[NEW] Can I make an attack with one weapon, then draw a second weapon with my other hand and qualify to use two-weapon fighting? To use the two-weapon fighting bonus action (PH, 195), you must have both weapons in hand when you make the first attack. If you’re instead fighting with two or more weapons as part of the Extra Attack feature, the rule for the two-weapon fighting bonus action doesn’t apply. The rule for that bonus action applies only to itself, not to any other use of two or more weapons in the game.
This is going to piss off a lot of people, and I'm glad.
[NEW] What happens if I’m polymorphed or Wild Shaped into a creature with fewer than 100 hit points and then I’m targeted by power word kill? You die.
This is also going to piss a lot of people off, and I love it.
About the racial stat adjustments... I don't see that anywhere in the document. Did you link the wrong one, or..?
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
[NEW] Can I make an attack with one weapon, then draw a second weapon with my other hand and qualify to use two-weapon fighting? To use the two-weapon fighting bonus action (PH, 195), you must have both weapons in hand when you make the first attack. If you’re instead fighting with two or more weapons as part of the Extra Attack feature, the rule for the two-weapon fighting bonus action doesn’t apply. The rule for that bonus action applies only to itself, not to any other use of two or more weapons in the game.
This is going to piss off a lot of people, and I'm glad.
Yeah, people trying to cheeseball their way around the TWF requirements are annoying.
This part of the answer is clear and makes sense to me. “To use the two-weapon fight- ing bonus action (PH, 195), you must have both weapons in hand when you make the first attack.”
I don’t understand what purpose the rest of the answer is meant to communicate.
”If you’re instead fighting with two or more weapons as part of the Extra Attack feature, the rule for the two-weapon fighting bonus action doesn’t apply. The rule for that bonus action applies only to itself, not to any other use of two or more weapons in the game.”
This part of the answer is clear and makes sense to me. “To use the two-weapon fight- ing bonus action (PH, 195), you must have both weapons in hand when you make the first attack.”
I don’t understand what purpose the rest of the answer is meant to communicate.
”If you’re instead fighting with two or more weapons as part of the Extra Attack feature, the rule for the two-weapon fighting bonus action doesn’t apply. The rule for that bonus action applies only to itself, not to any other use of two or more weapons in the game.”
That means that if you have the extra attack feature, you’re free to attack once with a single weapon you’re holding and then draw a second weapon to make your second attack with it.
[NEW] Can a paladin use Divine Smite when they hit using an unarmed strike? No. Divine Smite requires a melee attack using a weapon. The rules don’t consider unarmed strikes to be weapons.
So... does this "unarmed strikes are not weapons" statement get any reactions? I feel like I remember there being a number of different threads going back and forth on that with different features...
So, being raised from the dead now makes you lose one level of exhaustion.
I guess clerics are going to kill those who have more than one exhaustion and instantly revivify them instead of using greater restoration.
Doubt it. It's faster and cheaper to spend the 100 gp to use Greater Restoration than it is to kill somebody and spend 300 gp to revivify.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
[NEW] Can a paladin use Divine Smite when they hit using an unarmed strike? No. Divine Smite requires a melee attack using a weapon. The rules don’t consider unarmed strikes to be weapons.
So... does this "unarmed strikes are not weapons" statement get any reactions? I feel like I remember there being a number of different threads going back and forth on that with different features...
Unarmed strikes have never been weapons. That’s not anything new. What’s new is the idea that Divine Smite requires an attack with a weapon, which is absolutely not what the text says (the text says melee weapon attack, which unarmed strikes explicitly are). I expect this one to cause some annoyance.
[NEW] Can Minor Conjuration create a copy of a book, complete with all its text, if the wizard hasn’t seen all the text? No. In the case of a multipart object, the intent is that you must have seen all parts of the object to duplicate those parts. In the case of a book, if you have seen only the cover, then the duplicate created will be a copy of the cover, and the pages will be blank.
This would seem to go against combining the Feature with Keen Mind to cyclically remember then study so you can remember again any object you've seen. Unless, every time, you take the necessary time to study every detail, within the duration of Minor Conjuration.
[NEW] When you dismiss the familiar you conjure with the find familiar spell to its pocket dimension, can it take any objects it’s wearing or carrying with it? No, the intent of find familiar is that any objects are left behind when the familiar vanishes. This intent will be reflected in future printings of the Player’s Handbook
I'm a little torn on this one. Obviously the intent is to prevent the Familiar from also being a Bag of Holding, but that can also be artificially limiting should you intend to really bond with your Familiar, and start equipping it. If you make some form of Armor for it, the Armor will be dropped when it vanishes. Same thing for a Spell Storing Item.
I personally allow a familiar to take any items it is attuned to with it into its pocket dimension, but I agree that it shouldn't be allowed to take other things for the sake of avoiding abuse.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
[NEW] Can a paladin use Divine Smite when they hit using an unarmed strike? No. Divine Smite requires a melee attack using a weapon. The rules don’t consider unarmed strikes to be weapons.
So... does this "unarmed strikes are not weapons" statement get any reactions? I feel like I remember there being a number of different threads going back and forth on that with different features...
Unarmed strikes have never been weapons. That’s not anything new. What’s new is the idea that Divine Smite requires an attack with a weapon, which is absolutely not what the text says (the text says melee weapon attack, which unarmed strikes explicitly are). I expect this one to cause some annoyance.
A bit inaccurate. The Divine Smite text: "Starting at 2nd level, when you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend one spell slot to deal radiant damage to the target, in addition to the weapon’s damage. " - The text does state it is using a weapon. Unarmed strikes do count as weapon attacks but they do not count as weapons. I houserule otherwise because it's utterly nonsensical the "divine power" gives a shit what you attack with, but just clarifying the Sage Advice is correct RAW.
[NEW] Can Minor Conjuration create a copy of a book, complete with all its text, if the wizard hasn’t seen all the text? No. In the case of a multipart object, the intent is that you must have seen all parts of the object to duplicate those parts. In the case of a book, if you have seen only the cover, then the duplicate created will be a copy of the cover, and the pages will be blank.
This would seem to go against combining the Feature with Keen Mind to cyclically remember then study so you can remember again any object you've seen. Unless, every time, you take the necessary time to study every detail, within the duration of Minor Conjuration.
This Sage Advice is only if you are trying to conjure something you haven't fully seen like the text in a book you have not yet read. If you have read the book and seen all the text, then you can conjure the full book - text included. You don't need to study the object again and it's not based on memory. RAW requires only that you have seen the object before (and there's no time-limit on how long ago). If you've seen it, you can conjure it as you saw it, regardless of whether you specifically remember the fine details.
The purpose of this bit of Sage Advice was to ensure people don't abuse the feature - such as glimpsing the cover of the enemy wizard's spellbook and then being able to conjure it later with all spells included.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
They contradict themselves on th Paladin Unarmed Smite thing....
Monk Section: Can a monk use Stunning Strike with an unarmed strike, even though unarmed strikes aren’t weapons? Yes. Stunning Strike works with melee weapon attacks, and an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack. The game often makes exceptions to general rules, and this is an important exception: that unarmed strikes count as melee weapon attacks despite not being weapons.
Okay so Unarmed strikes is a special type of MELEE WEAPON ATTACK
Paladin Divine smite feature:
Divine Smite
Starting at 2nd level, when you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend one spell slot to deal radiant damage to the target, in addition to the weapon’s damage. The extra damage is 2d8 for a 1st-level spell slot, plus 1d8 for each spell level higher than 1st, to a maximum of 5d8. The damage increases by 1d8 if the target is an undead or a fiend, to a maximum of 6d8.
it says it right there.... Melee Weapon Attack...now if it said "when you hit a creature with a melee attack with a weapon" there wouldn't be this argument but they say melee weapon attack...which they already said unarmed strikes are....soooooooo how is it suddenly invalid?
And then they double down!!
What does “melee weapon attack” mean: a melee attack with a weapon or an attack with a melee weapon? It means a melee attack with a weapon. Similarly, “ranged weapon attack” means a ranged attack with a weapon. Some attacks count as a melee or ranged weapon attack even if a weapon isn’t involved, as specified in the text of those attacks. For example, an unarmed strike counts as a melee weapon attack, even though the attacker’s body isn’t considered a weapon. Here’s a bit of wording minutia: we would write “melee-weapon attack” (with a hyphen) if we meant an attack with a melee weapon.
They contradict themselves on th Paladin Unarmed Smite thing....
Monk Section: Can a monk use Stunning Strike with an unarmed strike, even though unarmed strikes aren’t weapons? Yes. Stunning Strike works with melee weapon attacks, and an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack. The game often makes exceptions to general rules, and this is an important exception: that unarmed strikes count as melee weapon attacks despite not being weapons.
Okay so Unarmed strikes is a special type of MELEE WEAPON ATTACK
Paladin Divine smite feature:
Divine Smite
Starting at 2nd level, when you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend one spell slot to deal radiant damage to the target, in addition to the weapon’s damage. The extra damage is 2d8 for a 1st-level spell slot, plus 1d8 for each spell level higher than 1st, to a maximum of 5d8. The damage increases by 1d8 if the target is an undead or a fiend, to a maximum of 6d8.
it says it right there.... Melee Weapon Attack...now if it said "when you hit a creature with a melee attack with a weapon" there wouldn't be this argument but they say melee weapon attack...which they already said unarmed strikes are....soooooooo how is it suddenly invalid?
I just covered this. The Divine Smite text literally says "the weapon's damage". Not in addition to the weapon attack damage. In addition to the weapon's damage. They are not contradicting themselves, you just haven't read the Divine Smite text properly.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
The Divine Smite text literally says “when you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack.” That is the trigger. That it later refers to “the weapon’s damage” doesn’t retroactively establish a different trigger. It suggests that the intent is that it require a weapon, but it doesn’t change the fact that “an attack with a weapon” is not the trigger.
[NEW] Can a paladin use Divine Smite when they hit using an unarmed strike? No. Divine Smite requires a melee attack using a weapon. The rules don’t consider unarmed strikes to be weapons.
So... does this "unarmed strikes are not weapons" statement get any reactions? I feel like I remember there being a number of different threads going back and forth on that with different features...
Unarmed strikes have never been weapons. That’s not anything new. What’s new is the idea that Divine Smite requires an attack with a weapon, which is absolutely not what the text says (the text says melee weapon attack, which unarmed strikes explicitly are). I expect this one to cause some annoyance.
Monk
Can a monk use Stunning Strike with an unarmed strike, even though unarmed strikes aren’t weapons? Yes. Stunning Strike works with melee weapon attacks, and an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack. The game often makes exceptions to general rules, and this is an important exception: that unarmed strikes count as melee weapon attacks despite not being weapons.
Ok....so Monk unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack while Paladin's isn't. Does it mean Monk-Paladin multiclass can use Divine Smite when they hit using an unarmed strike?
[NEW] Are natural weapons considered weapons? Things designated as weapons by the rules, including natural weapons, are indeed weapons. In contrast, unarmed strikes are not weapons. They are something you do with an unarmed part of your body.
Talons
Your talons are natural weapons, which you can use to make unarmed strikes. If you hit with them, you deal slashing damage equal to 1d4 + your Strength modifier, instead of the bludgeoning damage normal for an unarmed strike.
Also, some racial natural weapons such as Aarakocra's Talons are both unarmed strikes and weapon attack..... =,=|||
https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf
Orcs and Kobolds no longer have negative stat adjustments.
This is going to piss off a lot of people, and I'm glad.
This is also going to piss a lot of people off, and I love it.
About the racial stat adjustments... I don't see that anywhere in the document. Did you link the wrong one, or..?
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Click on the Volo link included on the main doc. Each book has it's own errata link.
Nice
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Yeah, people trying to cheeseball their way around the TWF requirements are annoying.
That sucks about TWF. LOL! That’s was my whole sales pitch for how it doesn’t suck for the ranger.
This part of the answer is clear and makes sense to me.
“To use the two-weapon fight- ing bonus action (PH, 195), you must have both weapons in hand when you make the first attack.”
I don’t understand what purpose the rest of the answer is meant to communicate.
”If you’re instead fighting with two or more weapons as part of the Extra Attack feature, the rule for the two-weapon fighting bonus action doesn’t apply. The rule for that bonus action applies only to itself, not to any other use of two or more weapons in the game.”
That means that if you have the extra attack feature, you’re free to attack once with a single weapon you’re holding and then draw a second weapon to make your second attack with it.
Well, that saves half my sales pitch. Oh well.
thanks for the clarification.
So, being raised from the dead now makes you lose one level of exhaustion.
I guess clerics are going to kill those who have more than one exhaustion and instantly revivify them instead of using greater restoration.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
So... does this "unarmed strikes are not weapons" statement get any reactions? I feel like I remember there being a number of different threads going back and forth on that with different features...
Doubt it. It's faster and cheaper to spend the 100 gp to use Greater Restoration than it is to kill somebody and spend 300 gp to revivify.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
Unarmed strikes have never been weapons. That’s not anything new. What’s new is the idea that Divine Smite requires an attack with a weapon, which is absolutely not what the text says (the text says melee weapon attack, which unarmed strikes explicitly are). I expect this one to cause some annoyance.
This would seem to go against combining the Feature with Keen Mind to cyclically remember then study so you can remember again any object you've seen. Unless, every time, you take the necessary time to study every detail, within the duration of Minor Conjuration.
I'm a little torn on this one. Obviously the intent is to prevent the Familiar from also being a Bag of Holding, but that can also be artificially limiting should you intend to really bond with your Familiar, and start equipping it. If you make some form of Armor for it, the Armor will be dropped when it vanishes. Same thing for a Spell Storing Item.
I personally allow a familiar to take any items it is attuned to with it into its pocket dimension, but I agree that it shouldn't be allowed to take other things for the sake of avoiding abuse.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
A bit inaccurate. The Divine Smite text: "Starting at 2nd level, when you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend one spell slot to deal radiant damage to the target, in addition to the weapon’s damage. " - The text does state it is using a weapon. Unarmed strikes do count as weapon attacks but they do not count as weapons. I houserule otherwise because it's utterly nonsensical the "divine power" gives a shit what you attack with, but just clarifying the Sage Advice is correct RAW.
This Sage Advice is only if you are trying to conjure something you haven't fully seen like the text in a book you have not yet read. If you have read the book and seen all the text, then you can conjure the full book - text included. You don't need to study the object again and it's not based on memory. RAW requires only that you have seen the object before (and there's no time-limit on how long ago). If you've seen it, you can conjure it as you saw it, regardless of whether you specifically remember the fine details.
The purpose of this bit of Sage Advice was to ensure people don't abuse the feature - such as glimpsing the cover of the enemy wizard's spellbook and then being able to conjure it later with all spells included.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
They contradict themselves on th Paladin Unarmed Smite thing....
Monk Section:
Can a monk use Stunning Strike with an unarmed strike, even though unarmed strikes aren’t weapons? Yes. Stunning Strike works with melee weapon attacks, and an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack. The game often makes exceptions to general rules, and this is an important exception: that unarmed strikes count as melee weapon attacks despite not being weapons.
Okay so Unarmed strikes is a special type of MELEE WEAPON ATTACK
Paladin Divine smite feature:
Divine Smite
Starting at 2nd level, when you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend one spell slot to deal radiant damage to the target, in addition to the weapon’s damage. The extra damage is 2d8 for a 1st-level spell slot, plus 1d8 for each spell level higher than 1st, to a maximum of 5d8. The damage increases by 1d8 if the target is an undead or a fiend, to a maximum of 6d8.
it says it right there.... Melee Weapon Attack...now if it said "when you hit a creature with a melee attack with a weapon" there wouldn't be this argument but they say melee weapon attack...which they already said unarmed strikes are....soooooooo how is it suddenly invalid?
And then they double down!!
What does “melee weapon attack” mean: a melee attack with a weapon or an attack with a melee weapon? It means a melee attack with a weapon. Similarly, “ranged weapon attack” means a ranged attack with a weapon. Some attacks count as a melee or ranged weapon attack even if a weapon isn’t involved, as specified in the text of those attacks. For example, an unarmed strike counts as a melee weapon attack, even though the attacker’s body isn’t considered a weapon. Here’s a bit of wording minutia: we would write “melee-weapon attack” (with a hyphen) if we meant an attack with a melee weapon.
I just covered this. The Divine Smite text literally says "the weapon's damage". Not in addition to the weapon attack damage. In addition to the weapon's damage. They are not contradicting themselves, you just haven't read the Divine Smite text properly.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
The Divine Smite text literally says “when you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack.” That is the trigger. That it later refers to “the weapon’s damage” doesn’t retroactively establish a different trigger. It suggests that the intent is that it require a weapon, but it doesn’t change the fact that “an attack with a weapon” is not the trigger.
Ok....so Monk unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack while Paladin's isn't. Does it mean Monk-Paladin multiclass can use Divine Smite when they hit using an unarmed strike?
Also, some racial natural weapons such as Aarakocra's Talons are both unarmed strikes and weapon attack..... =,=|||