-
- petepan3
- Registered Users
-
Member for 5 years
Last active Fri, Aug, 7 2026 16:52:55
- 0 Followers
- 326 Total Posts
- 191 Thanks
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
0
Agree with the first sentence.
The second sentence I don't feel is truly accurate. There are several ways to get the Invisible condition in the game, it is not limited to only taking the Hide [Action]. A creature can have the Invisible condition without attempting to hide; and just because there is a scenario where a creature could achieve a goal because they were invisible doesn't mean it is guaranteed to be repeated if they take the Hide [Action] because there could be other considerations or requirements that need to be met. There are examples and questions brought up in this thread discussing how and when the Invisible condition ends when granted by the Hide [Action]; in several of those examples, if the Invisible condition was granted by a different game effect, it would not end in the situation because the character would still meet the requirements to have the condition. This is what I meant, that we do not consider that the Hide [Action] is always a requirement when discussing a character attempting activities while being invisible.
No. Absolutely not. I was listing the in game benefits that a character gains from being unseen. One of them literally states the creature is immune to effects that require them to be seen. This is because they are unseen. What about my statement implies "being unseen grants benefits that do not actually include literally being unseen". Again, the first benefit listed is an immunity to effects that requires the creature to be seen; this is because the creature cannot be seen.
Detection is not limited to just being seen. It is possible that a character can know if the presence of, even know the location of, another creature but cannot see the creature. Being unseen (the Invisible condition) does not impose any penalties to the perception checks. Taking the Hide [Action] is a straight up stealth check; which is common throughout the game. "The Invisible condition doesn't aid in avoiding detection" is in references tot he fact that the condition doesn't apply something like +X bonus the characters DC to be found or requires a creature to first succeed on a perception check prior to attempting an attack roll agains the invisible creature.
So the first reference you provide states:
1) For a creature to hide it must take the Hide [Action] (which is logical; and no arguments here)
2) It states that it is common for creatures to hide and provides narrative examples when a creature would attempt to hide. The statement does not change how the Hide [Action] works in the game. The action doesn't increase you perception on ability checks when attempting to spy. The action doesn't increase your stealth check when trying to move past a guard. The action does help with attempting an ambush. This statement also doesn't say that hiding is required to attempt these actions. It just lists narrative examples in the game when a creature may opt to attempt to hide. I am discussing how the mechanics of the action work in game.
The second citation makes sense, and no challenge here and I don't think any posts have said otherwise.
0
The Empowered spell feature applies to the damage rolls for a spell; not the damage rolls for an attack. While there maybe multiple attack rolls to hit, a creature only casts Chromatic Orb or Scorching Ray once, therefore they can uses the Empowered spell to reroll any damage die resulting from that casting. Furthermore, the character can only use Empowered spell once per casting.
0
The Hide [Action] and the Invisible condition are not synonymous. We need to keep on point and ensure we are talking about the correct things.
The Invisible condition doesn't aid in avoiding detection. The rules state a creature can attack another creature that is invisible. And the condition does not provide any benefits to the character making a stealth check or penalties to a creature making a perception check to find the creature. The benefits to being concealed or unseen are: 1) a creature isn't affected by any effect that requires its target to be seen and 2) Attack rolls against the creature have Disadvantage, and the creature's attack rolls have Advantage.
The perception check made by a searching creature is a regular ability check. If successful, the Hide [Action] ends (thus ending the Invisible condition that was granted by action). The perception check is made to counter the Hide [Action]; and if the creature fails the perception check the creature can still attack the character that is hidden. Failing the perception check has no bearing on if the creature knows the character is present or hinders a creature from taking actions that are directed toward the character (with the exception of actions that require a target to be seen).
The intended function of the Hide [Action] is for a character to use obstructions to gain benefits to defenses against attacks and to gain benefits to making attacks. It provides no additional benefits to sneaking, avoiding detection, or deceiving characters. It comes down to the game situation to dictate if the failed perception check would result in a creature not being able to detect the character or just have difficulty with successfully attacking the character.
0
Based on how the Hide [Action] is written, none of these statements are accurate:
1) Is it the beginning of stealth, required to go sneaking about?
> No. There is nothing in the description that supports this. The character taking the action is required to make a Dexterity (Stealth) ability check and on a successful outcome they gain the Invisible condition. This condition doesn't provide any benefits to the character for making future stealth checks or provides benefits to the character's movement. Based on how the action's description is written; it is heavily implied that the character benefiting form the action will be stationary.
2) Is it a duck and cover maneuver used to avoid detection?
> The duck and cover maneuver provides a buff to the character taking the action. The Invisible condition provides three benefits: Surprise, Concealed, and Attacks Affected. These benefits do not aid the character in avoiding detection. Surprise gives Advantage on the Initiative roll. Concealed, and Attacks Affected offers defensive and offensive benefits. Nothing written helps the character to avoid detection.
3) Is it primarily a combat action, and not really intended for use outside of initiative?
> One of the benefits (Surprise) to action can only be gained when the action is taken outside of Initiative. It is fair to say that a character should be anticipating an Initiative moment; but taking the action before the Initiative roll is beneficial.
The Hide [Action] is not written (or intended) to help with sneaking around. As I stated before, it would be better to homebrew actions to meet the scenarios being discussed in the thread (or just call for Dexterity (Stealth) ability checks and rule accordingly). But the Hide [Action] is not intended to address many of the game scenarios being discussed her; and it is not essential to making Dexterity (Stealth) with respect to sneaking around or avoiding detection.
0
It really is just a "duck and cover" type of maneuver. The way the Hide [Action] is written in the rules, the only benefit to successfully taking the action is the Invisible condition. It is achieved by a character taking benefit from an area that is Heavily Obscured ,or provides Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover, and succeeding on DC 15 Dexterity (Stealth) ability check.
Outside of Initiative, successfully taking the action will set a character up to have Advantage on the initiative should it be required.
During combat, a character that finds Three-Quarters Cover and successfully takes the Hide [Action] gets a buff from the Concealed and Attacks Affected elements of the Invisible condition. But the action's benefits are limited to that and can they can end rather easily.
Successfully taking the Hide [Action] doesn't grant any other benefits. It can't be used to benefit movement, other ability checks, avoiding detection, trickery, etc. It is an action a character can take when they "duck and cover"; it is not a requirement for taking cover, but the action only applies extra benefits to a creature is taking a form cover (including benefiting from an area that's Heavily Obscured).
0
I think there is difference between the Hide [Action] of the game, and an event or scenario executed by a character that several posters are trying describe. For some of these scenarios, the game doesn't have a set of rules to preform them; and in some examples it sounds like a character would be required to make multiple actions in order to successfully pull off what a poster is describing.
For the game rules, the Hide [Action] is underwhelming as written. To successfully take the action, a character needs to make a DEX (Stealth) saving throw while benefiting from an area that obstructs the vision of the creatures the character is trying to hide from. If successful, the character gains the Invisible condition (which has no other relationship to the Hide [Action] and is the same condition that is awarded via other effects that provide a character invisibility). The value of the roll on the DEX (Stealth) ability check is also used as the DC for a creature find the character with a Wisdom (Perception) check. It is also implied that if the character loses the benefit of an area that obstructs a creature's vision then the character fails at the Hide [Action]; and thus loses the benefit of the Invisible condition.
The reason I say this action is underwhelming is if one looks at the requirements for the area that obstructs a creatures vision. The character needs to be:
1) Heavily Obscured
2) Behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover, and must be out of any enemy’s line of sight.
Now consider the benefits from the Invisible condition:
The Surprise feature is the only benefit that really applies to Heavily Obscured, Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover. The benefits of Concealed and Attacks Affected (with the exception of the "your attack rolls have Advantage" portion) are achieved or surpassed by benefiting form Heavily Obscured or Total Cover. The real benefit for taking the Hide [Action] is when in combat a character can find Three-Quarters Cover and has the action economy to take the Hide [Action]. Outside of that, the benefit is being hidden before an initiative roll.
So hiding is really limited to the action as summarized above. It sounds like the are players looking for the game to have an Avoidance [Action], Diversion [Action], and Distracted condition; but currently the game doesn't offer it. It might have to be homebrewed, and it would require some analysis of the game mechanics. But currently, the Hide [Action] is limited to just a "duck and cover" type of maneuver and there are no benefits from the action if a character wants to move or attempt some higher form of subterfuge.
2
1) Depends on the the firearm. Per the feat, the firearm needs to have the light property (which implies it is one handed). There may be firearms that have the heavy and two handed property. You need to check on the type of firearm the character is using and verify it meets the requirements of the feat.
2) It doesn't appear to be. The Palm Pistol has the light property.
3) No. You are allowed to make one attack. What it does mean, if the firearm can have two bullets then you can use this feature to attack on two separate rounds before having to reload the firearm.
4) Not every turn. The character can only do it when they are holding a loaded firearm with the light property. If the firearm is not loaded or lacks the light property, then they cannot use the feature. With that said, you are correct that there is no limit to the number of times per rest period. As long as the character meets the requirement for the firearm and one-handed weapon then the feature can be used.
0
Using the weapon to access the benefit from the property and having to use the weapon only as the extra attack to benefit from its property are different requirements. My comment was that your edit may only allow the latter to be true. This would mean a character cannot bonk a creature with a light hammer and then stab with a shortsword, and still benefit from the Nick property.
I would like to table "utilize the weapon" caveat for now (and will address that later on) and just focus on what the intent of the Nick property by design was to be. So for now, let's use the assumption that the rules will be clarified that they weapon must be used in order to benefit form the mastery property.
The way it is written today, the Nick property has several conditions that must be met that other weapon mastery properties do not have:
1) It is the only property that requires the character to access multiple weapons. If a character has access to only a single weapon then they cannot activate Nick.
2) The property can only be activated with the character taking the Attack action
3) The character must opt to make the extra attack of the Light property; and thus must meet all requirements of that condition
4) The property's activation is not dependent on the outcome of the attack roll (i.e. If you attack roll misses, if you hit, if you hit and deal damage are the criteria for the other properties thought they do clarify that the weapon must be used while determining the outcome). Instead, Nick modifies the character's action economy by allowing them to retain their Bonus Action if they opt to make the extra attack of the Light property.
5) By rule, it is the only mastery property that is limited to a weapon property. Future releases of D&D products could introduce new weapon types that can be assigned any one of the mastery properties; but a weapon must have the Light property in order to gain the Nick mastery property. This is true because the definition of Nick is that it activates when extra attack of the Light property is taken; which can only occur by a character is using two different weapons with the Light property.
6) It is the only weapon mastery property that requires a character to make two attack rolls to gain the property's benefits.
This mastery property is already very restricted in how it can be used. One point to continue to emphasize, in order to make the extra attack of the Light property one must first make an attack with a different weapon with the Light property (which all Nick mastery property weapons must have). So the Nick property can only be activated when a character makes two weapon attack roles using two different weapons with the Light property; and its benefit is that both attacks count towards character's Action. Based on this, I can see why this property's definition was worded as to not limit when the weapon was used during the character's turn; but rather that if the character is making the extra attack of the Light property and one of the weapons has the Nick mastery property then the extra attack is part of the Action and not Bonus Action. So that brings us back to the question, "Do the rules clearly state that the weapon must be used" to activate a Weapon Mastery Property ( In this case: Nick).
If additional clarification would be beneficial, then I recommend future proofing the rules as much as possible. Therefore, i wouldn't recommend editing Nick (leave it as is), instead I recommend editing the Mastery Properties section. Someone here can probably word it better than I can, but it should say something like this:
This change will protect any future releases that introduce new weapon mastery properties that are not dependent on hit or miss caveats, and will allow the Devs more freedom to write definitions without causing this confusion of weapon utilization. The exclusion of the "with this weapon" is clearly what is causing the debate, but I can see why it was left out of the Nick property, being it is the only property not dependent on the outcome of an attack (role). However, I feel additional wording and edits of the actual property definition might lead to additional debates or make the weapon property even more restricted. Especially since Nick is the only property that requires two weapon attacks; all that is needed is that rules clarify the weapon must be used by a character to activate its property, the outcome of the weapon's attack roll does not affect the property activation.
So unless if the order of attacks really matter, I prefer editing the Mastery Properties so it will future proof any additions and cover the current rules.
2
But that wording implies that Nick will only activate if the weapon is used for the extra attack. The current wording would attempt to suggest that the character gains this benefit if the weapon is used as the primary attack or extra attack.
0
I voted for "Your design goal determines how your PC grows, what features & feats you take, magic items are a bonus."
I feel as though items #1 and #2 are less viable over long campaigns. Maybe is small module this can work; but overall, I feel that 5e doesn't allow for a character to easily reinvent themselves if the campaign's direction shifts over time. For a simple example; the Bard and Sorcerer classes are limited in how they can adjust their spell selections. So a campaign may start off in an urban environment dealing with a mystery, a heist, murder, conspiracy to overthrow a political force, and highly organized criminal organizations. So as the campaign progresses, selecting spells to help with interrogation, sleuthing, and non-lethal solutions would be beneficial. But these decisions are based on past events; now what happens when the party discovers a clue that leads them through the Underdark and to a hidden citadel where a Lich instructs them on how to teleport to the realm of an Astral Dragon to obtain an artifact so that they can return home and defeat Orcus? Now these classes may be saddled with a bunch of spells that become less and less effective; maybe even so far as to the player just dumping the character and starting a new. I admit the example was hyperbolic, but the point for my concern is still valid in that as a player you do no know where the adventure is going but only where the adventure has been. Unless if I have assurances how the campaign is being bounded, I feel there are too many risks building a character to reflect adventure.
Instead, I look at how the character will support their party, their strategies for engaging in encounters, and to build on their attributes. This enables the character to have impact but leave the ability to adapt to flow of the adventure. I plan out the growth the of character but will reevaluate at different stages in the campaign's progression. Elements like the make up of the party and strategies can influence where I invest feature and feat progression with the character.
Regarding magical items; I don't place too much stock in them. First, the three (3) atunement limitation does a good job in capping character's growth. Then there are the factors of the GM having the final say on what items are available and that items can be "lost" based on campaign events. All of this leads to an unstable and undependable design of the character. I tend to build a separate strategy when it comes to magical items and try not to be overly dependent on them.
1
The restrictions apply when a character casts a spell. If a character is utilizing a feature or effect of a spell that had previously been cast, then they can still cast a spell provided they have the available action type required for casting the spell.
The player's tactic should be allowed.
2
It would be treated the same way the table treats accessing a material component. The spell lists the material component as
So however your table rules a spellcaster accessing a component pouch, focus, or just the raw material component for casting the spell. My interpretation would be that it is part casing the spell; no different than using a free hand to access the spell's material component. Now if you do not have a free hand then you cannot cast on that turn.
2
Approaching level 2 for my first run at a Sorcerer with the 2024 rules and am now evaluating what Metamagic options to consider. To caveat, the game I am in is using only features (classes, spells, etc) in the 2024 PBH and now DMG. The one exception is magic items might be homebrew or come from another source. So this evaluation of the Metamagic options should relate to 2024 rules and potential combination with features and feats, or with changes to how the game will now be played. I feel that Metamagic selections are dependent on the character's build design and game play philosophy as these should dictate the spells they take. So while an option's versatile may result in a higher rating, the character's prepared spells (and other characteristics) might suggest another Metamagic is a better fit.
I am looking for comments on how players rate each Metamagic feature under the 2024 ruleset. I am not looking for a ranking of 1 through 10; what I do want is a complied list of comments and evaluations of the options. Below I have my breakout, listing the options in Tiers and alphabetically from there. I appreciate any comments, advice, corrections, etc., including tips on the use of particular options (that aligns with the 2024 rules).
S Tier:
1) Quicken Spell: The improvement to a character's action economy cannot be understated. As a character progresses they might find better uses for their Bonus Action but at early stages this seems to be the one "Got To" option as the benefits are easily recognized. Something as simple as being able to cast a spell, and dodge or dash grants the character advantageous strategies. It is probably the most versatile out of all of the options in that it can be effectively applied to one of the largest list of sorcerer eligible spells, and the variety of game play and use of actions. I can't come up with scenario where one of my first two Metamagic selections isn't Quicken because I know of several instances where I will use it starting at 2nd level. And even if I swap it out at a high level based on the character's development, I still feel like it will always be one of the 6 selected options if the character gets to level 17.
A Tier:
1) Careful Spell: The 2024 wording really makes this option worth it; not only does the protected characters automatically succeed on the saving throw but they avoid taking damage as well. As powerful as this is, I leave it off the S Tier because the spells that benefit from this option I tend to take a later levels. I acknowledge this is my bias, but the fact is that many good spells cannot benefit from this option so its value is really based on the spell selection of the character. Another element I am not sure on is does this feature last for the duration of the spell or only at the time of casting. In other words, if a spell has lingering effect that requires creatures to continue making saving throws as long as they are in the area of effect; does a selected character continue to succeed? Or does this feature only apply to saving throws at the moment of casting (which begs the question; what if the save doesn't occur a time of casting but at the start of a protected creature's turn?)
Still, I feel it is a great option and once a caster's list incorporates eligible spells this option is an excellent choice.
2) Extended Spell: I am surprised to have this one here, but with the updated wording, it is really hard to pass on this one. Using this option will now grant you advantage on Concentration saving throws. That aspect alone is huge. Now if a character tends to be in combats that go over 10 rounds then applying this to some buff or utility based spells combined with advantage on Concentration saves can be a very powerful tactic to swing encounters in their party's favor. It still doesn't feel like an option at level 2 but I can see this being taken at a later level.
3) Heightened Spell: Very powerful and with the cost now at 2 sorcery points, its economy is fantastic. There is also the updated wording of "saves against the spell" which implies that it is no longer limited to just the first saving throw made against a spell. Probably most improved of the bunch (and it already was a very good option from 2014). The only thing keeping it from S Tier, for me, is similar with Careful Spell, is that it really based on the character's spell list build. No doubt if the caster's list is filled with "Save or Suck" selections then this is a must have option; but if you are focusing on being a spell sniper then you might not see the need to take this one. Overall, I think most sorcerers are going to see this as a beneficial and must have at some point.
4) Transmuted Spell: This option significantly increases your offensive arsenal. With a single expenditure of a sorcery point you can alter a spells damage type thus avoiding resistances or exploiting vulnerabilities. This helps a character with managing their prepared spells list. No longer do they need a diverse portfolio of spells with varying damage types in order be consistently effective from encounter to encounter. Other options might have have more powerful effects on the spell itself, but this option's inclusion can result in a making a more powerful sorcerer build. There was a slight nerf to this this feature which is attributed to the new cantrip Sorcerous Burst. This new cantrip provides a caster with a variety of damage options to select from, and without the high cost material component that is associated with the Chromatic Orb spell. But Sorcerous Burst is only a cantrip and targets a single foe thus making the potential need for this Metamagic option still very high. If you run into an encounter where a creature shows any form of resistance to a damage type, and you feel that may be a trend in the campaign, then this feature is essential by the time the character hits level 10.
B Tier:
1) Distance Spell: Perhaps I am ranking this one higher because I want the ability to turn the Chill Touch cantrip into a range attack again. With that said, there are a few spells who's effectiveness increases once you increase their range. Granted, many popular and powerful spells do not have a need for this metamagic option under most scenarios, but some lower level spells and cantrips have ranges that require squishy build casters to be closer to the combat then they desire to be. What works against this option is that it even if the character can counter the limitation of range of a spell, there is most likely other eligible spells that are more powerful and do not experience a range limitation to maximize their effect. I feel that this might be a good option for level 2 due to the spells available for selection but will be quickly replaced during level up (unless if the party sees a really cool benefit or strategy with a particular spell).
2) Empowered Spell: This is option will probably have the most use cases. The desire to reroll dice occurs multiple times per session and this feature can have frequent use starting at level 2. It is just this option doesn't have the same impact as the other options when it comes to breaking the game. What makes this feature worth considering is that level spells and cantrips cast above level 5 deal multiple die damage. Granted there are no guarantees but the rerolls come in handy especially when the same cost allows you reroll any number of die equal to your CHA modifier. This seems to be the default option to take when the direction of the character's build is still in development and debate; but ultimately the effectiveness of other options might knock this down the priority list, but it is still should end up with most sorcerers as they approach 4 and 6 total options.
3) Subtle Spell: On paper this sounds like an extremely awesome option. Both from a roleplaying standpoint and from a rules dynamic. The ability to avoid spell components (to a degree); the ability cast spells without giving away your position; the ability to cast a spell without the casting being noticed. All really cool. The effectiveness of this option comes down to how the rules of the game are enforced at a particular table and the campaign's tone. It is very easy that a particular game may not present the opportunities where this option needs to be utilized. And level 2 is probably too early to make that call. If the campaign evolves were the use of this option would often be beneficial then this becomes a must have.
C Tier:
1) Twinned Spell: I do not see a huge benefit here. This option is not game breaking and doesn't have the ability to really shake up an encounter. From an initial count, the number of eligible spells seems to be pretty low and there would be a decent effort to manage a build that would utilize this feature frequently. This option feels more like a nice to have but I am not sure it is even worth taking.
D Tier:
1) Seeking Spell: While this could probably get a good amount of use starting at level 2 there are other options in the game that can increase the success of an attack roll: Inspiration, Advantage, Buffing spells, etc. Also the frequent use of this option might imply a bigger issue that needs to be addressed with the character's build.
Right now, I am considering taking Quicken, and Transmuted or Distance. I think I want to experiment with the use of Distance spell, and then trade it offer once as the character reaches higher levels. Anyway, I appreciate any thoughts or comments. Thank you.
0
I am thinking of taking the Fey-Touched feat for a character build, and am debating between taking Hex and Hunter's Mark.
While I think Hex will be better thematically; Hunter's Mark appears to be the better options since it does Force damage. Regarding the other benefits, Hunter's Mark will help in finding creatures trying to hide, or escaping and running off. Now with several actions/effects requiring monsters to make a Saving Throw instead of an ability contest, does this confirm Hex is a weaker option in comparison? It has more versatility in that the caster can choose an ability; but I see this having more of a benefit outside of combat encounters.
Areas were I think Hex works as a benefit in combat:
1) DEX: Will give target disadvantage when trying to take the hide action in combat.
2) WIS: Will give target disadvantage on attempts to find characters that are hiding.
There are probable scenarios outside of combat where Hex could have come into play with the disadvantaged ability, and this might sway the spell in favor compared to Hunter's Mark, but I am not sure how often it will be useful in common game scenarios.
Any thoughts, guidance, tactical options would be appreciated. Is one a clear winner or are they both near equal under the right circumstances. Cheers!
0
When related to casting a spell, it is reasonable to conclude the "spell's level" equates to the "spell slot" that would be used to. This is supported by the text in Summon Aberration "Use the spell slot’s level for the spell’s level in the stat block."
This is more of a DM discussion and if they will allow upcasting with this feature (I believe it should be allowed based on how it is written); and your proposed cost for the slot appears to be valid.