While RAW, the Awakened Mind feature allows for only the warlock to talk to another creature telepathically, and not the other way around. I believe that two way communication should be possible.
The awakened mind feature states "You can communicate telepathically with any creature you can see within 30 feet of you."
Merriam Webster defines communication as "a process by which information is exchanged between individuals through a common system of symbols, signs, or behavior." Information cannot be exchanged in one way telepathy, so that wouldn't really be communication in my book.
Not sure if it’s been changed since, but looking at the feature on DnD Beyond just now, it reads “You can telepathically speak to any creature you can see within 30 feet of you.”
So while I would like that to mean 2-way communication, it doesn’t appear to. I actually picked up the Message cantrip to supplement this.
A fun use of Awakened Mind, by the way, is Suggestion. Since you’re speaking into their mind and language doesn’t matter, you can “magically influence a creature you can see within range that can hear and understand you”... no one else will know what happened 😈
I wish it was two way but by SageAdvice it was ruled as one way so my GM holds me to that so their is a lot of me handing index cards to my fellow players and they just give a subtle nod or hand wave in reply. Still works well "do you want me sneak around and knock this guy out?" while our leader is talking to guard and the conversation is not going well. Or I scout 25ft a head without having to yell back or speak and possibly give away our position. Mechanically more useful than I originally thought. I think the one way think is so we don't setup a "mental skype" session because that can really make for a lot of conversation without talking and annoy the GM.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The lack of inflection in text means that a reader of any post adds their own inflection as they "verbalize" it in their head. I write long and repetitive in an effort to be clear and avoid my intent from being skewed or inverted. I am also bad at examples. It is common for people to skim my posts pull out the idea they think I mean or want to argue against or focus on my bad example instead of the point I am actually trying to make. I apologies for the confusion my failure to be clear and concise creates.
I’ve both DMed for a GoO Warlock, and played one. I went by the book definition of Communicate (two way, as Radarmonkey describes above). When the Sage Advice subsequently came out, I decided to stick with the literal interpretation: I wasn’t finding it overpowered at the table, and it didn’t tread on anyone else’s niche. It felt a little inadequate as a level 1 combat power compared to the constant combat useful power of Fiend and the semi-useful power of Fey.
Now I play one myself, after discussing with the DM we have also gone to two way communication. The justification now is that mechanically, it competes against the Hexblade’s (frankly overpowered) level 1 abilities. Given everything that Hexblade gets, restricting Awakened Mind to transmit only would make very little sense balance-wise, despite Sage Advice providing the unusual interpretation of “communicate”.
If it was two ways then it would make the spell Telepathy useless which is an 8th level spell by the way!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Born under the watch of something from the furthest corners of the far realms.... It knows all.... it sees all... and it asks: "What is it that you want to see?"... and my answer is... ALL"
They messed up on the wording and didn't bother to fix it in the errata.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM: Are you sure?
Wizard: Yes. I cast the Wish spell and I wish that everybody loves me!
DM: You transform into an irresistible, magnificent feast. It was so great, all who participated in devouring you tell of the joy they felt with tears in their eyes and all who hear the tale only feel sorrow that they weren't there to eat.
They messed up on the wording and didn't bother to fix it in the errata.
What is there to fix? they already said it's one way.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Born under the watch of something from the furthest corners of the far realms.... It knows all.... it sees all... and it asks: "What is it that you want to see?"... and my answer is... ALL"
Just checked. The wording is different from the original PHB. You're right. It was worded as "communicate" rather than speak to. Which is what lead to the confusion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM: Are you sure?
Wizard: Yes. I cast the Wish spell and I wish that everybody loves me!
DM: You transform into an irresistible, magnificent feast. It was so great, all who participated in devouring you tell of the joy they felt with tears in their eyes and all who hear the tale only feel sorrow that they weren't there to eat.
Wizard: Yes. I cast the Wish spell and I wish that everybody loves me!
DM: You transform into an irresistible, magnificent feast. It was so great, all who participated in devouring you tell of the joy they felt with tears in their eyes and all who hear the tale only feel sorrow that they weren't there to eat.
While RAW, the Awakened Mind feature allows for only the warlock to talk to another creature telepathically, and not the other way around. I believe that two way communication should be possible.
The awakened mind feature states "You can communicate telepathically with any creature you can see within 30 feet of you."
Merriam Webster defines communication as "a process by which information is exchanged between individuals through a common system of symbols, signs, or behavior." Information cannot be exchanged in one way telepathy, so that wouldn't really be communication in my book.
I would have agreed with this ruling until very recently. Eberron Kalashtar race states:
You can speak telepathically to any creature you can see within 60 feet of you. You don’t need to share a language with the creature for it to understand your telepathic messages, but the creature must be able to understand at least one language or be telepathic itself. As a bonus action when you’re speaking telepathically to a creature, you can give that creature the ability to speak telepathically to you until the start of your next turn. To use this ability, the creature must be within 60 feet of you and be able to see you.
Now there is a RAW source stating that they can communicate both ways, and the GOO feature doesn't state that, meaning I would now rule that it's one way only :(
So after playing a Goo warlock for over a year and having both the DM and myself believe that this was two way communication I feel like I cheated most of the way through ToA utilizing it as a somewhat mental network for silent communication. All messages would run through my warlock but I would be able to act as a communication hub for our party. Just this week I found the sage advice on it and am a little frustrated with the ruling put out (however fully understand why it would be ruled that way). I spoke to my DM about it and he decided to home brew the two way part seeing as we both understood it to be that way for almost the entire campaign.
Granted I just found out about SA within the last few months and had previously only utilized PHB, Xanthars, and the DMG.
I originally thought of it as 2-way also and ignore the sage advice ruling as they occasionally get 1 wrong (even a broken clock can be right twice a day - apply the opposite, sage advice is great and gets most things right but do occasionally get things wrong... for example, Mike Mearls thinks casting Magic Missile is an attack).
Ask yourself this, if you called someone on the phone and and they could hear you but you couldn't hear them, wouldn't you assume something is wrong with the connection... and are you communicating... really?
How game breaking is it to allow it to be 2-way... follow the rule of cool and let them have it be 2-way.
Hope everyone has lots of fun, whichever way you play it in your games.
Hey all,
Do you have a Great Old One Warlock in your party? If so, I have a question for you!
How does your table handle the Awakened Mind feature?
Can the creature you are talking to telepathically respond to you telepathically?
Technically WotC has answered this question.
However, I am interested how many people follow this ruling?
While RAW, the Awakened Mind feature allows for only the warlock to talk to another creature telepathically, and not the other way around. I believe that two way communication should be possible.
The awakened mind feature states "You can communicate telepathically with any creature you can see within 30 feet of you."
Merriam Webster defines communication as "a process by which information is exchanged between individuals through a common system of symbols, signs, or behavior." Information cannot be exchanged in one way telepathy, so that wouldn't really be communication in my book.
Not sure if it’s been changed since, but looking at the feature on DnD Beyond just now, it reads “You can telepathically speak to any creature you can see within 30 feet of you.”
So while I would like that to mean 2-way communication, it doesn’t appear to. I actually picked up the Message cantrip to supplement this.
A fun use of Awakened Mind, by the way, is Suggestion. Since you’re speaking into their mind and language doesn’t matter, you can “magically influence a creature you can see within range that can hear and understand you”... no one else will know what happened 😈
I wish it was two way but by SageAdvice it was ruled as one way so my GM holds me to that so their is a lot of me handing index cards to my fellow players and they just give a subtle nod or hand wave in reply. Still works well "do you want me sneak around and knock this guy out?" while our leader is talking to guard and the conversation is not going well. Or I scout 25ft a head without having to yell back or speak and possibly give away our position. Mechanically more useful than I originally thought. I think the one way think is so we don't setup a "mental skype" session because that can really make for a lot of conversation without talking and annoy the GM.
The lack of inflection in text means that a reader of any post adds their own inflection as they "verbalize" it in their head. I write long and repetitive in an effort to be clear and avoid my intent from being skewed or inverted. I am also bad at examples. It is common for people to skim my posts pull out the idea they think I mean or want to argue against or focus on my bad example instead of the point I am actually trying to make. I apologies for the confusion my failure to be clear and concise creates.
We play it as being one way as well. However, through the use of pantomime on the part of the target, it has worked out well enough.
I’ve both DMed for a GoO Warlock, and played one. I went by the book definition of Communicate (two way, as Radarmonkey describes above). When the Sage Advice subsequently came out, I decided to stick with the literal interpretation: I wasn’t finding it overpowered at the table, and it didn’t tread on anyone else’s niche. It felt a little inadequate as a level 1 combat power compared to the constant combat useful power of Fiend and the semi-useful power of Fey.
Now I play one myself, after discussing with the DM we have also gone to two way communication. The justification now is that mechanically, it competes against the Hexblade’s (frankly overpowered) level 1 abilities. Given everything that Hexblade gets, restricting Awakened Mind to transmit only would make very little sense balance-wise, despite Sage Advice providing the unusual interpretation of “communicate”.
Huh. It never once even occurred to me that "communication" would be one-way.
If it was two ways then it would make the spell Telepathy useless which is an 8th level spell by the way!
Born under the watch of something from the furthest corners of the far realms.... It knows all.... it sees all... and it asks: "What is it that you want to see?"... and my answer is... ALL"
They messed up on the wording and didn't bother to fix it in the errata.
DM: Are you sure?
Wizard: Yes. I cast the Wish spell and I wish that everybody loves me!
DM: You transform into an irresistible, magnificent feast. It was so great, all who participated in devouring you tell of the joy they felt with tears in their eyes and all who hear the tale only feel sorrow that they weren't there to eat.
What is there to fix? they already said it's one way.
Born under the watch of something from the furthest corners of the far realms.... It knows all.... it sees all... and it asks: "What is it that you want to see?"... and my answer is... ALL"
Three words: Rary's Telepathic Bond
Nope.
err... yep...
Just checked. The wording is different from the original PHB. You're right. It was worded as "communicate" rather than speak to. Which is what lead to the confusion.
DM: Are you sure?
Wizard: Yes. I cast the Wish spell and I wish that everybody loves me!
DM: You transform into an irresistible, magnificent feast. It was so great, all who participated in devouring you tell of the joy they felt with tears in their eyes and all who hear the tale only feel sorrow that they weren't there to eat.
After the sage advice I treat it as one way, but I also have a homebrew invocation that makes it two-way (with some other bonuses)
Actually, there's a spell for that. Sadly, it is not for Warlocks.
DM: Are you sure?
Wizard: Yes. I cast the Wish spell and I wish that everybody loves me!
DM: You transform into an irresistible, magnificent feast. It was so great, all who participated in devouring you tell of the joy they felt with tears in their eyes and all who hear the tale only feel sorrow that they weren't there to eat.
I would have agreed with this ruling until very recently. Eberron Kalashtar race states:
Now there is a RAW source stating that they can communicate both ways, and the GOO feature doesn't state that, meaning I would now rule that it's one way only :(
PbP 🎲: Tyekanik; Moneo Noree; Korba Muris; & occasional DM:
Ah, the "communicate" discussion...
Here's a question: Can a dead body communicate?
"No, it cannot decipher nor contribute a message!"
-or-
"OH MY GOD THEY'RE DEAD...! TOTALLY RECEIVING THIS MESSAGE!"
I imagine the Awakened Mind falls into the unusual category of communicating a conscious message...and the nature of the process speaking for itself.
So after playing a Goo warlock for over a year and having both the DM and myself believe that this was two way communication I feel like I cheated most of the way through ToA utilizing it as a somewhat mental network for silent communication. All messages would run through my warlock but I would be able to act as a communication hub for our party. Just this week I found the sage advice on it and am a little frustrated with the ruling put out (however fully understand why it would be ruled that way). I spoke to my DM about it and he decided to home brew the two way part seeing as we both understood it to be that way for almost the entire campaign.
Granted I just found out about SA within the last few months and had previously only utilized PHB, Xanthars, and the DMG.
I originally thought of it as 2-way also and ignore the sage advice ruling as they occasionally get 1 wrong (even a broken clock can be right twice a day - apply the opposite, sage advice is great and gets most things right but do occasionally get things wrong... for example, Mike Mearls thinks casting Magic Missile is an attack).
Ask yourself this, if you called someone on the phone and and they could hear you but you couldn't hear them, wouldn't you assume something is wrong with the connection... and are you communicating... really?
How game breaking is it to allow it to be 2-way... follow the rule of cool and let them have it be 2-way.
Hope everyone has lots of fun, whichever way you play it in your games.
Sadly all the wording for awakened mind say that it's you pushing your thought into someone else's mind.
-- Gives you the ability to touch the minds of other creatures. --