcasting the character may be capable of.   -- Pauper
#42 imaginaryfriend Apr 04, 2015 15:46:52	RulesJD wrote:
(Reply to #14) OrganicDnD23	Kalani wrote:
(Reply to #42) Coredump00	imaginaryfriend wrote:
#45 Kalani Apr 04, 2015 20:43:26	OrganicDnD23 wrote:
(Reply to #45) Coredump00	Kalani wrote:
#47 Kalani Apr 04, 2015 23:22:59	How else would you expect a neutral evil talking sword to act.... It certainly wouldn't be friendly to anyone in the party whose alignment wasn't CN, N, or LE that is for certain.... And it would go out of its way to undermine good PCs.   The sword is a villian and one that most likely sees the party as an obstacle in the way of finding a new master whose alignment is a better match (Blagothkus for example). Any DM who doesn't RP it as a villian is not running it correctly. There is no way it would willingly work for a good aligned PC (such as the PC who claimed the sword in my campaign), that is for certain.   Besides, from an in-game perspective the sword was kind of limited as to what it could do to fulfill its objectives (find a suitable master). Talking was about its only recourse, and it figured that worst case scenario, its master would find the sword a liability and would throw him away (I know as an AL item, that isn't going to happen, but outside of AL that is how it would likely play out). Failing that, the sword hoped its current master would die at the hands of a worthy successor and if that failed, the sword hoped to corrupt the character (convince them to shift alignment to one it found acceptable - CN, N, or LE).
#48 imaginaryfriend Apr 04, 2015 23:29:24	Coredump00 wrote:
(Reply to #47) Coredump00	Kalani wrote:
(Reply to #48) Coredump00	imaginaryfriend wrote:
#51 imaginaryfriend Apr 05, 2015 1:17:42	Coredump00 wrote:
#52 Enevhar_Aldarion Apr 05, 2015 10:14:21	imaginaryfriend wrote:
#53 Enevhar_Aldarion Apr 05, 2015 10:18:15	OrganicDnD23 wrote:
#54 Kalani Apr 05, 2015 10:57:49	I am the DM. My preference would have been to have the sword make a contest of wills, but lacking stats, and a clear purpose - that option is unfortunately off the table (unlike some DMs I do not believe DME gives me licence to "make up stats", as that falls under houseruling which is prohibited). As such, I make do by having the sword voice its displeasure and/or verbally undermine the PCs at dramatic moments (but no more than once or twice a session).   I also try not to undermine each and every encounter - just a handful here and there. In fact, while I plan on having the sword undermine a stealth encounter (by yelling out - "they're over here" or something to that effect), it has not done so as of yet. I should also add that the sword sometimes sulks for a session or two, not saying anything during the entire time and acting as any other non-sentient sword.   Hazirawn does not require attunement. It counts as a +1 greatsword that deals +1d6 necrotic damage, and prevents healing for up to 1 minute when not attuned (once the typo is corrected). When attuned, it counts as a +2 greatsword that deals +2d6 necrotic damage and has the added benefit of minor spellcasting (in addition to the anti-healing property).
#55 imaginaryfriend Apr 05, 2015 12:22:52	Coredump00" wrote:
(Reply to #54) Pauper	Kalani wrote:
(Reply to #55) Pauper	imaginaryfriend wrote:
(Reply to #57) Coredump00	Pauper wrote:
#59 Skerrit Apr 06, 2015 18:06:30	Coredump00 wrote:
(Reply to #59) Coredump00	Skerrit wrote:
(Reply to #60) Pauper	Coredump00 wrote:
(Reply to #61) Coredump00	Pauper wrote:
(Reply to #62) Pauper	Coredump00 wrote: