Simple RAW 3

[No brains]

A 315
On page 202 of the PHB, it says that when you cast a spell with a casting time greater than one action, you use your action on every turn to cast the spell. Attempting to cast a ritual in the astral refuge would use your two actions toward casting the spell.

[Varlon]

Q316
Can Lay on Hands (5 points) cure the poisoned condition? Specifically that caused by a wild magic surge (73-74).

[Arkhios]

Q316
Can Lay on Hands (5 points) cure the poisoned condition? Specifically that caused by a wild magic surge (73-74).

A316 I'm fairly sure this is redundant, but anyway:

..., you can expend 5 hit points from your pool of healing to cure the target of one disease or neutralize one poison affecting it...

Poison is Poison (likewise, Poisoned is Poisoned). It doesn't matter which source gave you the effect.

So, yes. Lay on Hands can (and will) cure the Poisoned condition from a wild magic surge as well as from any other source.

[Maxilian]

Q317 Most racial things does pass over to Wildshape, but does that count for Long-limbed for Bugbear or the 1d12 resistance for Goliath?

[No brains]

A 317: Not quite RAW, but racial traits that aren't specific to anatomy can be used with Wildshape. https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/...13450645979136

Given this, I would say that Long-limbed would not work. I can't tell you about the Goliath's resistance though.

Q 318: If a Trickery Cleric had Invoke Duplicity active when they bodily entered an Antimagic Field, would they be able to cast spells from their duplicate while it is outside the field?

Normally Antimagic Field doesn't stop concentration on magic effects, so the duplicate has that going for them. The problem is whether Invoke Duplicity counts as an effect on the cleric or its own independent effect. Channel Divinity effects are explicitly called out as magical.

[greenstone]

A 309
The range of the touch spell is now 30 feet but it is still a melee spell attack. For example, thorn whip has a range but still requires a melee spell attack roll.

[SaA]

Q319

Bard College of Satire Tumbling Fool ability lets you take the Dash action among other things as a Bonus action. this still leaves your action open could you also in the same turn Just take the Dash action ?

so say your speed is 30, and you move your speed, then you use Dash, move another 30, then tumbling fool and move another 30 for a total of 90ft in one turn ?

[Varlon]

A319
Yes. Here's a Sage Advice about the very similar Cunning Action/Step of the Wind.

[Escribblings]

Q320

Can 2 players grapple the same creature?


Q320 b

Extension to the question...

Can 2 players grapple the same 2 creatures.

Scenario

A group of 2 barbarians and 4 squishies come up against 2 creatures resistant to normal weapons, and no one has any magic weapons.

Previously I have had 1 barb hold 2 foe.

2 raging barbs (advantage on strength) each grapple 1 foe.

B1+F1 and B2+F2

Assuming successful, on the next round can they both grapple the foe their comrade is grappling?

B1+F1&F2 and B2+F2&F1

Q320 c

And does that mean the foe, if grappled by 2 creatures, has to make 1 or 2 checks to free themself?

[braven]

I believe that in that situation, one grappler would be considered to be helping the other, but I could be wrong.

[Maxilian]

A320 Yes to all (note: Have in mind that to make the check the new to spend their action -normally-, so they won't be able to escape from both in one turn by normal means) -Unless you get some way to force movement on the grappler or yourself.

Q321, can an Eldrith Knight Fighter lvl 7 with 1 lvl in Death Cleric, could use its Action to use a Necromancy cantrip (chill touch - Toll the dead) to 2 creatures that are at 5 of each other, and then use its bonus action to make a weapon attack (with the War Magic ability)?

[Escribblings]

A320 Yes to all (note: Have in mind that to make the check the new to spend their action -normally-, so they won't be able to escape from both in one turn by normal means) -Unless you get some way to force movement on the grappler or yourself.

Thank you.

That was what I was hoping would be the case.

2 characters both grappling the same 2 foe making that said foe would basically be unable to escape in 1 turn.

[Maxilian]

Thank you.

That was what I was hoping would be the case.

2 characters both grappling the same 2 foe making that said foe would basically be unable to escape in 1 turn.

Yeah, kind of... (unless they can teleport -one way or the other- force movement on himself or force movement on both of you at the same time)

[ZorroGames]

Q 321 i believe...

Maybe I am just missing something but the Defensive Duelist Feat can only be used once in a round?

I shoot, I move, I use my bonus to “do something ‘bonusy’ “ then I am attacked/hit with the exact die roll needed by the next monster in initiative order and I use my reaction to defeat it with (DD) Defensive Duelist. Another Monster next hits me later in this round/turn with exactly the die roll needed but since I used my reaction in this turn I cannot use DD again this turn, right?

Would be nice if it were so but doesn’t read that way to me, others think it does. What is the RAW/RAI usage of DD in a single combat round/turn, please?

[Lombra]

A321

It works as you described it, it is not the equivalent of a shield spell.

[Maxilian]

Maybe I am just missing something but the Defensive Duelist Feat can only be used once in a round?

I shoot, I move, I use my bonus to “do something ‘bonusy’ “ then I am attacked/hit with the exact die roll needed by the next monster in initiative order and I use my reaction to defeat it with (DD) Defensive Duelist. Another Monster next hits me later in this round/turn with exactly the die roll needed but since I used my reaction in this turn I cannot use DD again this turn, right?

Would be nice if it were so but doesn’t read that way to me, others think it does. What is the RAW/RAI usage of DD in a single combat round/turn, please?

Yes, its only once per round (As it consumes your reaction, and you only have one reaction per turn -that also means you won't be able to use your OA)

[Petrocorus]

Q 322
Do we resolve the reaction attack given by the Sentinel feat before the foe's attack which has triggered it? For instance, if a foe attack a valid ally, and if the Sentinel attack kills the foe, is the foe's attack still resolved?

Q 323
Does a spellcaster requires to keep a "clear path to" the area of effect of an active concentration spell? For instance, if a druid cast a Flaming Sphere, does he need to keep a line of sight to the Sphere in order to keep it up? And in order to move it?

Q 324
Same question for a non-concentration spell that can be moved or modified, like Spirit Weapon.

Q 325
Does a Spirit Weapon occupy a space?

[Maxilian]

Q 322
Do we resolve the reaction attack given by the Sentinel feat before the foe's attack which has triggered it? For instance, if a foe attack a valid ally, and if the Sentinel attack kills the foe, is the foe's attack still resolved?

For you to get the Sentinel attack, they need to attack, so Sentinel attack trigger after your ally was hit.

Q 323
Does a spellcaster requires to keep a "clear path to" the area of effect of an active concentration spell? For instance, if a druid cast a Flaming Sphere, does he need to keep a line of sight to the Sphere in order to keep it up? And in order to move it?

You need to see where you are moving it, i don't think you need to see the sphere though.

Q 324
Same question for a non-concentration spell that can be moved or modified, like Spirit Weapon.

Need to watch where it goes

Q 325
Does a Spirit Weapon occupy a space?

Only if the spell says it does (Like the Guardian of Faith), in case of Spiritual Weapon, it doesn't

[Petrocorus]

For you to get the Sentinel attack, they need to attack, so Sentinel attack trigger after your ally was hit.

Need to watch where it goes

Only if the spell says it does (Like the Guardian of Faith), in case of Spiritual Weapon, it doesn't

Thanks

You need to see where you are moving it, i don't think you need to see the sphere though.

But do you need to see it to keep concentrating on it?

[Dmdork]

Q326 A Paladin's divine sense can locate an invisible undead creature. Does the pally still have disadvantage on the attack?

[Varlon]

A326 Yes. Attacks against a target you cannot see are at disadvantage even if you know their location.

[ebbisis]

Q327 Can a flask of oil be deposited on the ground where a creature is currently occupying the space?

You can also pour a flask of oil on the ground to cover a 5-foot-square area, provided that the surface is level.

[Erose]

Q328 If a caster is maintaining concentration on a spell and they get knocked prone/shoved does that force a concentration check even though no damage occurred?

[Millstone85]

A328 No. What makes you think it would?

[Maxilian]

Q328 If a caster is maintaining concentration on a spell and they get knocked prone/shoved does that force a concentration check even though no damage occurred?

I believe that fall into DM discretion as the DM may decide to make you roll for a con save whenever something may disrupt it, be it a bad climate, like an earthquake or something like that, or a big storm, so i would say... in most cases, you do. (but only for the base DC 10)

[Erose]

A328 No. What makes you think it would?

Well, I didn't state that I think anything. I'll entertain your question though. I'm aware that RL can't be used to determine RAW but getting slammed/tripped/shoved to the ground just seems like that would disturb an individual's concentration on just about anything.

[Maxilian]

A328 No. What makes you think it would?

Are you sure about that? i mean... there are rules about earthquakes, moving platforms and things like those that could force the caster to make a con save, so i don't see it out of RAW to say they would need to (Note: Nothing mentions it in detail, but it may be RAI)

[georgie_leech]

Are you sure about that? i mean... there are rules about earthquakes, moving platforms and things like those that could force the caster to make a con save, so i don't see it out of RAW to say they would need to (Note: Nothing mentions it in detail, but it may be RAI)

RAI certainly, but RAW concerns itself with what is written, and it doesn't say that knocking someone Prone forces a check. You are correct that there are circumstances that can lead to the DM calling for a check outside of damage, but that puts it in "Ask Your DM" territory, not "yes."

[Maxilian]

RAI certainly, but RAW concerns itself with what is written, and it doesn't say that knocking someone Prone forces a check. You are correct that there are circumstances that can lead to the DM calling for a check outside of damage, but that puts it in "Ask Your DM" territory, not "yes."

I agree, but not does it put it in a No, either, having in mind what RAW mentions (how it points out that things like moving terrain could make you force a save, so in theory the same should apply), in the end, the only "RAW" answer we could give is "Ask your DM", as there may not be any certain answer there.

Note: Actually... after re-reading it, it may be more RAW to say just No. (so... yeah, you may ignore me)

[Dmdork]

Q329 if someone is invisible, totally obscured, or you're just blind, all you get is disadvantage on your attacks really. You know where they are and can target them, correct?