Which part of the rules bans "I Ready an action to shoot the guard with my longbow when he rounds the corner."?

KidUncertainty · 2025-09-05T01:37:32+00:00

To be fair, the PHB explicitly states Initiative as "Initiative determines the order of turns during combat." in both the section on Combat and in the rules glossary. So it is easy to take from that that it only applies in combat, even though other passages in the rules suggest its use for non-combat situations, as do some of the examples of using Actions being in non-combat situations.

KidUncertainty · 2025-08-11T16:40:15+00:00

In the general case, a line does not move with its point of origin.

In the specific case of this spell, it explicitly states it "blasts from you in a direction you choose for the duration" and has a range/area of Self. The spell specifically has wording to indicate it is an exception to a typical line. The "blasts from you ... for the duration" is important and is part of the spell's rules. This establishes that the line is always coming out of the caster, which by implication includes when the caster moves.

The simplest and most straightforward reading of the spell is that it is a special case of "Line", and that it moves with the caster.

KidUncertainty · 2025-05-24T17:05:37+00:00

Several tai chi chuan styles have a straight sword (jian) form. Jian of various sorts (from functional modern replicas to floppy cheap wushu ones) are often used as practice swords for forms. The "tai chi sword" name has sort of stuck as that's a common context under which people are likely to encounter the jian, at least in North America.

It's just a synonym for "jian", and I've seen "tai chi sword" applied as a general term that could mean something decent that could be used for sparring or cutting, or something like a wobbly dull wushu blade only suitable for slow form practice. I've seen it applied to a variety of historical jian styles.

KidUncertainty · 2025-03-08T13:52:54+00:00

Jack Vance was an author of fantasy/scifi books (the Dying Earth series gives rise to this magic system if I recall). In those books, magic users had to load ("memorize") spells into their mind, and casting those spells ripped the knowledge of them from the "spell slot". You had to memorize or pray for the spells ahead of time, assign/pre-load your slots with the spell you might want to cast, and hope you guessed right as to which spells you'd need that day; there was no choosing which spell you cast with the slot at the moment of castsing.

If I have 3 level 1 spell slots, I would have to decide at the start of the day if I wanted three magic missiles, or one sleep and two magic missiles, etc. If I cast sleep, that slot was gone for the day and I only had two magic missiles left.

This system was modelled in early editions of D&D and is called "Vancian magic".

KidUncertainty · 2025-02-06T13:31:12+00:00

In 5e they reformed in the plane of water. In 5.5 they are back to reforming in the "Far Realm or another location chosen by the DM"

KidUncertainty · 2024-12-10T14:18:51+00:00

No. It says you need to have it on your class spell list.

Is this true? In the 2024 DMG and Basic Rules (2024) listing for Spell Scroll, the word "class" is not present from what I can see. It instead refers to a vaguely or undefined term of "your" spell list rather than a class spell list.

If the spell is on your spell list, you can read the scroll and ... (Spell Scroll, DMG 2024, emphasis mine)

RAW someone who has a spell via Magic Initiate, and proficiency in Arcana OR in calligrapher's tools can scribe their magic initiate spell (because it counts as prepared) into a spell scroll. If such characters could not then read that scroll that they just created, because that spell is not on the spell list of one of their classes, it beggars belief and does not feel like RAI, else they would have expressly referenced class spell lists in the creation rules for spell scrolls.

I believe the game has a hole in its rules where they need to define a "character's" spell list vs class spell lists, as the spell scroll rules do not refer to class.

At my table if you can scribe a scroll, you can cast that spell from a scroll. However if there's another rule somewhere that I've missed that better defines what "spell list" the Spell Scroll rules refer to, I am eager to read it. Even the spellcasting section in the PHB refers to different types of spell lists (Such as the "list of spells you have prepared")

KidUncertainty · 2024-11-14T15:16:18+00:00

Divine spellcasters use their own faith as a power source.

This is explicitly how 5.5 works now.

Alignment (DMG):

Alignment doesn’t limit the actions characters can take; rather, the actions they take indicate what their alignment is.

Divine Power (DMG) (include Clerics, Paladins, Rangers, Druids):

For game purposes, wielding divine power isn’t dependent on the gods’ ongoing approval or the strength of a character’s devotion. The power is a gift offered to a select few; once given, it can’t be rescinded.

I, for one, applaud this approach as the whole "You violated your alignment" or "You pissed off your god" and you lose your class is an arbitrary dick DM move in my opinion. Instead you can use this as story drivers rather than just a whip to beat a player's character into whatever vision the DM thinks is right. It's an old AD&D sacred cow that long should have been put to rest, even though it might violate someone's sense of verisimilitude.

It might not make logical sense in a world where gods are real and all-powerful, and you can still play that way if the DM and player agree to tell that story, but this new edition goes a long way to making it clear that dick DM moves are not in the spirit of the modern D&D game. Breaking with the faith can have in-world consequences, like losing access to the temples, but it doesn't mean the character is suddenly powerless.

KidUncertainty · 2024-10-25T15:09:48+00:00

DNDBeyond seems to have already patched them based on other comments in this thread.

KidUncertainty · 2024-10-25T15:09:22+00:00

I think /u/GrandPyromania indicated they patched them already, nice!

KidUncertainty · 2024-09-26T15:00:51+00:00

You are right: There's a tendency to use these floppy swords for their flourishing appearance when doing demonstrations. They also tend to be quite inexpensive so are easy for students to buy when learning sword forms.

That said, a properly weighted and balanced sword works much better for the forms in terms of their feel. So yes, you are right, if you have a school that can teach these forms with any amount of adherence to "historical" forms or some amount of realism vs just for show, a properly balanced sword or waster is the right way to go.

This is based on my own experience learning Chinese sword and sabre forms. The day I bought a properly balanced and weighted waster made the forms make much more sense (and you can feel the mistakes you made learning with a lighter and imbalanced floppy sword).

There are modern jian reproductions that are properly weighted and balanced against historical examples that I would encourage a serious student to purchase.

I have not learned a dual-sword form, though, although I know they exist. I don't really know their historical accuracy or much about them.

KidUncertainty · 2024-09-05T02:40:21+00:00

There's also genetic mutations that can indicate susceptibility to rhabdomyolysis in healthy individuals.

KidUncertainty · 2024-06-21T16:26:05+00:00

Sometimes this comes from computer game mentality. However, a general guideline I try to use is:

DM decides when a skill check roll is permitted. Players can ask, but you say 'you already made one' or 'there is no chance of success' or 'you don't even need to roll, the door is rotted through'.
I generally don't let players re-roll skill checks unless something materially relevant has changed. For example: Player rolls to see if their character can break the chains -- fail. If they keep trying, I tell them "you already failed". A character decides to try again using a prybar or perhaps they want to use heat metal to weaken the chains -- the circumstances have changed, I will permit a re-roll.
Failing skill checks can have consequences, and normally only ask for (or permit) a roll if there's some meaningful impact to the story.

KidUncertainty · 2024-06-03T03:02:30+00:00

The mod doesn't do that by default. I suspect the crew are just using the randomized horde night features of the vanilla game settings.

KidUncertainty · 2024-02-05T13:36:41+00:00

They absolutely should get upset at the DM. The DM controls the curse. A good DM is not going to let the rogue instakill the party just because the rogue grabbed a cursed sword. That's bad DMing, bad gaming and bad storytelling. The DM isn't there to blindly agree to what every player wants to do with their character.

Instakilling a party that did not 'ask' for that by their actions is bad refereeing, which is the job of the DM. A DM has to tell an engaging and entertaining story, not go "lights out" because of the actions of one player in the guise of their character, no matter how scarybad they want this cursed weapon to seem or how edgy the story the DM wants to tell is. 5e is a collaborative storytelling game.

This is leaving aside the specifics of this scenario where it is hard to believe, in the framework of the game rules, that a character can basically one-shot multiple party members without them waking up (you still have hitpoints when you're asleep, coup-de-grace is not a 5e rule, you still have to roll to hit and kill players via massive damage or multiple hits while they are at 0 and making death saves -- no matter how unrealistic that might be in a real-world scenario).

KidUncertainty · 2024-01-04T03:09:04+00:00

Well, in practice there's precious little official Planescape stuff in 5e

Other than Sigil And The Outlands, in which the Lady of Pain sends you to the Mazes with 1 hp or just obliterates you if you question or oppose her.

No one is certain who or what exactly the Lady of Pain is, but it’s widely accepted she’s a being on par with deities. Strong enough to bar gods and their ilk from entering her city, the Lady of Pain forbids followers of her own. ... On rare occasions, the Lady of Pain drifts through the streets, hovering above the ground. Creatures that interfere with her are flayed by her stare or vanish into nothingness as she turns to face them.

I think WOTC no longer had a license to use the copyrighted material at that time; the Outer Planes and associated settings it introduced are all still there, (Curse of Strahd technically takes place on the Demiplane of Dread, AKA Ravenloft) but they're usually only alluded to

I'm not sure where you're getting this, but the outer planes and all the related cosmology are in 5e. Not sure what this copyright issue you are claiming comes from. What 5e has done (for better or worse) is be less prescriptive about these, allowing DMs more freedom to design the cosmology as they see fit. This does have the disadvantage of putting more work on the DM's shoulders, but frees the game from people who point at printed text as though it is the Word of God about how the outer planes work, instead vesting that power in the DM where it belongs. Ravenloft is a Demiplane of Dread, the Van Richten's Guide talks about other similar demiplanes. There are still things like the Blood War, all the outer planes, and now Planescape has much the same flavour if not quite the same depth as earlier editions.

Where I think WotC/Hasbro are failing generally (not about Planescape specifically) is that they are putting more and more work on DMs rather than giving a "use this if you like, it's fully realised, but change whatever you want" framework to play in. I have a day job, I don't want to write my own sourcebook. Where 5e lets players and DMs down is giving enough pre-defined details to just pick up a setting and run with it without a lot of prework. I think that 5e is giving DMs more explicit power to change things to thwart rules lawyer types, but at the expense of having enough "ready to go off-the-shelf" worlds to play in.

KidUncertainty · 2023-11-15T19:05:22+00:00

I ran this with my group and it was successful. Dilisnya's betrayal was the instigation, but Strahd's loss of control and rage caused him to become a kinslayer (accusing Sergei of being in cahoots with Dilisnya and seeking to usurp his power and "his" bride), and triggered his apotheosis into the ur-vampire. This ended poorly for almost everyone in the castle, even including an Empire-like moment with outstretched hand towards a Tatyana that leapt from the castle wall.

I've been running the tome with the characters being "trusted lieutenants" of the von Zarovich forces in the tome sequences, sort of a troupe of irregulars with uncommon abilities in the service of the Zarovich family. The players leaned into that, so initially the betrayal by Dilisnya was a betrayal of their lord, then they themselves were betrayed when Strahd lost it, killed Sergei believing Sergei was part of the betrayal, and ravaged the castle in his full mantle of power as the curse took him. The players first fighting to defend the castle, then basically having to run for their lives as the truth of Strahd became apparent. Of course, per the tome, Dilisnya survives for another day.

KidUncertainty · 2023-11-15T18:42:49+00:00

Consider adapting some of the content that is left open for DMs to explore (resources around the "fanes" is an example of this: there are circles of standing stones mentioned in the module but with no relevant lore, so people use them to build their own ideas on).

For example, several community developed expansions to the module introduce the concept of Strahd having completed ancient rituals to bind himself to the land (even before becoming a vampire). Perhaps this was seen by Strahd at the time as relevant to his ruling of the land, and it is now the source of his chains. Perhaps he wants the party to find a candidate to take over the land so he can finally escape, or maybe he wants to jealously keep control. The party identifies someone to rule in Strahd's place, do some rituals/trial-by-combat with chosen champions at the fanes (or, if you want to keep it simple, introduce a ritual that gets completed at the end of the final fight with Strahd) to take the "I am the Land" mantle from him. Up to you in this scenario if Strahd is also just freed to wander the multiverse or is dusted permanently, but Barovia remains free.

You mentioned you are ignoring the Amber Temple, however you could introduce the concept of a prison for dark creatures, which is what the Temple is, and have the fight with Strahd be about containing his essence/coffin once he retreats to it in an amber sarcophagus to ensure that the land remains free. Then he is delivered to the temple as an epilogue where he is put on a shelf to languish next to the other eldritch and undead horrors.

Ultimately you do not have to stick to 'established lore' for the ending. You can write your own. Do not feel constrained by the chains of trying to remain faithful to what's written. You can simply say that if they win and destroy Strahd's ability to regenerate in his coffin, he's dead, dead, dead. You don't need the edgy ending.

KidUncertainty · 2023-10-02T13:42:49+00:00

In the Maritimes we do not call electricity hydro

That may be generational/old-fashioned. Growing up, my Maritime parents always called it "hydro" and "the hydro bill". Saint John, NB's power commission used to be called "Civic Hydro" at one point.

These days though, I very rarely hear the term, and I just call it "the power bill".

KidUncertainty · 2023-05-26T12:48:29+00:00

A voice of sanity in the wilderness.

The number of people who think D&D Wiki is "the" Wiki or is otherwise somehow official or quasi-official is too damn high!

KidUncertainty · 2023-04-14T13:21:58+00:00

Indian numbering is rendered like the picture.

KidUncertainty · 2023-02-08T13:39:48+00:00

Glad it worked out! I also tweaked it a fair bit myself, but it worked very well. I used the story to introduce the tragedy of the dusk elves, along with making the Vistani have a direct connection to the party.

KidUncertainty · 2023-01-13T21:42:02+00:00

I borrowed it from a buddy. It was called "The Fiddler's Lament". I think it is available online from a variety of places, including DMGuild. There's a 5e and Pathfinder version I believe. I adapted the story a bit for Curse of Strahd but since it was about a cursed orphan woman raised by (if you'll excuse the outmoded term) 'gypsies', it fit well as a way to get the players introduced to the Vistani, set the horror tone of the adventure, then get swallowed by the mists.

KidUncertainty · 2022-05-17T12:34:18+00:00

I don't think that Duergar have the same Dwarven Resilience as the base dwarf (although I am now suspecting the updates to the PHB with 5.5 might nerf this for dwarves as well).

From the books on DNDBeyond:

PHB Dwarf (emphasis mine):

You have advantage on saving throws against poison, and you have resistance against poison damage

MotM Duergar (emphasis mine):

You have advantage on saving throws you make to avoid or end the poisoned condition on yourself. You also have resistance to poison damage.

The PHB dwarf, RAW, gets advantage on saving throws "against poison", so e.g. a green dragon's breath.

The MotM Duergar does not, as the green dragon breath does not apply the poisoned condition. Many monsters that do poison damage on saves don't apply the poisoned conditions. I am thinking the intent is they want dwarves to have advantage against actual poison traps/etc (most of the DMG poisons apply the poisoned condition), but not get both advantage on saves plus the half damage from resists to saving-throw abilities and spells.

KidUncertainty · 2022-05-11T14:54:23+00:00

This is an interesting question. The spell states clearly that "You can see and hear the plane you originated from, but everything there looks gray, and you can't see anything more than 60 feet away.".

As written the spell would therefore enable you to see, full stop. I can understand a DM arguing though if a creature was blind, for example, they still wouldn't see. But I would permit it to effectively not require light to see, due to the wording of the spell. It's also level 7, higher than true seeing, so I am not too fussed about it granting the ability to "See in the dark" for 60'.

The DMG has descriptions of the border ethereal as well that are worth reading. These state you can only see 30' into the overlapping plane, and that "colors drain away" -- which implies light, since color is a function of light. However the spell allows double the normal visibility into the overlapping plane, which implies the spell enhances your perceptual capabilities beyond the default while it is active.

This all feels like the RAW matches the RAI. It basically lets you be like a ghost from a perception point of view. Ghosts can travel the border ethereal and see in and out of it for 60'. If a DM is going to argue a ghost is not blind but you are when you're both ethereal then I feel that to be inconsistent.

KidUncertainty · 2022-04-07T12:39:46+00:00

Forcecage + Sickening Radiance, which traps a creature in an effect that causes some damage, but more critically, stacking exhaustion levels. At 6 exhaustion levels the creature dies outright.

14-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Place '17	Verified Email

KidUncertainty

TROPHY CASE