Do I correctly evaluate the effectiveness of a Mystic’s abilities in CQC, fighting a Medusa? [on hold]

I would like to start this off by saying that I am a fairly new player, and a lot of this is speculation. As such, I may ask some obvious questions.

The mystic has several abilities which could allow him to engage a medusa in CQC. Please inform me of if any of these are viable, or plain incorrect.

The first is “Perceive the Unseen“, which allows you to see auras, potentially allowing for you to not see the medusa itself, but still understand it’s position.

Second is the “Perfect Sense” from “Bestial Transformation“, granting you a very short ranged Blindsight. This is almost guaranteed, but very short ranged (10 ft).

Third is the focus of “Mastery of Light and Darkness“, allowing you to ignore darkness for 30ft, however you are still “seeing” her, even if she cant see you in total/magical darkness.

Finally, “Third Eye” grants 3 options:

  • Tremorsense, range 30ft (would this only work if she moves?)
  • Piercing Sight, you can see through 1ft of solid object, such as a blindfold (would this still petrify to see through an object?)
  • True Sight, I have looked around, but this still appears to be LOS based, so would still petrify.

My assumption is that

  • the Mystic directly sees her (True Sight, Focus of Light and Darkness) is out
  • things that indirectly see her (Piercing Sight, Perceive the Unseen) are questionable
  • and non-vision related (Perfect Senses, Tremorsense) are completely safe.

All responses appreciated.

How does fighting in an area covered by the Darkness spell work?

I play a shadow sorcerer in a group with an arcane trickster. I have been thinking about casting darkness onto the blade of a dagger then sheathing/covering it and giving it to the rogue.

The rogue can then scout ahead or try to infiltrate in disguise. If she gets caught or ambushed, she can use her free item interaction to draw out the dagger and surround herself in the darkness. Even better, she can re-cover the object at the start of her next turn, attack with her other hand, and then use her bonus action to pull the object back out.

But mostly the spell is just intended to buy the rogue some time if she is compromised, so the group can catch up to her position.

I was curious how, as a DM, most would rule advantage/disadvantage on this strategy. It seems that when you cast the spell it causes disadvantage for attacks against those or from those in the sphere… but the fact that been blind and hidden from sight also stack more advantages/disadvantages, everything just goes back to natural rolls….

  1. Since those in the circle are “blinded”, all attacks against them would be at advantage. But since they can’t be seen, those attacks would also be at disadvantage. So being in the circle just makes attacks against you roll straight?

  2. And the rogue’s attacks against others in the darkness would also be a straight roll too, for the same reason. Right?

  3. And attacks you make against those outside the circle would be at disadvantage, unless you use the Hide action. Then you get a straight roll because you are “unseen”.

Personally, I’d probably rule that attacks made within or into the darkness are just at disadvantage, because that seems in line with reality even if it isn’t RAW. If someone wanted to use their familiar or quickly hide/unhide the object to perform an attack, I might allow a straight roll depending on how they described it (but not a roll at advantage).

But I’m curious what others think and if I’m getting the RAW correct.

Does Eldritch Smite gets bonus from Hexblade’s Curse, Hex or Fighting Style: Dueling?

I’m making a Polearm master hexblade warlock and thinking about getting a level of fighter for Dueling Fighting Style. Does it boost Eldritch Smite damage?

While I was thinking about this question I also thought Eldritch Smite should get bonus from first level spell Hex and Hexblade’s Curse, is that right?

Is this change to two-weapon fighting balanced?


Two-Weapon Fighting

  • When you engage in two-weapon fighting, roll all your attacks for this turn.
  • You can transfer up to 5 from one of your off-hand attack rolls to different attack roll before damage is rolled, potentially causing the lowered attack to miss and raised attack to hit.
  • You can draw or stow an additional weapon, provided it is one-handed.

Just to be clear, this is a comparison of Fighting Styles and the question is right before the altered Fighting Style

I’ve been playing D&D for a few different characters and noticed that with the melee types (at least those who’ve invested in it), that fighting with two weapons is mechanically horrible, such that it seriously impacts the flavor of the style and the theme.

From the beginning (going by RAW) two-weapon fighters, who’ve already taken the Fighting Style: Two-Weapon Fighting, have to either use their action or invest in the feat Duel Wielder in order to draw both of their weapon in one turn. The rules for drawing weapons can be found on page 193 under Use an Object and the Fighting Style can be found on pages 72 and 91, all in the Player’s Handbook.

This results in needing an optional rule in order to use your fighting style at the beginning of each combat, which you won’t have for the first 4 levels of your character, ignoring variant human and possible home rules. Which, by the time you can solve this issue, other melee proficient classes, except Rogue, can emulate your previous attack count at exactly zero cost to get.

Needless to say, this makes it feel horrible to go for this style since there are so many hoops just to get one (1) extra attack and nothing more :/.

How to handle collisions and hits in 2D fighting game?

I know this question has been asked here and solution is given. Basically, I want to know how hits are captured in 2D fighting games. Sprites are in variable sizes, and I know that we have to have rectangles for the purposes like hits, getting hits, blocks, etc. However, I don’t know how we can do that. Should we create separate set of rectangles for each and every sprite, or do we have some ways of automating it? If we have to create them manually, then how? What kind of structure can we follow to do it?

Will temporary Dex penalties prevent you from getting the benefits of the “Two Weapon Fighting” feat if your Dex score falls below the prerequisite?

Our fighter is exhausted and is suffering a -6 to Dexterity as a result, bringing his Dexterity from 15 to 9.

He has the feat Two-Weapon Fighting, which reduces the penalty for fighting with two weapons. The feat has a prerequisite of 15 Dex.

Does he still get the benefit of Two-Weapon Fighting while exhausted?

How would it unbalance gameplay to rule that Weapon Master allows for picking a fighting style?


Context

For a new campaign I’m building a protector aasimar Kensei. We’re using the Point Buy system, so being an unarmored monk I managed to raise my default AC to 15 (17 with Agile Parry), at level 3 through: STR 10 DEX 15 CON 14 INT 8 WIS 16 CHA 10

At level 4 I was thinking of taking the Weapon Master feat, because I read online that it increases my Dexterity by 1, and let’s me gain a fighting style from the fighter class. So, by picking the Mariner fighting style at level 4, I could raise my AC with 2 in just one level-up! This fighting style, from Unearthed Arcana: Waterborne Adventures, grants:

As long as you are not wearing heavy armor or using a shield, you have a swimming speed and a climbing speed equal to your normal speed, and you gain a +1 bonus to AC.

(Yes, the DM allows UA playtest material)

Now, unfortunately(!), we just discovered that according to the books Weapon Master actually doesn’t let you pick a fighting style… The Player’s Handbook states on page 170 about Weapon Master:

You have practiced extensively with a variety of weapons, gaining the following benefits:

  • Increase your Strength or Dexterity score by 1, to a maximum of 20.

  • You gain proficiency with four weapons of your choice. Each one must be a simple or martial weapon.

Discussion

Both the DM and myself agree that, by RAW, Weapon Master is rather underwhelming as a feat. So intuitively, the unofficial addition of the fighting style doesn’t seem to be gamebreaking to us. If anything, it makes the Weapon Master feat actually worthwhile in specific cases (instead of almost never really being worth taking it). I would say the improved Weapon Master would be comparable to the Magic Initiate feat, because by RAW the latter offers options to “obtain useful class features without multiclassing”.

We think that taking a feat should be an investment worthy of not increasing ability scores with an additional point (especially when using the Point Buy system). However, we are unsure about how it could unbalance gameplay in ways we don’t foresee right now.

Question

How would it unbalance gameplay to rule that Weapon Master allows for picking a fighting style, instead of four weapons?

To be clear, what does the DM need to keep in mind regarding encounter balance and player character options, when he allows the following emphasised addition to the feat:

You gain proficiency with four weapons of your choice. Each one must be a simple or martial weapon. Instead of gaining proficiency with four weapons, you may gain a fighting style of your choice from the fighter class.

A good answer addresses mechanical implications that makes this houserule balanced or imbalanced: in comparison to how Weapon Master functions by RAW, and compared to other feats. A good answer addresses this in the context of our specific table.

An excellent answer also shares experience from a table that allows this houserule, covers potential exploits and how it effects their game mechanically.


Possibly relevant details

  • I won’t be the only melee combatant in this party, composition so far: barbarian, monk (me), war cleric, wizard.

  • We start at level 3. If our characters survive, we’ll get to level 5 in just a few sessions (through milestones). After level 6 I’m seriously considering to multiclass into fighter, rogue or cleric. I plan to never wear any armor or a shield, so just wield the Kensei weapons.

  • The DM wants this setting to be leaning towards a “Ragtag band of adventurers”. He also prefers to keep mechanics balanced at the table, both for the players and him as DM. The campaign will be heavy on combat: we are holy crusaders.

Does Shield Master make Two-Weapon Fighting obsolete?

I need a clarification between these two answers: 1 2

  • The first answer argues that Shield Master removes only the penalties from attack rolls made with a shield. So for example a character that has the Shield Master feat, has a Bonus Attack of +6/+1 and is armed with a longsword (primary) and a light shield (secondary), his full-round attack would look like this:

    +4longsword/+6lightshield/-1longsword

    or

    +2longsword/+6heavyshield/-3longsword

    with a heavy shield.

  • The second answer, which is corroborated by an official FAQ answer, seems to argue instead that Shield Master removes all attack roll penalties made when attacking with a shield. So, again, a character that has the Shield Master feat, has a Bonus Attack of +6/+1 and is armed with a longsword (primary) and a light shield (secondary), his full-round attack would look like this:

    +6longsword/+6lightshield/+1longsword

    or

    +6longsword/+6heavyshield/+1longsword

    with a heavyshield.

    Which would effectively make the feat Two-Weapon Fighting (although essential to the acquisition of Shield Master) and light shields’ powerplay (except for the fact that, unlike heavy shields, you can hold small objects with a hand equipped with a light shield) obsolete.

  • A third answer (which I came up with, based on the fact that a lot of people think that corresponding primary and secondary attacks happen at the same time) may be that Shield Master removes all attack roll penalties, but only when attacking with a shield. So, same character with Shield Master, Bonus Attack of +6/+1, armed with a longsword (primary) and a light shield (secondary), his full-round attack would look like this (the first two attacks happen at the same time and a shield is involved so Shield Master is applied, the third one is believed to happen separately so it doesn’t benefit from the feat):

    +6longsword/+6lightshield/-1longsword

    or

    +6longsword/+6heavyshield/-3longsword

    with a heavy shield.

Which one of these outcomes is the correct one?

Does the ranger’s Archery Fighting Style apply to the monk’s Deflect Missiles feature, for a multiclassed monk/ranger?

I’m considering a multi-class of Monk and Ranger, and have been trying to decide which Fighting Style I’d like to pick.

Two-Weapon Fighting and Defense are useless for a Monk, as they won’t be wearing armour, and using multiple weapons stops unarmed strikes.

Dueling could work, if the character uses a 1-handed monk weapon, giving a +2 to damage with it (I believe).

As for Archery, I was wondering if catching and throwing something with Deflect Missiles would get the +2 to attack. The reason I believe it would is that it counts as a Monk Weapon for the attack.

Does this logic look right?