(This space reserved for FAQ.)
Please all you awesome D&D fans, fill up this thread with what you think will be frequently asked questions, along with the answers if you have them.
Can the free D&D Basic PDF be shared and distributed?
Can we post fan-made content? How about fan-made conversions of prior edition adventures?
Will the Starter Set, PHB, DMG, and MM be available in PDF form?
Is there going to be a japanese, italian, german, spanish and french version of the books?
Will additional classes get added to the basic pdf?
Why is there no "General Discussion" forum? What if we just want to talk about D&D 5e without having a specific rules/product/player/DM question?
If the players are rolling with disadvantage and roll snake eyes, can we kill them outright?
pukunui wrote:
pukunui wrote:
Will the Basic PDF have clickable chapter links at the beginning or at least bookmarks to make jumping to specific sections quicker and easier?
alienux wrote:
Yeah, I asked Mike and he said it was going to be a printer-friendly document with minimal art. I imagine it won't have bookmarks in it. If it's not a locked pdf, I'll be able to add my own, though, so that's not a big deal for me.
pukunui wrote:
WotC_Trevor wrote:
WotC_Trevor wrote:
WotC_Trevor wrote:
Where should I be looking for the free pdf?
What is WotC's opinion of fan-created material for settings that have yet to be supported. Say, for example, a group of fans creates a conversion guide for Dragonlance or Ravenloft. Would WotC be okay with that as long as it was deemed unofficial?
Kobolds. Hands down. They have an economical advantage because they can transition to glue and ceramic exports. Goblins don't have any trade they can use to sustain long term battle. Kobolds are actually crazy enough to actively seek out a dragon and demand that he be their god. They clearly have an advantage in both bat **** crazy and morale department. They also have an ace in the hole of possibly rolling a nat 20 on charisma to get the lazy dragon god to participate in the battle..
Popesixtus wrote:
Sub-class now maybe? Geeze I forget what was in which packets.
edit: sorry, I believe achetype is the proper term now.
What steps can (or will) be taken to try and curtail the overly duplicated thread mimicking? Do we need half-a-dozen separate threads, on the same exact topic, all being discussed simultaneously?
Popesixtus wrote:
A company that is not WotC just posted a free module, converted to 5e. Is this allowed? I have a link but I won't post it unless it is.
I think this is a good place to ask, My question will be a FAQ, I assume.
So...If anyone has read all there is to read in the Starter Set, and the Basic PDF (I have the PDF, and am reading though it now...But I am not done yet)
Are most (or all?!) saves going to be based on 3 ability scores? Dex, Con, and Wis?
I pray the DMG brings enlightenment to this edition. Won't know until November...
How can I copy bits of the free PDF to quote them in other forums, to discuss it? It seems to come up with crazy characters when I paste it?
Noon wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
OK. I know that the first problem I will have is ruling on the new area-of-effects for spells. We use grid maps. I just did a cone of cold. I think this is what it looks like. Are the orange tinted squares in the AOE? How exactly does it work. Also, when casting at a 45 degree angle how would it work? Much confused!
Neptune0923 wrote:
spelley wrote:
So you're saying this:
That works for that.
And if diagonal, this?
@Mechpilot.
I agree with you. 4e simplified shapes. I hope that's one of the options down the road.
Neptune0923 wrote:
Neptune0923 wrote:
#2
No. Can't be distrubuted.
Dont know if you can post fan made stuff
Dont know if it will be in PDF form but I doubt it
#3
No word yet, expect a long wait
#4
No, the basic PDF should only have 4 classes and 4 races. Everything else will be requred in the basic rules
#18
Don't know
#24
No
I think we should number or questions as Q001 and R001 for Question and Response.
I'll start
Q001 - Who is upset that they still haven't clarified if you can buy cantrips or learn new cantrips during leveling up as a Wizard?
sliceoffruit wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
Q002 Is the Mountain Dwarf supposed to get Str +2 Con +2? I think there was another thread on this particular topic, but I can't find it now.
A002: Yes. Its this the thread you are looking for ? http://community.wizards.com/forum/product-and-general-dd-discussions/threads/4107036
These came up today:
Q003: What happens if a creature is invisible but not hidden?
A003: You know where the creature is, can attack it without guessing its location, but because you cannot see it you take disadvantage to its attack rolls and it takes advantage to attack you.
Q004: Are you automatically hidden when you are invisible?
A004: No. Unless you use the stealth action to "hide," creatures detect your general location via sound and/or clues. If you use actions to hide while you are invisible, whether creatures are aware of your location or not will depend on your stealth check and the perception check made by creatures in your area.
Q005: Then what is the benefit of the level 14 rogue blindsense ability?
A005: It lets you automatically detect all hidden creatures within a 10 foot radius--basically, your passive perception check to detect hidden creatures within a 10 foot radius has an infinitely high value, and nothing can hide from you within that radius.
EDITED: To match a Mike Mearls response to Q005, which was a little different then my original A005.
Er... the post I was responding to was deleted. But, I can't seem to delete my own post. Nothing to see here! These are not the answers you are looking for... *waves hand*
@mikemearls Q: What happens if a creature is invisible but not hidden?
@mikemearls Sorry, to clarify, do you have to guess which square the invisible creature is in, or do you just attack with disadvantage?
@CyberDaveMil attack with disadvantage, unless target is hiding. Then you need to guess.
@CyberDaveMil you know it's space but can't see it. If using minis, mark its pos on the map.
@mikemearls Thanks! One more very quick question if you do not mind: in that case, what is the benefit of the rogue's blindsense?
@mikemearls To clarify, I am assuming "blindsense" lets you "see" invisible creatures within 10 feet, right?
@CyberDaveMil main benefit is revealing hidden creatures. Invisibility detection is small benefit if creature isn't trying to hide
@CyberDaveMil nope, just detect
This means that I was right about everything except for blindsense. It seems blindsense doesn't let you see an invisible creature. It just lets you autodetect all hidden creatures in a 10 foot radius (without making any perception check). It doesn't really grant you any benefit against an invisible creature that isn't also trying to hide. That makes the wording of that ability a little confusing, but the dev's have clarified the intent of the power for us. Cool beans!
Cyber-Dave's interpretation of the invisibility/stealth rules seems correct to me.
Then I will retract my previous posts, now that M.Mearls has weighed in. I however took issue, and still do, with Cyber-Dave presenting his (at the time) unconfirmed personal opinions on a contentious rules question as fact. I will also state that in my games, an Invisible creature must still be 'Noticed' first, and will most likely involve a roll against Passive Perception.
Plaguescarred wrote:
LupusRegalis wrote:
Cyber-Dave wrote:
I had confused with blindsight. So blindsense effectively does nothing for invisible creature that aren't hidden as you already can detect their location. Unecessary reference then?
Plaguescarred wrote:
LupusRegalis wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
Its as simple as that (just like in 4E) You know where everyone is, anywhere and at all time, unless its hidden
Wether this person is behind a buffet in front of you, invisible but a few feet away or in an adjacent room, you know its there unless its hidden.
LupusRegalis wrote:
Cyber-Dave wrote:
Well, a DM can always declare that the presence of creatures is not detected due to distraction if he want. But that would be a DM call. Default rule is that you're location is known unless you are hidden, its one of the particularity of being hidden.
In such case, i'd just have the PCs get a "free" Dexterity (Stealth) check against their passive perception (and ignore stealth requirements) but that's me.
I will add that if an invisible person is trying to step without making noise or standing real still as somebody is walking by, they are trying to be hidden.
Plaguescarred wrote:
LupusRegalis wrote:
Torg_Smith wrote:
Torg_Smith wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
LupusRegalis wrote:
LupusRegalis wrote:
The rules do make mention that a DM can under certain circumstance, allow a creature that was already hidden remains so while being seen;
Page 60: In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you. However, under certain circumstances, the Dungeon Master might allow you to stay hidden as you approach a creature that is distracted, allowing you to gain advantage on an attack before you are seen.
Torg_Smith wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
Torg_Smith wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
LupusRegalis wrote:
Cyber-Dave wrote:
I think the issue here is when you become aware of a creature.
If you walk into a room, and there's an orc standing there, you see the orc and the orc sees you. You're both immediately aware of each other. Makes sense.
If you walk into a room, and there's an invisible orc standing there, the orc sees you but you don't see the orc. You aren't immediately aware of the orc. If the orc charges at you, you become aware of it. If the orc stands very still, it's taking it's action to hide -- and it becomes hidden, and you only become aware of it if it fails its Dexterity (Stealth) check. Either way, you do not become immediately aware of the orc as soon as you enter the room. So it's much simpler for the DM, when you initially encounter an already invisible creature, to just assume that it's hidden until detected (via Passive Perception or because it reveals itself), because that's the way things should naturally progress anyway.
Of course the real question is:
Q006: If you walk into a room, and there's an invisible orc standing there who is unable to move or make any sound (paralyized or petrified), and is thus incapable of taking any actions (including hiding), do you automatically detect its presence because it isn't "hidden," even though it's completely invisible and silent?
souldoubt wrote:
Okay, so here are my thoughts (and my question).
1. You have to take an action to hide because hiding involves trying to remain quiet. If you aren't taking such an action you aren't particularly trying to be quiet, and hence are automatically noticed if someone is close enough to reasonably notice you from non-visual clues.
2. Outside of combat, this is a complete non-issue, since your hiding can be derived from any sort of appropriate statement. In combat, you have to take a specific Hide action.
3. The Hiding sidebar implies that the type of noise you have to worry about involves loud noises. It implies that unless you do something auditorially relevant, you are more or less automatically successful in being quiet by virtue of having taken your hide action.
4. The same sidebar also implies that passive perception doesn't necessarily apply unless your opponents are in combat or otherwise suspicious.
5. By the way, it doesn't say that you can hide behind cover, like the playtest did.
6. Things get more interesting when you read the sections on being lightly or heavily obscured. We know that heavily obscured provides sufficient conditions for hiding. But lightly obscured imposes a -5 to Perception checks. 'cept you can't actually hide in lightly obscured. So, doesn't really matter.
a) But wait, you say! (Here's where it gets really confusing) Some creatures (such as wood elves) can hide when only lightly obscured. So, of course, that penalty would apply when attempting to notice them.
b) But no such penalty applies when someone is heavily obscured. So apparently it is harder to see a lightly obscured wood elf than to see an heavily obscured wood elf.
c) Which is absurd.
7. I'm trying to put all this together into a coherenct system. Here is what I have so far:
B1. Sometimes people are always looking around--such as in combat. In such a case, you cannot hide (or remain hidden while moving) unless you are heavily concealed (which takes an action, as always).
B2. If people are distracted or not particularly aware, and you have at least half cover, you can attempt to hide. Make your Dexterity (Stealth) check.
B3. If you are in a lightly obscured area and behind half cover, opponents have a -5 to their Wisdom (Perception) checks to spot you, once they start looking or enter a state of alertness, like combat. If your opponents are alert and aware (such as combat) most creature cannot initiate a hide attempt in such a situation. Wood elves can attempt to hide in a subset such situations (and do not even need any cover.) Lightfoot halflings can also attempt to hide in a subset of such situations.
B4. It is implied that, once hidden (whether through B1, B2, or B3 conditions) you can then move into conditions of less than heavy concealment (but still at least half-cover, unless you have a feature that provides an exception) and remain potentially hidden. You cannot initiate a hide action when people can see you, but you can move into situations (such as B2 or B3) where you have less than heavy concealment and remain hidden. This is when you compare your Dexterity (Stealth) to their Wisdom (Perception).
B5. If you are invisible or heavily concealed and have taken an action to hide you are automatically successful, unless you give yourself away somehow. If you are standing around the corner and being quiet they have no chance to know you are there, and your roll is irrelevent.
I know what you're thinking: B5 is ridiculous. But then, how do you explain 6 and B3 without B5? Heavily obscured should be better than lightly obscured and behind cover, but without B5, it is actually easier to spot characters in B3 than if they were heavily obscured.
The whole reason why being hidden is *active* while perceiving a hidden creature is *passive* or *active*, at least mechanically speaking, is that the hidden creature needs to have a # (his Stealth check) that the perceiving creature can measure against his passive Perception or his Perception check. You quite literally *need* to make a Stealth check at some point in order to allow the game to adjudicate when you are discovered. All "Hidden" is is a contest between two checks. There isn't really an "interpretation" here, as you either have two numbers to compare or you don't.
Now, under what conditions you can become hidden are a bit more loosely defined, but the RAW still, I think, covers the bases. Basically, unless there is something that can hide a creature (ie. something that provides heavy obscurement), that creature cannot hide. But, as Plaguescarred pointed out, the DM is given a bit of latitude to stretch the hide/not hide boundary slightly if there are appropriate circumstances. But in either case, rolls have to be made before anything can be officially considered Hidden.
LupusRegalis wrote:
Sword_of_Spirit wrote:
souldoubt wrote:
Am I to take it that the FAQ is now officially the Hide/Invisbility thread? 
Shouldn't lengthy debates - especially important ones like this one - get their own threads so the FAQ can focus on quick-and-dirty Q&As? Or am I missing something?
Okay, let me be clearer.
If heavily concealed is a straight up requirement for remaining hidden, that means that your opposed checks only measure whether or not you can hear the hider. A hiding requirement of complete invisibility makes sound the only thing that the opposed checks are for. "Hidings" means "staying quiet" and only staying quiet. There is no visual component to hiding.
Does that make sense?
So why don't I agree with that interpretation? Because of this:
"What Can You See? One of the main factors in determining
whether you can find a hidden creature or object is how well
you can see in an area, which might be lightly or heavily
obscured, as explained in chapter 8."
So that contradicts the idea that opposed rolls only measure sound.
That being the case, it must be possible to hide under conditions where it is theoretically possible for you to be seen. Still following, everyone?
So what conditions exist where it is theoretically possible to be seen?
Not if you are invisible. Not if you are standing behind a wall.
If anyone can logically explain how these are not contradictory, I'd love to hear it.
Torg_Smith wrote:
Sword_of_Spirit wrote:
Q: Is overchannel supposed to work with cantrips?
A: No. But, Mike Mearls thinks that it "works out if you increase the damage by 1d12 per cantrip."
I've started a new thread on hiding to try to analyze unresolved issues.
http://community.wizards.com/forum/rules-questions/threads/4108961
Cyber-Dave wrote:
Question: When is the release date for the Player's Handbook for Wizards Premier Network stores (the general release date is August 19, 2014)?
(Just got answer to my own question so
Friday, August 8, 2014
zoroaster99 wrote:
I haven't stayed in the loop with 5th as much as I perhaps should have, but we went through a pretty heavy Warhammer phase after beta test completion.
From initial looks, Forgotten Realms has a pretty strong showing right out the box. Is this setting considered the default D&D setting now, or will there still be a sort of setting-neutral focus? For example, the Basic Rules do mention other settings, but we don't get a laundry list of Dragonlance-style or Greyhawk-style names.
Tiger_Dave wrote:
Q007: The Roguish Archetype Thief has two abilities for 3rd level. The first, Fast Hands, states "starting at 3rd level...", while the other, Second-Story Work, says "when you choose this archetype at 3rd level...". Is there a difference between these phrases' meanings? My first thought was of Multiclassing; maybe only one is granted to multiclassed Rogues if you pick up the Archetype after 3rd level? (I realize this won't be easy to answer without the PHB.)
I consider hiding the sum of a visual (that's why you have to be concealed to hide) and auditive occultation (that's why you need the action, so you refrain from making any noise to remain hidden). In my [house] ruling, any creature or objetc which can't possibly be seen (mainly invisible creatures) would be hidden by default as long as it's not acting, moving or making any noise. Only if it acts, makes a noise or moves would it cease to be hidden unless it has taken the hiding action. Of course, there's still the issue of smell...
At any rate, this is a roleplaying game and we can't expect the rules to cover every issue. If the rules as written don't work for us, we're free to houserule, instead of turning the wording of the rule upside down looking for a solution to our current situation.
And...
Q0008: Is there a chance for rulebooks and supplements of this edition to be published in electronic format?
nirnel wrote:
Q0009: Is 20 meant as an absolute hard cap to preserve "bounded accuracy" tenets?
Or is it merely the magic-free cap; might we see magic items that grant an enhancement bonus. or ones that confer an inherent bonus to ability scores, bringing them above 20 to some other, higher hard cap?
Chimerasame wrote:
mellored wrote:
Chimerasame wrote:
Chimerasame wrote:
During the Sundering and after the release of Murder in Baldur's Gate adventure (almost 1+ year ago)., WotC published some statistics according to reports of the payers that they have played the specific adventure. I am trying to find those statistics or the link of site that are available. Any help with that? Someone that knows the link?
Thank you in advance.
Sokaki wrote:
Nicodaudel wrote:
Sokaki wrote:
Where is the line between Inteligence (Investigation) check and Wisdom (Perception) check? It is not obvious especially when the Inteligence (Investigation) check should be made.
ShadoWWW wrote:
JaySims wrote:
Can we create our own type of monster by using the 5th edition ruleset? How can we create our own custom monster for our campaigns by using the 5th edition rules?
Since the complete 5th edition ruleset isn't out yet (as far as I know), how can DMs create their own monster species and races with the rules we have available?
Melwick wrote:
Q: Does magic items bonus stack? for example: ring of protection, staff of defense, armor +1...
Rinfor wrote:
Q: Will magic items be in the Player's Handbook, or the DMG, or...?
SwampDog wrote:
On page 36 of the Basic Rules we get the following rule regarding proficiencies from multiple sources:
If a character would gain the same proficiency from two different sources, he or she can choose a different proficiency of the same kind (skill or tool) instead.
Does this apply to armor proficiences as well? A literal read seems to indicate that it should, but it seems pretty clear that the devs didn't anticipate this for armor profs.
-Polaris
Polaris wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
Polaris wrote:
Overpromises wrote:
Polaris wrote:
It's also in a section that, previous to that sentence, only discusses skill and tool proficiencies. The section itself is in a greater section devoted to Backgrounds, and currently no Background gives any proficiency other than skill or tool.
I agree that a very, very strict reading could be used to infer that armor/weapon proficiencies would work the same way (e.g. if you would get 'longbow' from race and class, this sentence gives you the ability to choose another weapon, or somesuch), but that would make the sentence so bizarrely out-of-place, tucked away as it is there in the background section, that I overwhelmingly believe the RAI to be that this sentence only applies to skill/tool proficiencies.
Polaris wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
Q: The zombie in the starter set has an ability that when it is brought to zero HPs by non-radiant damage on a non-critical hit it can attempt a Con save (or check, I forget which) and a success means that it goes down to just one HPs. Does this ability actually activate only when the zombie is broguht to zero HPs? Or does it also work if a blow brings the zombie below zero HPs? I assume they meant the latter, but I don't see anything that specifically says so.
MechaPilot wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Where are all the links to all previous D&D articles and versions???
Forging the realms for instance... NO LONGER THERE! why!?
4e stuff... no longer there
not to mention 3e stuff, NO LONGER THERE!? are you removing it for good? or bringing it back!?
Polaris wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Funny how you decided, all on your lonesome, how the parentheses are being used. Even though there are different applications, such as the one I cited (which is a ligit use even if you don't "like" it).
Hows about, instead of being the self appointed punctuation police, you ask Mearls how they are intended instead of deciding for him, just to continue grinding your axe?
Polaris wrote:
Its seems more like a Parenthetical Statement, which explains or qualifies something, even clarify or give extra information.
A parenthetical statement is one that explains or qualifies something. You can call such a statement a parenthetical, (especially when it's in parentheses).
Have you ever said something like "I'm hungry!" and then added "...but I only want French fries"? That second statement is parenthetical: it clarifies the first statement. Just like words in parentheses (like these words) add clarity to a sentence, parenthetical words in speech help make something clearer or give extra information. You can call these statements (or words that actually are inside parentheses) parentheticals; and while parentheticals aren't the most important ideas, they help support those ideas.
Yep.
Plaguescarred wrote:
Polaris wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
Polaris wrote:
Apologies if this has already been asked but will any monsters and magic items be added to the free basic rules?
samstockdale wrote:
Edit.
I appologize if the following has been addressed elswhere. What happened to character builder? What happened to encounter builder? What happened to all the tools? Where can I find the archived editions of past Dungeon mag? Where, also, is Dragon mag? Finally, without these things, is my paid account now only to read these forums?
Duke01 wrote:
Unless there are some laughably bad launch day one erratas (What's the ETA on free rules update? It still says V0.1), I'll probably grab the Player's Handbook soon after it's release. But I would really love to be able to buy an official PDF for all of the conveniences that brings over flipping through a physical copy.
What are the odds of this ever happening? If even in a never updated/only releasing pay full price for your revised editions so everyone buying physical books only do not feel left out way.
LaserFace wrote:
Would we see more information on the ecology of the player races? Will we see information on the diets and favored foods that demihuman races prefer?
Are there going to be more spells listed in the PHB? Some spells are missing from the Basic Rules pdf.
So I saw a finished copy of 5.0 PHB sitting on the counter of my local game store while they were unpacking todays shipments. They said it was available for purchase on the 8th. I thought it was the 19th?
Wrylis wrote:
Wrylis wrote:
LaserFace wrote:
TKGB wrote:
LaserFace wrote:
Apologies if this has been covered but couldn't find in a search... when a monster description lists resistances such as "bludgeoning, piercing and slashing from non-magical weapons" is it safe to assume that the "from non-magical weapons" applies to all three categories rather than only the one it follows (i.e. slashing in this example)? I think that has to be the interpretation but it's not clear.
kelnas wrote:
This may have been asked before, and I just haven't been able to find an answer. Is the Rise of Tiamat adventure inclusive of the events in Hoard of the Dragon Queen? Of do you need to buy/play both to get the complete experience?
echostation38 wrote:
Will the new edition be released digitally? I use a tablet and get all my books from DrivethruRPG.com or Paizo and would love to pick these up. Thanks!
I've asked the D&D twitter account and Rodney Thompson but no response.
My questions have to do with the Monster Manual.
Will monsters be able to be p.c. races like the 3.5 M.M.?
Will Shifter be included in the Lycanthrope section?
What about the Changling?
Can you guess which setting I'm currently running? 
Karpomatic wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
Are the PHB and other books going to be available in a pdf format?
Hello, I am a new user here on the D&D forums. I've been a long-time player and DM since the pre-1st edition days.
I recently downloaded the v5 manuals and want to take a moment to applaud the game designers for their efforts at removing a lot of the extraneous content from v2 onwards.
My question is with regards to the "Dungeon Master's Basic Rules Version 0.1" PDF. I wanted to let you know that there seems to be a printing error in the document with regards to the title. As mentioned, it states "Dungeon Master's Basic Rules" but, on inspection, there does not appear to be any Dungeon Master-related material. In fact, the PDF appears for all intents & purposes to be a Monster Manual.
I reached this conclusion after noting that all 61 pages discuss monsters.
The term "DM" is mentioned 3 times. The term "Dungeon Master" is also mentioned 3 times (not counting the title on the page footers).
Of course I may be missing something and can only assume that a future "Dungeon Master's" Guide will include information related to being a Dungeon Master...? I eagerly await confirmation of this.
Thank you for your time.
Kind regards,
Arentol
Arentol wrote:
BoldItalic,
Thank you for the kind reply, I appreciate it.
Indeed I just took note of the 5 pages relating to Encounters and Magic Items. The other 56 pages do seem to be Monster-related. I also noted that the Guide mentions that it's a work-in-progress, so I should probably not be critical of this early Monster Manual draft -- I mean, DMG.
I look forward to reading about alignment, money, armor classes, weapons, spell acquisition, how to craft a campaign, how to formulate city-based campaigns, combat, turning undead, assignment of experience, world building, social rank, NPCs and treasure.
In short, all the topics one would expect in a Dungeon Master's Guide.
Unless, of course, this particular version does not address those issues... in which case I suspect I'd be profoundly disappointed.
Warm regards,
Arentol
Arentol wrote:
I picked up Legacy of the Crystal Shard as a first adventure with a newly formed group. Are the D&D Next supliments 100% compatible with 5e as printed now? If not, are there any plans to release a further online supliment?
** General Question**
Im not sure if this is the proper thread or forum to ask this question but what are the rules or process that you would have to get something published for D&D 5th I have been working on an adventure module but I am not sure if there is or if there is going to be an open game license or even how exactly that would even work. If anyone knows anything please let me know and if I should be looking in a different place for these answers please just point me in the right direction..................................... thanks
General/product question
Is there a listing/checklist of the icons of the realms minis out now? Tried a quick look at wizkid's site, but nothing there, a quick search online didn't pull one up.
Alternatively, I'd assume there is a tiefling caster of some sort, but if anyone could confirm, that'd be great (if there is or isn't will depend on how in vain my search at my FLGS will be).
Coanward wrote:
When I splash the acid in vial onto a creature within 5 feet of me, the description of acid says to make a ranged attack against the creature. However, chapter 9 says I have disadvantage to attack roll when making ranged attack if I am within 5 feet of a hostile creature who can see me and who isn’t incapacitated. So, do I understand it right I have always disadvantage when splashing a vial to creature next to me?
One more question: is it normal ranged thrown weapon and ranged attack should be made with Dex modifier? And what about proficiency bonus - should I apply it?
Brightmantle wrote:
arderkrag wrote:
Next question: where can I find a digital version of the spell sheet in the phb?
Hello,
I'm not sure if this is the right place for this question.
What are the rules on what a person is allowed to bolg? I wanted to post some cheat sheets for my players that have abreviated spell and feature descriptions but i wasnt sure if that is a copyright violation of some kind.
Thanks.
Where do I post errors found in the Basic rules text? I found a doozy on P. 57, under Encounter Design, There is the Green boxed text example of Encounter difficulty. On the second column of the page, after the 4th step of encounter building, the exact same text as in the example is used, only the numbers given are changed. In addition to being a little confusing (the same example given tiwce on the same page, one in boxed text, one not) the numbers are different which makes the chart the entire section is based on seem like it doesn't work.
bengrayawhile wrote:
~~Here's one that I'm going to throw out to the collective.
Armor of Agathys and Dark One's Blessing.
Assumption #1 - AoA is cast at 2nd level. This gets you 10 temp hp and a 10 pt damage shield.
Assumption #2 - You get hit for 9 points of damage. This negates all but 1 of your AoA temp hp. The damage shield does 10 pts of cold damage to the attacker.
Assumption #3 - The damage dealt to the attacker in the previous assumption is enough to render it to 0 hp or less. Now you get 6 hp from Dark One's Blessing.
Question - Since the temp hp are in effect being replaced (as in swapped, not replenished), does AoA drop? Or does it stay active until you take real damage?
Kiraya_TiDrekan wrote:
littlejigman wrote:
Can monsters with Multiattack move between attacks?
Brock_Landers wrote:
New DM here, starting up a group of mostly new players. We plan to begin with the Starter Set and the Lost Mine of Phandelver. I know that there are several included characters in the set, and that at least part of the story relates to the background of one or more of those characters.
For those who have played through it, are there issues with using new player-generated characters instead of the included ones? Would this require simply tweaking the story to fit the backgrounds of the new characters, or more along the lines of a major overhaul?
Thanks!
littlejigman wrote:
GreenFeevah wrote:
Azzy1974 wrote:
Sorry if this was asked earlier but does anyone know if Wizards plans to re-launch the Eberron campaign setting for 5e?
Theros wrote:
I am not sure if this is the right section for this, forgive me if it is not and point me in the right direction please.
I am cautious with my books as I do not like to see them marred or damaged. The binding in my PHB is giving away already. I have pages ready to come out. Has WotC addressed this? Is anyone else having this problem?
mrpopstar wrote:
PalmettoSwampFox wrote:
Theros wrote:
Will WotC publish Nerath (4e setting) for D&D 5e? Anyone knows about that one?
cassi_brazuca wrote:
littlejigman wrote:
WhiskyJ wrote:
Azzy1974 wrote:
The best thing about 5e, at least, is the low number of books that will likely exist. Getting all three of the main hardbacks can be a bit pricey but you can always do what my friends and I did when I was 12 - each person buys one book and, eventually, all of us had the core books (1e and 2e era) and one copy of the main supplements for the entire group.
WhiskyJ wrote:
Again, I don't want to purchase books- even if I were in the States and could get them cheap.
I really don't want scanned, pirated PDFs either. I like PDFs that have proper bookmarks/navigation and are professionally produced... I am willing to pay for a quality product. I believe in compensating the writers/artists/editors developing it.
Just hoping there will be an answer from WotC at some point which addresses my question.
WhiskyJ wrote:
I have my PHB, MM and DMG. Can somone tell me if the DM Screen will be out early at preferred stores? If so what date?
joeburgos wrote:
Will there be a 5E on-line Compendium and a 5E Character Builder? If so, when?
When will online tools be available for 5e. It seems to me that if the character builder, compendium and so on do not support 5e, then either groups won't switch, or that when they do, they will no longer be renewing DDI.
Kiraya_TiDrekan wrote:
Will WOTC ever reformat the "basic" rules in a smaller printing format?
Basic is great as a imediate start up and go on the fly system but the pdf's file format is for standard printer paper and when printed out, bound, including a DM's guide its as think and large as a regular players handbook. Lets face the facts most e-readers do not have an 8x11 screen. Only the larger I-pads can do this. All I'm suggesting is to offer it in an e-reader/html format or at least in format that is suiteable to those smaller screens.
Heck you could one up the game and reformat it to whatever that pulp paperback novel size is. 7 x 5 i think? Online print on demand services like LuLu can take a pdf, print it out, and bound it as an auctual BOOK. From softcover to hardback. Now I'm not suggesting to do that with standard 8x11 size but the option is out there already.
You could even use them as a means of drumming up support for other campaign settings as a form of advertisement. Offer modified versions of basic that introduce differnt classes and races specific to the associated setting. Dm guides that introduce new setting specific monsters, and a simple 'mini module' for each. In this way settings of long ago that will never see re-implementation in 5e can at least have a minimal footprint. Mystara, Ravenloft, Darksun, Greyhawk, Oriental adventures, and Spelljammer to name a few. Hah. Throw in some fun stuff too. Movie tie ins, video game tie ins, or light weight fluff stuff like cartoon critters, fairies and unicorns. Theres dozens of ways you can use it as an advertisement means.
Me, Personaly I'ld love to see a Lovecraft inspired set.
If you think you can't make a buck like that think again. Once long ago abandoned video games, roms, books, etc were practicaly free to download from online. Now a dollar a download is made, sometimes more.
My question is who here would pay 3$ to download a version of basic customized for Ravenloft? It would come complete with campaign information, custom races, custom clases, monsters and a simple intro module with so many holes that its easy as sin for a BEGINNING dm to expand upon. . .
Now THAT is how you offer 'starter sets' like a BOSS.
BigOleBob wrote:
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/basicrules
Does not offer rules in html format.
Does not offer to download rules in html format.
The link you gave as highlighted text below does not appear on the basic rules page.
There does not appear to be any other links to that html form of basic rules.
That is why I was unable to find them before.
Might I suggest you provide an easy to find link for future users.
Thank you.
BoldItalic wrote:
BigOleBob wrote:
Just to clarify: the link I posted was http://dnd.wizards.com/products/tabletop/players-basic-rules.
I apologize for my misunderstanding of the location of the html rules for basic.
I still stand by my original idea though.
The use of 'basic' as a means of advertiseing other (non forgotten realms) campaign settings.
We’ve removed content from this thread because of a violation of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
Remember, a community is a joint effort of all those involved, and while we want intelligent meaningful and productive banter to ensue we also need it to be polite and considerate of others.
Thank you for your time and support as we continue to try and make a great community for everyone.
Can you exceed 20th level by multi-classing?
Brock_Landers wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
Brock_Landers wrote:
Is there going to be a program I can use such as Dungeons and Dragons Core Rules 2.0? I still use this for 2nd games, but I would Love to see something like this for 5th edition.
morrit19 wrote:
THe ELH was basically an updated high level campaign book from 2E. The epic spellcasting system seemed to be based of the 2E version.
Zardnaar wrote:
So I just had my first session of 5e. Hell my first time playing since 2003! While I like playing I have always devoured the source books, especially the race and class descriptions. Any idea when we will be getting more of these published?
I just downloaded the Temple of Elemental Evil Handbook!
DizzyWood wrote:
How do I report a textual error?
(Specifically: PHB, some words - probably "Dexterity (Acrobatics)" - are missing between pages 195 and 196.)
Thrawcheld wrote:
Does Wizards have any plans on Publishing
1. Stats on Deities
2. levels above 20
3. Challenge Ratings Above 30
i have to ask, because frankly, if you put all the powerful monsters at CR 30, you are going to end up with more CR 30 encounters than the rest put together. I got the distinct impression CR 30 was right about demigod level. Am I wrong about that?
And how are you going to Stat people like Elminster, who have traditionally been above 20th level for over 20 years?
shintashi wrote:
Azzy1974 wrote:
Why do Beastmaster Rangers and Way of the Four Elements Monks still suck? When will Wizards fix them?