How exactly does Burn It! (and similar effects) affect splash and ongoing damage?

The level 1 goblin feat Burn It! gives a status damage bonus to all spells and alchemical items that deal fire damage. It also gives a status damage bonus of +1 to all ongoing fire effects. How does that work with splash damage?

For example, suppose I’m a low-level goblin with the Burn It! feat, who really, really likes fire, and who has just come into a bit of money. I decide to blow it on an alchemist’s Fire (Greater). It’s got +2 to hit, and deals 3d8 fire damage, 3 persistent fire damage, and 3 fire splash damage. It’s level 11, and Burn It! gives a bonus of a quarter of that (min 1) to base and splash damage. I spot two people I don’t like standing next to each other, pitch it at one of them, and hit. Now, without the feat, it’s pretty simple. The guy I hit takes 3d8+3 (base plus splash) and 3 ongoing. The guy next to him just takes 3 splash. With the feat… what happens? Does it affect the splash damage at all? If it does affect the splash damage, do I get the bonus twice on the main guy because I hit him with both base and splash? Does the ongoing damage get just +1 (for being ongoing fire damage) or the full bonus (for being fire damage from an alchemical device)? How is the actual bonus determined (given that the level is not evenly divisible by 4)?

there is a question that covers part of this from the playtest, but it appears that at least some of the rules text has changed since it was written, and it doesn’t cover the full thing.

Does either ability of the thrown weapon fighting style affect boomerangs?

The thrown weapon fighting style says:

You can draw a weapon that has the thrown property as part of the attack you make with the weapon. In addition, when you hit with a ranged attack using a thrown weapon, you gain a +2 bonus to the damage roll.

Boomerangs, listed here, and the Storm Boomerang which is not in SRD, don’t have the thrown property. This would seem to exclude them from the first ability which is very explicit about what it affects, and possibly exclude them from the second, depending whether "thrown weapon" refers to a weapon with the thrown property or to any weapon that is thrown to make a ranged attack. This seems absurd though.

Does the Gust of wind spell affect ranged weapons?

Gust of wind Says:

A line of strong wind 60 feet long and 10 feet wide blasts from you in a direction you choose for the spell’s duration. Each creature that starts its turn in the line must succeed on a Strength saving throw or be pushed 15 feet away from you in a direction following the line.

I am wondering if this would either negate ranged attacks on the wizard, or at the very least pose disadvantage on the attacker?

The closest thing I could find to an answer was in the DMG p110, under Strong Wind

A strong wind imposes disadvantage on ranged weapon attack rolls.

My personal experience in archery, is that there is basically no point in even trying to hit a target with anything above a mild wind. As it is very, very difficult at any distance.

Does Hexblade’s Curse extra damage affect every die rolled? [duplicate]

The relevant part of Hexblade’s Curse states (XGtE p.55):

Starting at 1st level, you gain the ability to place a baleful curse on someone. As a bonus action, choose one creature you can see within 30 feet of you. The target is cursed for 1 minute. The curse ends early if the target dies, you die, or you are incapacitated. Until the curse ends, you gain the following benefits:

  • You gain a bonus to damage rolls against the cursed target. The bonus equals your proficiency bonus.
  • […]

Typically when features add extra damage they clarify that the extra damage only applies to one damage roll, or the added damage just applies to the damage as a whole, like the various cleric subclasses’ Potent Spellcasting:

Starting at 8th level, you add your wisdom modifier to the damage you deal with any cleric cantrip.

Or the Evocation Wizard’s Empowered Evocation (PHB p.117):

…you can add your Intelligence modifier to one damage roll of any wizard evocation spell you cast.

Does this mean the wording of the Hexblade’s Curse would apply to all of the dice rolled for the attack? If when the warlock gains Pact of the Blade at 3rd level, could they pick a great sword as there pact weapon, which deals 2d6 damage, and add their proficiency bonus twice to the damage?

How does completely decoupling Ability Checks from Abilities affect the game?

The PHB mentions how it is possible to make ability checks based on different abilities, a variant "Skills with Different Abilities" rule.

In some situations, though, your proficiency might reasonably apply to a different kind of check. In such cases, the GM might ask for a check using an unusual combination of ability and skill, or you might ask your GM if you can apply a proficiency to a different check. For example, if you have to swim from an offshore island to the mainland, your GM might call for a Constitution check to see if you have the stamina to make it that far. In this case, your GM might allow you to apply your proficiency in Athletics and ask for a Constitution (Athletics) check.

Some answers here in RPG provide a similar solution, and even provide a custom sheet which decoupled those.

I wonder how, in long-running games, implementing this variant rule for all skills (by using the aforemented sheet, for example) affects the game and its pace.

  • Does it slow down the game considerably as all players try and suggest which ability they use for something?
  • Do you end up with players trying to cheese EVERY check to use a specific ability "I climb the wall by leveraging my weight and the above counter-weight and choosing the simplest path, so I can use Athletics (Intelligence)"?
  • Does it encourage players to RP more, which despite the slower game pace, makes the game enjoyable (for tables that like RP)?

How does “Sympathetic Magic” mecurial work with area of affect spells

I have a wizard who rolled 22 "Sympathetic Magic" on the Mecurial Magic table for an area of affect spell. Is there any ruling documented how that works?

For those without the book:

22 Sympathetic Magic. The Spell requires that the caster have a personal belonging or a physical piece of its target in order to function normally. The spell can be cast without this sympathetic connection, but the wizard suffers a -4 penalty to his spell check.

I envision it’s:

  1. You need a piece of 1 person in the area or you’re at -4, rest are just affected.
  2. You need a piece of all people in the area or you’re at -4.
  3. You need a piece of 1 person in the area or you’re at -4 x affected targets (e.g. if 3 in the aoe it’s -12).
  4. You need a piece of all people in the area or you’re at -4 x affected targets (e.g. if 3 in the aoe it’s -12).

1 seems too gentle to me, 4 too severe. My guess is 2 but I’d appreciate if anyone has citations, quotes or things maybe I haven’t thought of (related affects, spells with better definition, etc). I can ask my judge (and will) so that as an answer isn’t helpful to me 🙂

If a creature is squeezing in a space does that affect other characters’ ability to move past it?

So if a large creature is halfway down a 20ft long 5ft wide hallway and a friendly, medium creature wants to move past him, does the large creature impede the medium creature’s movement? Also, can two large creatures squeeze past each other in that same hallway?

I know normally you can move through a friendly creature’s square without being impeded, you just can’t stop in it. Also, the squeezing rule says, "A creature can squeeze past a creature while moving but it can’t end its movement in an occupied square." This could be interpreted to say that "while squeezing, a creature may move past another creature, but some at my table say that is intended to be a rule about, for instance, a large creature moving past an unfriendly medium creature in a 10ft wide hall, meaning that sometimes to move past an unfriendly creature you need to squeeze and you can do that as long as you don’t stop that way.

I guess it just seems logical to me that if a creature is already having to squeeze to fit it should be a greater than normal effort to move past it, but I see no rule to this effect. Am I missing it or would this just be a houserule if we wanted to play that way?

How does a Flameskull’s Rejuvenation affect its rest?

Flameskulls are interesting creatures in that they combine three traits – they are undead, they have the Spellcasting trait with wizard spells and spell slots, and they are not killed at 0 HP. Rather, they are "destroyed" but Rejuvenate after one hour.

A previous question has asked whether the ‘rejuvination’ restores their spent spell slots and concluded it does not, by the principle of abilities do only what they say they do.

If they must recover their spell slots by rest, do Flameskulls need to sleep to do so? A previous question about undead in general suggested that while their Undead Nature means they are not required to sleep, that does not mean that they cannot sleep. Thus as NPC casters recovering spell slots, (and without access to features like Arcane Recovery or the Lair Action of a Lich that recovers spell slots), Flameskulls would need to take a long rest, which would include voluntarily sleeping.

Suppose a Flameskull is down a few slots and is engaged in rest and possibly sleep to recover them. It is attacked and ‘destroyed’, and then Rejuvenated in an hour.

Does the time that it spent while destroyed

a) allow it to continue to both rest and sleep, so that it has gained an hour more of each when it is rejuvenated?

b) allow it to continue to rest but not to sleep, so that it has an hour more of rest but not of sleep when it is rejuvenated?

c) not permit it to either rest or sleep, but not remove any time for these it had already ‘accumulated’? (It is thus ‘paused’ for an hour)

d) ‘interrupt’ both its rest and sleep, so that even if it had hours of these banked, it has to start over upon rejuvenation?

For reference, from the PHB errata:

A long rest is a period of extended downtime, at least 8 hours long, during which a [creature] sleeps for at least 6 hours and performs no more than 2 hours of light activity, such as reading, talking, eating, or standing watch.”

From the PHB

If the rest is interrupted by a period of strenuous activity—at least 1 hour of walking, fighting, casting spells, or similar adventuring activity— the [creatures] must begin the rest again to gain any benefit from it…a [creature] must have at least 1 hit point at the start of the rest to gain its benefits.

Note that ‘being destroyed’ is not explicitly one of the ‘similar adventuring activities’ that interrupts a rest. The requirement of having at least one hit point would rule out the Flameskull starting its long rest immediately upon being destroyed, but does not explicitly prevent one from continuing a long rest if it had already begun one when it was destroyed.

Note that, unlike rest, "sleep" is not a game-defined condition, but a state that is meant to be intuitively adjucated on the fly (DMG p. 248).