How does attacking downwards affect ranged weapon attacks?

For 5e, ranged weapon attacks are associated with a normal range and a long range distance. For a flying attacker, how does attacking downwards affect that range?

Say a flying PC with a handaxe was flying 150 feet above an enemy. Can they throw their weapon down to hit it? It’s outside both the handaxe’s standard and long range, but the handaxe has nowhere to go but down.

Does it automatically miss? Does it become an improvised weapon?

Are monsters with Sunlight Sensitivity supposed to have disadvantage when attacking or perceiving a target that is in direct sunlight?

Certain subterranean-dwelling monsters, such as drow and duergar, have the Sunlight Sensitivity trait, which is consistently worded as follows:

While in sunlight, the [monster] has disadvantage on attack rolls, as well as on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight.

Of course, drow and duergar are also playable races for PCs. These playable races have an identically-named Sunlight Sensitivity trait, but its wording is different:

You have disadvantage on attack rolls and on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight when you, the target of your attack, or whatever you are trying to perceive is in direct sunlight.

This is a significant difference. A drow PC attacking a target that stands in sunlight has disadvantage where a drow monster would not. One can imagine a drow PC traveling with a group of his monster drow kinsfolk and ending up the butt of jokes (or worse): "Poor Drew, for some reason he just can’t hit the broad side of a barn when we’re up on the surface. The rest of us, we just find some shade to snipe from and we’re set. Even that doesn’t seem to help Drew. I don’t know what his problem is."

Am I missing something? Has this difference been either explained or errata’d somewhere?

Can a battlemaster use Maneuvering Attack to prevent two creatures from opportunity attacking one ally?


Maneuvering Attack. When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to maneuver one of your comrades into a more advantageous position. You add the superiority die to the attack’s damage roll, and you choose a friendly creature who can see or hear you. That creature can use its reaction to move up to half its speed without provoking opportunity attacks from the target of your attack.

If an ally is within two enemies’ reaches, and the battlemaster has extra attack, hits and uses the maneuver on both enemies, and if the ally only uses the movement reaction when the second creature is hit, would that ally still take opportunity attacks from the first one?

Can a Fathomless Warlock move their Tentacle of the Deeps without attacking?

In Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, a warlock with the Fathomless patron can summon a Tentacle of the Deeps, whose description includes the line

As a bonus action on your turn, you can move the tentacle up to 30 feet and repeat the attack.

"Can…and" seems to suggest that you must do both: move and attack. "Up to 30 feet" means you could move it 0 feet and repeat the attack, but can you move the tentacle without attacking?

When attacking with Two-Weapon Fighting, can you break up your movement and attack a different target?

When you get the Extra Attack action, you can break up your movement and attack different targets at varying distances from your starting point.

Does the same apply with TWF? As in, can I approach my first target, use my attack action, then move, and use my bonus action to attack a different target?

From PHB 195:

“When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand.”

The key seems to be how to interpret “when:” either “immediately after” or “whenever (during your turn).”

Ideas on how to handle a denying/unaware team attacking player? [closed]

Short: Right now I’m thinking about our next session and how to handle a PC who has attacked us the second time with an AoE spell. To defend him: he’s denying that he has done it intentionally and even saying that he doesn’t know anything about it.

First: I don’t want/need the best solution, just some ideas – like "how would you react?".

But I will start by describing the whole situation:
We are a group of 5 PC – there are two double-pre-mates and I’m the lonely fifth one. Two sessions ago the fighter in question attacked two of us the first time while we explored a mine occupied by wererats and some following smaller ones. The first small rat attacked him, as he’s always the one going first. Our archer, the rat and I were attacked by black tentacles getting out of the face of our knight and/or the rat – as the rat bite him in his face. The rat was slashed in three parts and the archer and I were lucky enough to dodge. After we cleared the room we surrounded the fighter and asked him what it was, if he has any explanation or why he did it to us. He has only answered that he doesn’t know what it was and he hasn’t done it. We told him that we will watch him and aren’t really trusting him anymore.

Some days (in-game) later we got to an old cathedral occupied by orcs and ogres. We attacked the orcs with the help of the wererats, as the cathedral is the real home of them. While fighting the first ogre (the fighter his accompanying cleric and I) these black tentacles popped up again, this time clearly out of his mouth, and attacked the ogre, an orc, the cleric and me. All were damaged (necrotic) and also prevented reactions for one round as we had to get rid of these tentacles first.
During the fight we haven’t talked about it as there were a lot more orcs than we thought first. The end of our last session was that we have "finished" (we haven’t checked the cathedral – only surrounding) the fight. We’ve lost some wererats and we all are heavily damaged, nearly all spell-slots are used and we have this big-black-mysterium in our group.

As it was the second time, this time we were damaged and we’ve clearly seen that the origin of these tentacles is the fighter we have to react somehow.

My current idea is to call the archer, as he still doesn’t trust the fighter and was betrayed in his past, so he will very likely support me. After this I would like to approach the fighter and "command" him to drop his weapon and get on his knees. I have placed a force-ballista (artificer) during the battle and can use my crossbow. If he doesn’t follow we get to the first problem – if I really attack him he will get very likely unconscious as he has 4HP remaining. Should I? I’m a lawful-neutral/good dwarven artificer, trying to get part of "Hammers of Moradin" and waiting for a sign of Moradin himself that I’m worthy to join the hammers.
So from my perspective it would be possible for my PC to attack a presumably lying, betraying, team-attacking, necromancy casting human fighter.
But in success-case, he’s now on his knees, I would at first arrest/tie him, ask him again in hope that he will talk more about these tentacles and otherwise transport him to the next town to present him to the local guards or similar and get him judged.

Now the question: do you have other ideas? How would you react? Everything is possible/valid response – as I’m pretty new to DnD (it’s my first campaign) and I want to get some ideas about what else could be possible.

Can a barbarian maintain rage by attacking a creature that is not present?

Suppose a raging barbarian does not see any opponents on the battlefield but is attempting to maintain rage by attacking a hostile creature, according to the following:

Your rage lasts for 1 minute. It ends early if you are knocked unconscious or if your turn ends and you haven’t attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then.

If there was a successfully Hidden opponent on the field, the barbarian would be permitted to attack it by guessing its location. Even if they were incorrect, that would be sufficient to maintain their rage.

But how far ‘off’ is the barbarian allowed to be in their guess and still have the attack count?

Suppose the successfully Hidden opponent has actually left the field without the barbarian knowing. Does the fact that the opponent is not actually there prevent the barbarian from making an attack on an unseen opponent?

If yes, and the rage ends, the player then gains information about the fact that the opponent is not present (which seems to go against the spirit of "If the target isn’t in the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but the DM typically just says that the attack missed, not whether you guessed the target’s location correctly.")

If no, and the barbarian is allowed to attack an opponent that is not actually there based on the plausible belief that an opponent is present, then what prevents the barbarian from postulating an opponent who could be there? For example, the barbarian invokes an NPC that has successfully Hidden against the party before – is it enough to maintain rage for the barbarian to say that they believe said NPC is present and Hidden and then attempt to attack them as an Unseen opponent?

Somewhat related: A barbarian’s belief that they are attacking an opponent is not sufficient to maintain rage if what they are attacking is an illusion. So attacking a not-creature that is there is not enough to maintain rage, but is it enough to attack an actual creature that is not there?