What would be the correct sequence of actions on 1st turn, and following turns for an Battle Smith Artificer to Maximize damage?
They are a 3rd level variant human (Dual Wielder feat) with a Strength and Intelligence modifier of +3. We are using the 2019-2 version of the Artificer.
They are armed with
They could cast either
- Arcane weapon 1d6 (variable) or
- Searing Smite 1d6 (fire)
And they have the ability to command their Iron Defender as a Bonus Action to attack with a 1d8 + 2 damage attack, or take the help action.
The Battle Master fighter’s Commander’s Strike maneuver (PHB, p. 74) states:
When you take the Attack action on your turn, you can forgo one of your attacks and use a bonus action to direct one of your companions to strike. When you do so, choose a friendly creature who can see or hear you and expend one superiority die. That creature can immediately use its reaction to make one weapon attack, adding the superiority die to the attack’s damage roll.
However it is currently the only maneuver that actually requires you to take the Attack action. I found this odd, and the rare times that this fact came up, I simply ignored it, allowing it to be used with any sort of attack. I have thus made the following changes as a house rule:
When you make an attack on your turn, you can forgo the attack and use a bonus action to direct one of your companions to strike […]
It would still be limited to one use per turn, as you only have one bonus action on any given turn, but perhaps there is some issue that results from this which I haven’t noticed. What are the ramifications of this change?
The Battle Master Fighter can choose the Sweeping Attack Maneuver which states:
When you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to damage another creature with the same attack. Choose another creature within 5 feet of the original target and within your reach. If the original attack roll would hit the second creature, it takes damage equal to the number you roll on your superiority die […]
So what happens if the Fighter has (dis)advantage on the attack against the first enemy but ordinarily wouldn’t have (dis)advantage with an attack made against the second enemy, or vice-versa? Does this simply get ignored because you have to use “the original attack roll”?
An example of how this could happen:
Your first target is invisible, giving you disadvantage, but the second target is visible; ordinarily an attack against them would not have disadvantage.
For the opposite direction, attack the visible creature first.
We’re using the 2019 UA Artificer (from the DND Beyond site).
I am the DM. The PC is level 3 (getting to level 4 pretty soon) and he wants to start going into crafting magical armors because he feels its part of his class identity.
Now, I understand its generally up to me to decide what is suitable and what is not, but we try to figure a balanced way to handle this, in which he can have creative ideas and magic items still feel wondrous.
The examples I gave him, from what I understood from the PHB and DMG books, is that he either finds a formula, or creates one.
I mostly understand the other parts, we are discussing the creation of a formula. We’re trying to understand the basics and go up from there for our understanding’s sake with creating a common magic item.
We’re trying to be as true to the “original” world of D&D as we’re both pretty new and he really likes trying to “outfigure” the system; not by cheating it, but by thinking of clever ways in which to use it.
He offered two examples:
One is trying to infuse a piece of armor with Heroism spell, in a way that once a day a humanoid who wears it and expresses bravery (judged by the piece itself) it gives it 1d4 temporary hit points, or something like that.
Which sounded cool and okay with me.
The second example was infusing a pair of boots (Leather worker’s tool?) with Expeditious Retreat. Which sounded really bad with me. He couldn’t describe how it will do it, just that its infused with the magic and is “cast” the same way normal Expeditious Retreat is cast, which just says “This spell allows you to move at an incredible pace.” He said he wants the boots to have the spell active at all times, and I figured it would make it a rare or very rare item? (which he can’t create).
We’re trying to go for a as “realistic” to the world approach as we can. How would you approach this?
The rules state that “you can use only one manoeuvre per attack” (PHB 73), but i’m unsure how that applies in the case of two weapon fighting.
Is striking an opponent with your bonus action considered a separate attack, or part of the original attack?
This question already has an answer here:
- Is there a proper way to handle large combat engagements with party members involved? 3 answers
- How can I model the mechanics of an army battlefield scene? 2 answers
I am DMing an homebrew DND 5e adventure. My players are going to defend a village from an orc tribe. The village will have around 100 armed farmers. Players also gained support of a local dwarven mining expedition ( around 30 dwarwes ), and freed an enslaved kobold tribe from the orcs ( about 15 surviving kobolds ).
The village will be defended by 100 farmers, 30 dwarfs and 15 kobolds againts 50ish orcs and 30ish goblins.
They don’t know the exact numbers, I will adjust depending on how they will prepare for this.
I took a look at unhearted arcana mass combat, but I think it’s unlikely to be fun, interesting or balanced for this type of battle.
I would like the players (4 players) to be field commanders of this small army, each commanding a small amount of units.
Is there any system that can let the players play out the battle?
When a character uses the Attack action to throw a net, he can only make one attack, regardless of the number of attacks he normally has (ex: 2 from the Level 5 Fighter’s Extra Attack).
A Battle Master Fighter’s Commander Strike Maneuver enables a character to give up a bonus action and one of his attacks, when he makes the Attack action, to let an ally attack with their reaction.
My question is : Can a Battle Master with Extra Attack do a Commander Strike AFTER he throws a net (in order to let an ally profit of the extra attack he cannot use by himself) ?
From what I’m seeing, the Fighter character is not making more than one attack, so he’s respecting the net rule, but at the same time, he does have an extra attack, which he is giving to an ally with a Commander’s Strike. It all seems to work out (just like if the maneuver was tailored for net throwing!), unless I’m missing something here.
Does the to-hit bonus of the Iron Defender’s Bite increase when the proficiency of a Battle Smith Artificer (from the 2019 artificer UA) increases?
The starting bonus is +4 (which I assume is the Iron Defender’s STR modifier + proficiency bonus), but nothing in the subclass’ description indicates that the bonus changes.
The iron defender’s stat block, under “hit points” says the following:
equal to five times your level in this class + your Intelligence modifier + the iron defender’s Constitution modifier
I could read this two ways:
equal to five times (your level in this class) + your Intelligence modifier + the iron defender’s Constitution modifier
Or way 2:
equal to five times (your level in this class + your Intelligence modifier + the iron defender’s Constitution modifier)
Which of these readings is correct?
The Battle Master fighter’s Disarming Attack maneuver can make someone drop a weapon at their feet. The only advantage is if others want to dash away or you need to remove a reaction parry from the opponent before they get their own turn.
When the bad guy’s turn comes around, they pick it up (free interaction with an object) and go about their business.
Do I have that right?
To my understanding, you wouldn’t be able to use your own free object interaction to pick up and/or throw away their weapon (unless you have movement left over, and you’re either two sizes smaller than your opponent or you’re a halfling) because the weapon is in the enemy’s space – not yours.