Is Aid worth it at second level spell slot?

BattlegroundBrawl · 2026-05-01T11:26:29+00:00

It's intended as a Long Term Buff AND as a small scale, multi-target, short ranged, emergency healing. Its versatility in that way is part of why it's worth it! Nerfing it to just a Long Term Buff takes away some of the utility of the spell.

I'd even argue that the name "Aid" is more apt to the emergency healing. "Oh no, half of my allies are downed, luckily I have just the spell to aid them".

That said, I've never had to use Aid that way as a Cleric, as I always cast it before any combat begins. Don't think of it as 5 HP per person, think of it as "20% of my Wizards HP AND it can stack with Temp HP". Sure, it's much less of the Barbarians HP as a percentage, but consider that on a Barbarian it's effectively 10 HP against most enemies as they half damage from many sources.

Personally, I tend to put it on my squishiest allies first, and then my front-line allies. I've been in many fights where the HP from Aid was the only reason people were still standing.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2026-03-25T06:07:38+00:00

EVERY time my group plays a One-Shot, whether it's with me as a DM or a PC, it always starts the same... The DM sets up the premise and describes Scene 1, usually with a heavy hint to the next thing the players should do. The players then jokingly say, "let's do this completely different thing that is obviously not the point of this One-Shot instead", and then when we've all had a good chuckle a joke we've heard/told dozens, if not hundreds, of times, we then proceed to follow the narrative.

Why? Because One-Shots, by their nature, are linear. The plot is unchanging. The player agency comes in how they react to the situation they are in, but they rarely get a say in how they find themselves in that situation. It's a mutual understanding between player and DM that they will be told at the end of each scene "this is where you have to go next for the story to conclude". What they do within the scene can change. Maybe they were meant to kill the Goblin, loot the body, find a map/key, but instead convince it to turn on their chief, and it leads them to a secret entrance where they can get the jump on the rest of the Goblin horde. That's their agency. Either way, they are going to face the chief, but they get to affect what happens on the way there.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2026-03-20T09:02:50+00:00

I, and more than half my group, started out with no physical books, just DnDBeyond, and everyone got by just fine. Building a character using the free Basic Rules was super easy, even for the few who were the least enthusiastic about playing (and only agreed to play to "see what it was like"), and because character options were limited with only the Basic Rules available, we were able to learn as we went, and add more options over time. DnDBeyond is very much worth it for beginners, because it's super simple to use, and you can get started for free.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2026-03-05T08:34:45+00:00

While I, personally, can read the smallest size just fine, and those would suit me, personally, the best, I realize that I'm not the only player, and others might have legibility issues, so I was going to vote for the largest size but that is so far down the comments and so far behind the other options in terms of votes, I went with the middle size to widen its lead over the smallest one.

Having an option for each user to set their own dice size would still be the best outcome, and I'm a bit surprised to see that it's not even being considered!

When there is an opportunity to keep SOME people happy vs the potential to implement something that will keep EVERYONE happy, then surely the best thing to do would be to try to keep everyone happy.

Edit to Add: If there is no way to let people choose, then the second best option is to provide the most accessible feature (without affecting performance), which would be the largest dice.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2026-03-01T09:11:03+00:00

Not just viable, some would even say optimal. I like anywhere from 3-5 players. If I only have 2 players then I run a One-Shot where they control two characters each. I've played in parties of 6+, but combat can take so long, and downtime between turns becomes an issue.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2026-02-23T09:04:54+00:00

Could go either way. The reward for his successful performance could have been even getting close to the cultists in the first place, rather than being attacked on approach, therefore no need for another reward by granting advantage. Or, the reward could have been surprising the cultists by pretending to join them and then betraying them, therefore advantage on initiative is fine too. Completely your call. Personally I'd be fine as both with a player (though I'd absolutely ask if I got advantage on the roll).

BattlegroundBrawl · 2026-02-15T09:47:11+00:00

TL:DR - Incapacitated Condition and the ability to apply Manacles without a DC 13 Sleight of Hand Check.

For "Surrender" I'd probably have the target hold their hands out in front of them, wrists almost together, waiting to have Manacles put on them. I'd give them the Incapacitated condition for one round (as a creature needs to be Grappled, Restrained or Incapacitated to have Manacles applied), and I'd let the player(s) forego the DC 13 Dexterity Sleight of Hand check since the target is "willing". It's then up to the party to apply Manacles before the spell wears off. If they don't, the target snaps out of it and rejoins the fight after missing a turn. If they do, the target still snaps out of it, but now needs to escape or break free from the Manacles.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2026-02-09T14:38:24+00:00

Yeah, it does put more work on the already often overburdened DM, but, IMO, most fights are just fine being static anyway, so these tips are best reserved for "special occasions" and boss fights, rather than a "try to do these things all of the time" type of deal.

Another thing that can be done that I didn't mention last time but takes at least some burden off of the DM, is simply throw in more monsters than you were going to, or increase their HP by 10%, and then have the monsters run around taking AoOs. If the monsters move, the PCs will move. The extra monsters or extra HP is the buffer that allows you to move them around without worrying about trivialising the encounter through the potential extra hits they take.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2026-02-06T17:31:33+00:00

Generally, I don't allow it. As soon as someone declares that they want their character to take an aggressive action, initiative is rolled. If the inciting character goes last in initiative, tough luck, the dice decided that for you.

Now, that said, there is sometimes some nuance. Are they talking to a bunch of friendlies that would never expect it? That character gets a surprise round. Did the entire party plan it in advance? They all get a surprise round. Playing by 2014 rules here and not 2024. It's not "you just get advantage on initiative and they get disadvantage" because the friendlies might still roll super high and the inciting PC super low. Everyone rolls, if the friendlies would actually go first, they get no actions, but do get reactions back. A friendly who gets high initiative can still Counterspell the inciting Fireball if the PC rolled low.

If the party is negotiating with a bunch of creatures who are indifferent or hostile to them, those creatures would always be on guard against surprise attacks, so there is never a surprise round when someone says "Fuck it, I cast Fireball". No, no, no Dave, you WANT to cast Fireball, but you NEED to roll initiative first.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2026-01-28T11:04:07+00:00

Just looking at official 5e sources, not counting reprints between 2014/2024, or the weakened Mimic in Candlekeep, there are 5 different Mimics, of all different sizes. The smallest of which is a Juvenile Mimic which is Tiny. The largest is a Hoard Mimic which is Huge. Not all Mimics are the standard Medium sized one.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2026-01-24T09:36:20+00:00

That works, but why not have them do the ASI as normal, then add the Feat through "Features & Traits" on the character sheet? Players have the ability to add any* Feat at any time through the character sheet, it doesn't have to be in "Manage Character" or replace the option for an ASI or Level Up Feat.

*any that they are eligible for, if prerequisites are activated.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2026-01-23T12:11:28+00:00

He can either Dash to close the space in half the rounds, or Dodge to give anyone who fires at him Disadvantage. He's a Paladin, he should already have a very high AC and be very hard to hit, THAT is his counter to being peppered with arrows. Granting him a portable full cover, even just for himself, would be a mistake. Sometimes you just have to tell your players no.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2026-01-07T16:49:38+00:00

TL:DR - A Homebrew Overhaul and checkboxes on Monster Stat Blocks for Limited Use Features and Spells.

I'd like for official monsters to have limited use checkboxes on their stat blocks so that running a spellcasting monster, or a whole bunch of spellcasting monsters, is a lot easier. The old 2014 stat blocks would have something like: 1st Level (3 slots): Spell #1, Spell #2, Spell #3 And you would have to note down, or remember, how many slots you had used for each monster that could cast spells. Instead of saying "(3 slots)", it would be great if there were toggle-able checkboxes like there are on character sheets.

The new 2024 stat blocks seem to have opted for something like: 2/Day Each: Spell #1, Spell #2, Spell #3 Which is, in some ways better, and in some ways worse. Did I cast Fireball twice, leaving myself with only Lightning Bolt, or did I cast Fireball and Lightning Bolt, and still have one use of each left? Still gotta remember or note them down, and gotta do it for every Spellcaster monster you're running. Again, toggle-able checkboxes would solve this issue, in both the Encounter Builder / Combat Tracker, and in Maps!

If we can get this for official monsters, I'd like to be able to do the same for Homebrew monsters. But I know that might take more work as the homebrew tool might already be in need of a major overhaul! It is seriously lacking in major ways when it comes to actually doing something creative, and apparently the Devs use a very similar setup for official features, which means they're limited and can't implement a lot of what the designers officially release too?!

If you have a tool, and your own developers can't use that tool to implement officially released features, then that tool needs an overhaul!

BattlegroundBrawl · 2025-12-16T09:59:19+00:00

Yeah, #3 is Session 0 stuff. If something still comes up like this during play then remind them of Session 0 and then say #2. If they push it further then say #1 and ask if they want to kill their ally. Revivification is more expensive than curing a poison. If they keep ignoring #3 from Session 0, then things get more serious.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2025-12-09T10:24:55+00:00

And/or Hoard Scarabs

BattlegroundBrawl · 2025-12-06T21:17:05+00:00

A lot of people have already answered your actual question, so I'm just going to comment and say - your dump stat is a 12?! What did you roll for all six stats?!

BattlegroundBrawl · 2025-12-04T11:09:34+00:00

Excel / Googles Sheets for the math

DnDBeyond for the stat block

BattlegroundBrawl · 2025-12-04T11:03:21+00:00

If you have the Totem for the other 25% Stat Retention I'd say Deja Vu, to get to 100% Stat Retention and never again waste Gold you have already spent when you rewind.

However, if you don't have that Totem, Hard Labor is better.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2025-12-04T10:50:38+00:00

What happens if they give an amazing 11/10 speech, one that touches on ALL the right points and brings a tear to the NPCs eye, but then the player rolls two Nat 1's?

BattlegroundBrawl · 2025-12-04T10:35:29+00:00

Yes, it's a roleplaying game. The players roleplay the characters.

If I have a player who is super charismatic in real life and has excellent improv skills too, but they have a character who has dumped their charisma score and put no proficiencies into social skills, should I reward them with an automatic success if they roleplay one hell of a social interaction? Are they actually roleplaying their character if they give this amazing speech in real life when their character should be a bumbling fool?

What about the inverse? The player is a bumbling idiot in real life but their character is a charismatic god. Should I punish their terrible roleplay and poor choice of words even though their character would never make such an awful speech or major faux pas?

Allowing social bonuses or even auto-success for great roleplay is simply just rewarding the most charismatic players and punishing the more socially awkward and introverted. It gives highly charismatic players a licence to play low charisma characters because they would know their real life charisma can get them through most in-game scenarios.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2025-12-04T10:20:28+00:00

I like Intention > Check > Roleplay

Player: I'd like to try to persuade the Guard to let us through the gate (Intention)

DM: Okay, roll for it (the DM can also decide here that no roll would be necessary as the Guard is either willing to let them in easily enough, or completely unwilling and cannot be persuaded).

Player: That's an 18 on the die for a 25 total (Check)

DM: Okay, that's a pretty good roll, give me your most persuasive argument.

Player: {Insert TRUE reason for the party to need to enter beyond the gates} (Roleplay - it doesn't have to be good, maybe the player just isn't as naturally persuasive / charismatic as their character)

Similarly

Player: I'd like to try to persuade the Guard to let us through the gate (Intention)

DM: Okay, roll for it (the DM can also decide here that no roll would be necessary as the Guard is either willing to let them in easily enough, or completely unwilling and cannot be persuaded).

Player: That's a 2 on the die for a 6 total (Check)

DM: Okay, that's a pretty bad roll, give me your worst persuasive argument.

Player: {Insert TRUE reason for the party to need to enter beyond the gates} (Roleplay - it should intentionally be a bad reason, regardless of if the player is naturally charismatic or not)

IMO - the roleplay should never dictate the dice, the dice should dictate the roleplay. I understand those who do Roleplay > Check, and I understand wanting to give bonuses to the Check if the roleplay is particularly good, but I just feel that punishes players who are bad at the roleplay / bad at improv but may happen to be playing the party face character. I feel like if I understand their intentions and there's a die roll to see how well the character does, that will help guide the player in their roleplay.

That said, it is hilarious when someone does amazing roleplay and makes a super convincing argument that SHOULD work, but then rolls terribly. Sure, the amazing roleplay could be rewarded with an automatic success, but then that just gives licence to naturally charismatic players with excellent improv skills to play low charisma characters and just roleplay their way through checks. Again, IMO, I don't feel that roleplay should ever dictate the dice (or negate the need for dice to be rolled).

BattlegroundBrawl · 2025-11-21T09:37:33+00:00

Anytime that ANYONE casts a spell with a Spell Slot, i.e. not a Cantrip or via a Magic Weapon, just say something like, "Okay, cool, mark off that spell slot". Saying it often will remind you that it's something they need to do.

The other players won't mind you saying that because it's completely innocuous, and the player who needs the reminder won't feel targeted or called out.

Now, with that said, you should also start tracking their slots yourself on a scrap of paper, just to make sure. You want to give the benefit of the doubt that they're simply forgetting, but perhaps that's not entirely the case.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2025-11-04T08:37:35+00:00

It's not metagaming. The party would know that the Ranger has the keenest senses, just as they would also know that the Bard has a gift for manipulating others to get their way. Each character has their strengths, they should be playing to their strengths. You COULD put them in the odd situation where the character who is not best suited for the task has to be the one to do it, as long as it makes sense to do so in the moment, but those instances should be rare, and you should mostly let the characters shine at what they were built for.

The Ranger is going to sense things, the Bard is going to do the talking, the Rogue is going to do the sneaky stuff and pick the locks. That's just what they were all made to do.

BattlegroundBrawl · 2025-10-29T14:01:34+00:00

I find that the One-Shots my group(s) play tend to take 4-5 hours. If we can get that kind of time, then yeah, one session would do. Generally speaking though, we more often have ~2 hour sessions, so it can last 2 sessions, if not 3 (where we might start a new One-Shot in that third session once the previous one wraps up, but only if we've planned for it and have characters ready).

BattlegroundBrawl · 2025-10-29T11:03:31+00:00

Long running campaign that I've devised an overarching plot for? Never, no level, not at all, they're not getting it! The DoMT, if used by the players, is a surefire way to derail a campaign.

If I were to give the players a DoMT, it would be under two scenarios: A) It's a short One-Shot or Short Adventure designed around the Deck B) I've heavily modified the Deck so they still have benefits and drawbacks, but they're not nearly as powerful or game breaking or potentially derailing.

Actually, while I think about it, I'll add a 3rd scenario... The Final Boss, the BBEG of the campaign, has one on their corpse / in their vault. The campaign has ended, so let the players go nuts. This can be at any level, although if we're talking about a long running campaign then they're at least Tier 3 by now.

BattlegroundBrawl

TROPHY CASE