This question is in relation to this earlier question.
The Epic Level Handbook’s Demilich has the ability Phylactery Transference, with the following effect:
Headbands, belts, rings, cloaks, and other wearable items kept in close association with the demilich’s phylactery transfer all their benefits to the demilich no matter how far apart the demilich and the phylactery are located. The standard limits on types of items utilized simultaneously still apply.
However, it does not make clear what benefits are transferred by this ability. The example demilich used in the SRD link appears to only be wearing items that increase its stats, but how would other benefits be handled? For example, these rules seem confusing in the following cases:
- What about items that cast spells? If the demilich tries to cast Fireball from an item that it is “wearing” with this ability, will the fireball appear near the location of the demilich or near the location of the phylactery?
- What about storage items? If the lich is “wearing” a Belt of Many Pockets, will the pockets and items in them be within the lich’s reach or will we only have an irrelevant pocket open where the belt actually is?
- Intelligent items.
Lets say that a party has recently decided to retire from adventuring to focus their efforts in caring for a city-state in need of benefactors. I want to know what the lowest level a party can be and still safely make enough money to provide the required financial support to care for a city-state’s population, without their risking life or limb adventuring.
This isn’t an easy question since the economy of 3.5 is so screwed up that it’s difficult to determine how much a gold piece is worth, much less how many it takes to equal a nations GDP. So Let’s be a bit more exact on what I mean. Let’s say the party is in charge of a City-State the size of Rome, with a population of 35,000. They want to generously provide for it’s citizens by ensuring that each and every person can live a wealthy lifestyle, which costs 50gp/week/person. That means they need to provide 1,750,000 gp/week.
The adventuring party consists of 5 members, all at or below the party level you chose for your answer, of whatever classes you deem appropriate. The party can work any ‘safe’ job necessary to help earn the income required. At the time of their retirement they have at their disposal an amount of money expected for a party of their level, based off of wealth/level guidelines, to spend on purchasing items or equipment which would assist in providing for the City State.
If necessary the party can take up to a month’s worth of time, starting at the moment of retirement, to prepare for providing for the city. This could be spent building equipment, training underlings, or saving up money for a large purchase; whatever will help them to best provide for their city.
The lucky members of the city are being cared for without being required to earn the support, meaning they can not be utilized as part of the parties money making scheme. However, the party can employ any underlings or hirelings they would otherwise have access to.
Any solution must be sustainable long term, at least until the original party grows too old to continue providing for the city. Bonus points for minimizing cheese factor (though I’m open to answers with some low degree cheese) or for not requiring every member of the party to be equal to the total party level
I’m currently playing a Warlock/ Rogue multiclass character and I’m curious about the limitations of the One With Shadows invocation.
One with Shadows
Prerequisite: 5th level
When you are in an area of dim light or darkness, you can use your action to become invisible until you move or take an action or a reaction.
The question is:
Is it possible to take a movement, either a regular move or a cunning action and then use your action to become invisible (assuming the other conditions are met?)
Certainly, movement (or any other bonus action) after becoming invisible is not allowed (Because bonus actions are actions) but it’s unclear exactly what’s allowed in a turn before using your official action to become invisible.
To me, all the ‘cunning action’ bonus actions would seem to be permitted, as long as I’m allowed a full action after any of them.
Starting at 2nd level, your quick thinking and agility allow you to move and act quickly. You can take a bonus action on each of your turns in combat. This action can be used only to take the Dash, Disengage, or Hide action.
So it seems to me you could do any of the following before taking an action to become invisible:
- Disengage & Move
- Move and hide
Is this correct, or am I missing something in the action economy and/or order of actions, bonus actions, and movement?
I am a fairly new DM. I am playing with a group I have tried to DM and have played with as a PC. There is one person in that group that plays as a PC that says no, AKA he is the opposite of a murder hobo.
When faced with a decision or a turning point in the story he will say no to most of the possible outcomes and bring the story to a halt because either the DM is trying to come up with another method to put to the players, the party is arguing about what to do now, or the other players just want to follow his lead and he doesn’t want to do anything.
He does this to see how frustrated the DM can get before giving up and then complains that we don’t play because no one wants to deal with this every single time.
I am the DM for the next campaign and I am looking for an advice on how to deal with him. The common methods of just killing his character or excluding him but I don’t want to that. I want him and everyone to have fun and be a part of it but I also don’t want to get frustrated with his play style.
What can I do to either deal with him as PC or can I do anything as a DM to help the story without the mental state of “No I am God you will do what I tell you and that is the story”?
Similar to this question, how long is Dungeons & Dragons vs. Rick & Morty? Considerations:
- Game will be played in person.
- I will aim to have 5 players, not counting the DM.
- If I DM, I will push players to use the included characters rather than creating new ones.
- I expect to have two new players, and three that have played before. Of those three, one has DMed before.
- My goal in asking this question is to find a 5e campaign or module that can be finished in 1-4 sessions (I anticipate each session will run 4 or maybe 5 hours).
I have a wizard casting Lightning bolt at a flying mount (Griffon), hoping to hit both the mount and its rider. The DM has determined that I have hit the mount, but we have the question of if this also hits the rider as well?
How does Lightning Bolt work when targeting both a mount and the rider along the line effect area?
Old school RPer coming back after long gaming hiatus and new to D&D 5e. Liking what I see, and happy to be rid of ThAC0, lol. I’m pretty sure I already know the answer to what I’m about to ask, but figure I’d ask anyways to make sure I didn’t miss something in the new system. Sorry if this is clearer to others or was addressed previously.
As I’m reading it seems feats are a little different now and fewer and further between when leveling, so I’m guessing they’re more valuable than they used to be. Going through the feats list I noticed that a lot of the feats also give an Ability Score increase and I have a question about those increases. (Example: Moderately Armored feat gives proficiency in medium armor and also increases STR or DEX by 1.)
IRC in the old system if you were proficient in an armor type you effectively had the armor feat for it. My question is, does a class in D&D 5e that starts with proficiency in medium armor have the Moderately Armored feat and get the Ability Score increase from above example? Or is the feat totally separate and they can just wear the armor but don’t get the Ability Score increase unless they take the feat?
Related to this question What are the most and least-resisted damage types? what is the most and least resisted or immune conditions?
I was looking at the UA psionic spells and I saw Id Insinuation that causes the incapacitated condition and it got me thinking about how often if ever a creature is immune to incapacitation. I use a lot of creatures that have immunities to the same (seemingly) conditions while other conditions are rarely in the list of immune conditions.
I’ve not been able to find the specific date, at which these three were mortal. Does anyone know? Is it perhaps not specified? I know that they were slain around 1358 DR, but at this point they had already become gods.
During my first campaign as a player I had a issue with my DM regarding the background I gave to my character. It was my first time creating a background for my character and I loved doing it, so much that my backstory became quite big. (I gave my DM a short summary to make his life easier).
While I loved creating a backstory, I wasn’t too comfortable with going all in with roleplaying. For this reason I added a piece in my backstory where my character was cursed, couldn’t remember where he was from and he was now wandering around looking for answers. I just wasn’t ready to dive straight into roleplaying this backstory and wanted to learn RP step by step.
A couple sessions after I handed over my backstory, my DM briefly mentioned his dislike towards my backstory. He did this in a single comment, away from all the other players which went along the line of “Who gives their player amensia, what kind of person does that?” At that time I didn’t know how to respond and not too long after that we stopped playing anyway, but the comment still makes me wonder if it really is a bad thing to do?
So, is giving your player amnesia about their backstory a bad thing to do to your DM? Or is it something just my DM had issue with?