Calculating HP for UA beast master animal companion

I am a very new DM in DnD 5e, and one of my players is a ranger. As I was browsing through posts here and there we decided to use the UA, as everyone is saying the RAW ranger is lackluster. She obtained her wolf in a little side story, and I would like to set up the stats for her companion. I read through the UA, and it states:

For each level you gain after 3rd, your animal
companion gains an additional hit die and increases its hit points accordingly.

Now this confuses me a lot, and upon further looking into how HP is calculated, I don’t even understand the stats of the simple Wolf enemy.

So in the Monster Manual the HP of the wolf is 11 (2d8+2).

First question: How is this calculated? The average of 2d8 should be 10. 10+2 is 12.

Second question: What is the hit die of a wolf? If its 1d8, than in case the wolf is “level 1”, its HP should be 10 (max hit die + con modifier). If it is considered to be level 2, its HP should be 17 (Max hit die + avg hit die + con modifier). What am I missing?

Third question: I found a post on a DnD reddit site where someone calculates the stats of a wolf in case the ranger is level 7. It goes like this:


Medium beast, your alignment

Armor Class 17

Hit Points 35 (6d8+6)

Speed 40 ft.

STR 12 (+1)

DEX 17 (+3)

CON 12 (+1)

INT 3 (-4)

WIS 12 (+1)

CHA 6 (-2)

Proficiency Bonus +3

Skills: Perception +4, Stealth +6, Skill of Choice, Skill of Choice

Saving Throws: Str +4, Dex +6, Con +4, Int -1, Wis +4, Cha +1

Senses: passive Perception 14

Actions Bite. Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 11 (2d4 + 6) piercing damage. If the target is a creature, it must succeed on a DC 12 Strength saving throw or be knocked prone.

I think I was able to figure out everything, except the HP.

My first assumption was to start with the given base 11 HP as a level 3 companion. Than at level 4, it gains an additional 7 (5 hit die +con modifier). And the same thing goes on for level 5, 6 and 7, to a total of 11+4*7 totaling 39.

If I start from the 2d8+2, and just add a hit die each time the ranger levels up, I can understand the 6d8 mentioned in the post, but I don’t get the +6 modifier. Shouldn’t it be +10? +2 base modifier at level 3, and +2 for each 4 levels totaling at +10. And now the problem is that averaging this value leads to 40, not 39, this problem is coming from my first question.

I am completely lost here.

One last question. The Bite attack says +6 to hit. I can explain this as the DEX modifier became +3, and the proficiency bonus also became +3, however I dont understand the reason why DEX modifier is used for the Bite attack instead of STR.

Thanks a lot for the answer!

How to authorize a subkey using a primary master key pair?

I’m using webcrypto, not PGP/GPG.

I would like to use a key pair to create a “subkey” that is authorized by my primary key in a way anyone can publicly verify so I don’t need to expose the primary key’s private component to any web-facing systems.

My idea is to:

  • primary key signs a hash of subkeys public component
  • then use the subkeys private key (proving it has access) to encrypt this signed blob

Verification would be:

  • use the subkey public key to decrypt the signature
  • use the primary key’s public to verify the signature.

Would this be safe? Do I need to ad any tamper protection (AHEAD/HMAC)? I’m interested in an answer for both ECC and RSA.

TLS 1.2. Handshake: Where do Client and Server negotiate how the master key is built from randoms and pre?

I am currently trying to solve an exercise where I should look at a TLS 1.2 handshake trace while having access to pre and both randoms (server random and client random).

In order to decrypt application data, I need to rebuild the master key.

But I am struggling with finding the section where it is negotiated how this master key is actually built from pre and randoms.

How does TLS 1.2 handle that? Is there maybe a default handling?

Does having the Shield Master feat mean that the shield is indestructible?

Does having the Shield Master feat mean that the shield is indestructible?

The Shield Master feat (PHB, p. 170) says:

  • If you take the Attack action on your turn, you can use a bonus action to try to shove a creature within 5 feet of you with your shield.

  • If you aren’t incapacitated, you can add your shield’s AC bonus to any Dexterity saving throw you make against a spell or other harmful effect that targets only you.

  • If you are subjected to an effect that allows you to make a Dexterity saving throw to take only half damage, you can use your reaction to take no damage if you succeed on the saving throw, interposing your shield between yourself and the source of the effect.

The last part… as a reaction yada yada yada….

Last game session our paladin used his +1 shield to block a young dragon’s 11d8 fire breath weapon, and prior to this, he did the same when confronted with an 12d6 explosive device of fire and shrapnel. How is his shield not riddled with holes from the explosive, and how is it not a melted slag of metal after the dragon’s fire breath? Yes he made the saves, but shouldn’t placing the shield directly in line of harm’s way to protect him also heavily damage the shield if not destroy it?

The feat just says the PC doesn’t take damage, but does not account for shield’s condition after. Is a shield indestructible with the feat?

Would allowing the “Polearm Master” feat on a Longsword be Overpowered

On of my players (an Eldritch Knight) wants to make a modification to the “Polearm Master” feat by replacing the weapons given with a Longsword. So It would be written as such

Longsword Master

  • When you take the Attack action and attack with only a Longsword, you can use a bonus action to make a melee attack with the opposite end of the weapon. This attack uses the same ability modifier as the primary attack. The weapon’s damage die for this attack is a d4, and it deals bludgeoning damage.
  • While you are wielding a Longsword, other creatures provoke an opportunity attack from you when they enter your reach.

Is there anything about this that is overpowered or ripe for abusing? How would that change if we kept the original weapons and added a longsword rather than replacing them?

Are there any ways to make an improved familiar speak with people other than it’s master

Outside ones that can talk naturally like the silvanshi who has truespeech I can’t think of any way to get an improved familiar to talk with people other than it’s master. The mascot and decoy familiar archetypes won’t work because they both require speak with animals for the related abilities.

Masoct Ability

Speak with Team (Ex) At 7th level, a mascot gains the ability to speak with all members of its team verbally as if using speak with master.

This replaces speak with master and speak with animals of its kind.

Decoy Ability

Mockingbird (Ex) At 5th level, a decoy can speak any of its master’s languages. At 7th level, it can mimic its master’s voice and intonation perfectly.

This ability replaces speak with master and speak with animals of its kind.

Concerned Lines

Improved familiars otherwise use the rules for regular familiars, with two exceptions: if the creature’s type is something other than animal, its type does not change; and improved familiars do not gain the ability to speak with other creatures of their kind (although many of them already have the ability to communicate).

Advance Weapon Training (Weapon Master + Brawler + Item Mastery combo) question

For the people that doesnt know the combo heres the link to Cartmanbeck’s Guide, all credits to him. ( The scenario is this: the weapon master archetype gains weapon training at lvl 3, and he has this benefit:

Special: Fighters that have the weapon master archetype can select this feat beginning at 4th level. The benefits of a weapon master’s advanced weapon training options apply only to his selected weapon rather than all weapons in the same fighter weapon group, and he can’t select the weapon specialist advanced weapon training option. A weapon master can select this feat as a bonus feat; if he does so, it doesn’t count for the purpose of the requirement that it can be taken at most once per 5 fighter levels.

in lvl 4 he picks the Advanced Weapon Training as a bonus feat, and at lvl 5 take a dip into brawler and gain Martial Flexibility.

The question is if with Martial Flex. one can take again an advanced weapon training feat ignoring the clause of the 5 lvls, despite the fact that it doesnt gains it from the fighter bonus feat as this implies

[…] A weapon master can select this feat as a bonus feat; if he does so, it doesn’t count for the purpose of the requirement that it can be taken at most once per 5 fighter levels.

A player of mine is using this and im inclined to, if proves illegal, let him play it anyways. But I need to know if it is indeed legal. Thanks in advance!

Does Lore Mastery’s Master of Magic feature create a prepared spell?

According to the wording of the UA Lore Mastery wizard’s capstone, it says:

At 14th level, your knowledge of magic allows you to duplicate almost any spell. As a bonus action, you can call to mind the ability to cast one spell of your choice from any class’ spell list. The spell must be of a level for which you have spell slots, you mustn’t have it prepared, and you follow the normal rules for casting it, including expending a spell slot. If the spell isn’t a wizard spell, it counts as a wizard spell when you cast it. The ability to cast the spell vanishes from your mind when you cast it or when the current turn ends. You can’t use this feature again until you finish a long rest.

For the purposes of a spell like glyph of warding‘s Spell Glyph option, which states that

You can store a prepared spell of 3rd level or lower in the glyph…

would Master of Magic create a “prepared” spell that can be used in this way, or does it create one that’s outside the wizard’s prepared spell list and unable for glyph of warding use?

Would it work in the same way/idea explained here? Can you store a Spell Glyph with a spell scroll of a prepared spell?

Is this proposed change to the Transmutation Wizard’s Master Transmuter class feature balanced for a setting without resurrection? [Version 2]

In my previous iteration of this question, I proposed a replacement for the Master Transmuter option Restore Life. the feedback I received identified that it was too powerful, so I have a new, much simpler proposal. The brief description below outlines the problem; see my other question for a more detailed explanation.

The School of Transmutation wizard archetype has a feature at level 14 called Master Transmuter. It can allow such a wizard to, once per long rest, destroy their transmuter’s stone and do one of a handful of options, one of which is:

Restore Life. You cast the raise dead spell on a creature you touch with the transmuter’s stone, without expending a spell slot or needing to have the spell in your spellbook.

Unfortunately, in my homebrew universe, there is no resurrection magic, so I’m looking into replacing this option with something homebrew that is not related to resurrection, but still at least broadly fits the theme of “Restore Life“.

Still considering greater restoration, I wonder if it would be balanced to simply allow Restore Life to cast it instead of raise dead, a direct trade with no other additions (i.e. not a “super charged” version like I proposed before)?

Restore Life. You cast the greater restoration spell on a creature you touch with the transmuter’s stone, without expending a spell slot or needing to have the spell in your spellbook.

My reasoning behind believing that this might be balanced, in light of the feedback, is a) it’s a 5th level cleric spell like raise dead, and b) it is not usually available to wizards, same as raise dead.

One the other hand, I’m concerned that this might be a bit weaker than the RAW raise dead version of Restore Life (after all, once you’re dead, greater restoration can’t help at all), so if that is true, I’m also considering waiving the costly material component of the greater restoration spell if cast in this way, since it seems you do need it for the raise dead version. If this is not weaker (or waiving the material component would make this vastly more powerful), then I won’t do that.

So my question is, in a setting where there is no resurrection magic, does my new proposed replacement of the Restore Life option of the Master Transmuter class feature seem balanced?
Ideally contrasting with and without my “waive the material costs” suggestion.