Simple RAW for 5e 4: Smackdown v. RAW

[Zetakya]

This is a question that's come up in a current thread about Swords Bards (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthre...-Caster-vs-ASI), although it may have more general applications. I'm away from my books for the duration and online searches don't give me clarity on this:

Q516: If you are casting a spell which does not have a material component, but does have a Somatic Component can you still make the Somatic Component gestures with an Arcane Focus in hand?

[Dmdork]

Q517 I have polearm master feat. I make my attack as a bonus action with the butt end of my polearm. do I get str damage?

[Galithar]

Q517 I have polearm master feat. I make my attack as a bonus action with the butt end of my polearm. do I get str damage?

A517

Yes. The default is that you add your modifier from the ability used to make the attack to damage. Two-weapon fighting explicitly overrules this to remove the modifier from the attack if it is positive. PAM does not, so it is simply an attack as normal with a d4 damage die.

[Chronos]

A 516:

By RAW, no. The rule about using the same hand for holding a focus and for somatic components only applies to spells with a material component.

A similar issue that arises with the magic items Instruments of the Bards was fixed in errata: Originally, if you used an Instrument as a material component to cast a spell that charms others, the creatures would have disadvantage on their save, but this was almost useless, because almost no spells that charm have a material component. The errata said that you could nonetheless use the Instrument to cast charm spells, even if they don't ordinarily have a material component. A DM might use this as precedent for a houserule on the issue you asked about.

[Mr Adventurer]

Q518

When you are Polymorphed by the spell, you don't keep any of your class features or anything at all that's not part of the form you take - is that correct? I don't see the same exceptions that are present in Wild Shape but want to make sure.

[Galithar]

Q518

When you are Polymorphed by the spell, you don't keep any of your class features or anything at all that's not part of the form you take - is that correct? I don't see the same exceptions that are present in Wild Shape but want to make sure.

A518
This is correct. Polymorph replaces your game statistics entirely and only makes an exception for alignment and personality. This means you lose all racial and class features from your previous form and gain those of the new form.

[Mr Adventurer]

Cool.

Q519

What happens if I cast Polymorph on an ally who is on 0 hit points? As far as I can tell, they replace their hit points so they wake up and can act on their turn (though they are prone, presumably)?

[ThePolarBear]

Cool.

Q519

What happens if I cast Polymorph on an ally who is on 0 hit points?

A519 Nothing. As per spell description, it can't affect a target that has 0 hit points. If that line isn't on your PHB, you have a very early (if not first) edition of the PHB. The spell description has received some changes in later printings (You can find in the official document of such changes on the WoTC site, latest in my knowledge has been released on april 2020).

[Mr Adventurer]

Dang, no, I just skipped over that line. Thanks

[TheCleverGuy]

[bold]Q520

Is there an official rule for how much damage is dealt from falling into a pool of acid? And if so, how much?

[Ortho]

[bold]Q520

Is there an official rule for how much damage is dealt from falling into a pool of acid? And if so, how much?

As luck would have it, one of the examples in the Improvising Damage section of the DMG (pg 249) gives falling into a vat of acid 4d10 damage.

[Dualswinger]

Q521 An Echo Knight Fighter with the Grappler feat successfully grapples a target. On his next turn, he uses his manifest Echo and the echo attacks with his greatsword. Do the attacks have advantage?

Mercer has said on twitter that an Echo does NOT count as an individual creature, and that the character is the one making the attacks, just from a different space.

[E’Tallitnics]

Q521 A character with the Grappler feat successfully grapples a target. On his next turn, he uses his manifest Echo and attacks with his greatsword. Do the attacks have advantage?

Mercer has said on twitter that an Echo does NOT count as an individual creature, and that the character is the one making the attacks, just from a different space.

A521: As long as your echo is attacking the creature you have grappled the echo attacks with advantage.

• When you take the Attack action on your turn, any attack you make with that action can originate from your space or the echo’s space. You make this choice for each attack.
  

Given that wording I’m not seeing where the advantage granted by the feat wouldn’t apply. ​​

[ThePolarBear]

Q521 A character[...]successfully grapples a target [...] and attacks with with his greatsword.

[FONT=verdana]A521: [...] Given that wording I’m not seeing where the advantage granted by the feat wouldn’t apply.

A521 The reason i see as of "no, you don't get advantage on the attack" is "you don't get to make that particular attack at all".
A greatsword is a 2-handed weapon and assuming i'm not wrong in assuming just 2 hands or other feature that allows to grapple without using those hands that character can't attack with a greatsword at all while grappling.

Assuming the attack can be made to begin with, then yes, Grappler would grant to the attacks advantage.

[E’Tallitnics]

A521 The reason i see as of "no, you don't get advantage on the attack" is "you don't get to make that particular attack at all".
A greatsword is a 2-handed weapon and assuming i'm not wrong in assuming just 2 hands or other feature that allows to grapple without using those hands that character can't attack with a greatsword at all while grappling.

Assuming the attack can be made to begin with, then yes, Grappler would grant to the attacks advantage.

R521: Great catch! Grapple does say, “...one free hand…” so a two-handed weapon is out. Thank you.

[Dualswinger]

A521 The reason i see as of "no, you don't get advantage on the attack" is "you don't get to make that particular attack at all".
A greatsword is a 2-handed weapon and assuming i'm not wrong in assuming just 2 hands or other feature that allows to grapple without using those hands that character can't attack with a greatsword at all while grappling.

Assuming the attack can be made to begin with, then yes, Grappler would grant to the attacks advantage.

So your logic is "Because the Prime does not have 2 hands free, his Echo therefore doesn't" ?

[ThePolarBear]

Q521 An Echo Knight Fighter [...] uses his manifest Echo and the echo attacks with his greatsword.

When you take the Attack action on your turn, any attack you make with that action can originate from your space or the echo’s space. You make this choice for each attack.

So your logic is "Because the Prime does not have 2 hands free, his Echo therefore doesn't" ?

A521 - I'm assuming the wording provided is the correct one for the feature that is being called in question.
The wording states that it is the knight, not the echo, making the attacks. The only thing that changes is the position from which those are made, not who makes them. If there's anything more to add, it would be better to do so in a separate thread.

[Gungor]

Q522 Suppose a creature is under the effects of a battlemaster fighter's goading attack and, before the end of the battlemaster's next turn, a paladin successfully casts compelled duel. Both of these effects impose disadvantage on attacks against anyone other than the fighter in the first case, and the paladin in the second case. Nothing in the wording of compelled duel says that it overrides or bypasses existing effects on the target. Does the creature effectively have disadvantage on all attacks until the goading attack's effect wears off?

[Chaos Jackal]

A 522

Yes. As you said, there's nothing to override or bypass. The creature will have disadvantage.

[da newt]

Q523

Does the Mule's "Beast of Burden" (considered Large animal for carry capacity) mean that it can serve as a mount for a MED sized PC?

[Dualswinger]

Q523

Does the Mule's "Beast of Burden" (considered Large animal for carry capacity) mean that it can serve as a mount for a MED sized PC?

No, it literally just allows it to pull or carry a heavier amount of "stuff" but doesn't have the body size to be able to serve as a suitable mount.

[Samayu]

Q524
Calm Emotions
You attempt to suppress strong emotions in a group of people. Each humanoid in a 20-foot-radius sphere centered on a point you choose within range must make a Charisma saving throw; a creature can choose to fail this saving throw if it wishes. If a creature fails its saving throw, choose one of the following two effects.
You can suppress any effect causing a target to be charmed or frightened. When this spell ends, any suppressed effect resumes, provided that its duration has not expired in the meantime.
Alternatively, you can make a target...

While the spell is in effect, can the calmed humanoid be subject to new charm or fear effects?

[Samayu]

*snip*
Please start over with the numbering. When this one reached 50 pages, please report it so that we can start a new one. Thanks.

Hey, we hit 50 pages. When the new RAW discussion is posted, could we have something about "rules questions" in the title. I feel like there are a lot of new people who come here with questions, who don't know what RAW means, or why they should post their questions in "Simple RAW for 5e".

[Samayu]

Q525

If you use a magic item to cast a spell you're really casting the spell. The usual rules apply, such as casting time, and the DMG specifically says you must maintain concentration. It's just that you don't have to have the spell prepared or use a slot, or even have magical ability.

So does this mean barbarians can't use magic items to cast spells while raging?

[Galithar]

Q525

If you use a magic item to cast a spell you're really casting the spell. The usual rules apply, such as casting time, and the DMG specifically says you must maintain concentration. It's just that you don't have to have the spell prepared or use a slot, or even have magical ability.

So does this mean barbarians can't use magic items to cast spells while raging?

A525
Yes it does. However if an item simply recreates the effects of a spell without the wording "You cast X spell" they can still use it. For a example the Necklace of Fireballs only requires you to throw the bead. It then "detonates as a 3rd-level fireball spell" but you did not cast the spell. So a raging barbarian can still use it.

[Samayu]

A525
Yes it does. However if an item simply recreates the effects of a spell without the wording "You cast X spell" they can still use it. For a example the Necklace of Fireballs only requires you to throw the bead. It then "detonates as a 3rd-level fireball spell" but you did not cast the spell. So a raging barbarian can still use it.

Good to know! Thanks

[LtPowers]

A524

Yes, the targets of calm emotions can be subjected to new effects. But those effects are suppressed as long as calm emotions is still active.


Powers &8^]

[WaroftheCrans]

Q526
Wall of force says "Nothing can physically pass through the wall. It is immune to all damage and can't be dispelled by dispel magic. A disintegrate spell destroys the wall instantly, however. The wall also extends into the Ethereal Plane, blocking ethereal travel through the wall."

Fireball says "A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot radius must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one. The fire spreads around corners. It ignites flammable objects in the area that aren’t being worn or carried."

Can you cast a fireball through a wall of force? And can the resulting explosion pass through a wall of force?
Fireball is the example I'm choosing, but if your answer can resolve the general ambiguity of what is physical, that would be great.

[E’Tallitnics]

Q526
Wall of force says "Nothing can physically pass through the wall. It is immune to all damage and can't be dispelled by dispel magic. A disintegrate spell destroys the wall instantly, however. The wall also extends into the Ethereal Plane, blocking ethereal travel through the wall."

Fireball says "A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot radius must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one. The fire spreads around corners. It ignites flammable objects in the area that aren’t being worn or carried."

Can you cast a fireball through a wall of force? And can the resulting explosion pass through a wall of force?
Fireball is the example I'm choosing, but if your answer can resolve the general ambiguity of what is physical, that would be great.

A526: No, because you need a clear path to the target in this case.

A Clear Path to the Target

To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover.
If you place an area of effect at a point that you can't see and an obstruction, such as a wall, is between you and that point, the point of origin comes into being on the near side of that obstruction.

[ThePolarBear]

Wall of force says "Nothing can physically pass through the wall." [...] "The wall also extends into the Ethereal Plane, blocking ethereal travel through the wall."

[...]

Can you cast a fireball through a wall of force? And can the resulting explosion pass through a wall of force?
Fireball is the example I'm choosing, but if your answer can resolve the general ambiguity of what is physical, that would be great.

A526 Magical is not an antonym of physical in general: a magical longsword is very much as physical as a mundane one, for example. What the antonym is would more appropriately describe "incorporeal" or "intangible", albeit many creatures and effects that behave incorporeally in D&D would also be blocked by the wall, due to the Etheral plane part. "With no physical component", so to speak.

One can't also target something that is beyond total cover with spells and cover, in general, regards physical obstructions.

AoEs in particular would come into existance on "this side" of an obstruction should one attempt cast them at a point beyond an unseen obstruction.

Sorry for the non-exaustive explanation, but i'm desperately trying to avoid entering into the "cover" vs "concealed" argument in this case and this thread. You can find more on the topic with a search, but i don't believe it needs to be treated as an argument here, so i'll let you draw your conclusions.

This should give you enough RAW context to draw your own conclusions, whatever might them be (while avoiding entering the territory that is "cover" and "concealed" as an argument.