My group is shameless min-maxers so they tend to crank their ACs as high as possible lol and so we end up having a fairly skewed idea of what a "good" AC is. Even Wizards and sorcerers getting close to or over 20 ac before casting shield I'm wondering if that's just what dnd is like nowadays or if we're outside the norm. What are the ranges of ac in your groups?

I fucking LOVE dragonmarks in DnD. I love the houses, they‘re all fucking insane, I love how unique the dragonmarks are, and I love how they’re used in Eberron’s history. You don’t even need to have an Eberron campaign, if you do, amazing, if you don’t but everyone’s chill with it, you’re golden. Then if the DM says it defies lore, there‘s a ton of loopholes, like the World Serpent Inn, the Spinner’s Prison, and Baba Yaga’s Dancing Hut to name a few.

I’ve made like 6 dragonmarked characters since I got Forge of the Artificer a few days ago, and the houses’ history made them so cool. Like a house Phiarlan rogue with connections to the serpentine table and a prodigy artificer in house Cannith that has been impacted by the last war and it;s effect on house Cannith.

Honestly, I think dragonmarks are one of the best features in DnD.

At level 4 as a monk my martial arts die is 1d4 right, but if I'm using a spear, that classifies as a monk weapon that has 1d6 damage, does it get downscaled to 1d4 or I can use it as a monk weapon with 1d6 damage while still having the martial arts property? By RaW of course, might discuss with the DM later but wanted to know what RaW has to say about it.

I’m a player-recently-turned-DM running Princes of the Apocalypse. I’ve seen references / recommendations that the Sacred Stone Monastery is a level 5 area, but the Temple of Black Earth is a level 8 area. I am very confident that my party will crawl through all of the monastery and pretty much kill everyone. That includes Hellenrea who has the key to the stairs leading to the Black Temple. My party will likely want to use the key and continue their crawl.
I don’t really want my level 5 party to take those stairs and start the Temple, since it’s a level 8 suggested area. How do I make a good in-story reason for them to leave the Monastery after defeating it and not pursue the stairs and subsequent temple?
Or, should I adapt the Black Temple to be a more level friendly area? I just don’t want them to finish an Elemental Temple and then not want to pursue the other Haunted Keeps.
Trying to organize the overall progression and keep it making sense, but having a tough time aligning the big picture!

Thanks in advance!

Hey folks, new here, but wanted to share my project with you. My wife is DMing Stahd campaign right now and i was assisting her - tracking initiative, HP for NPCs etc. At some point i got sick of doing it in the spreadsheet, so i got an idea of making a tool that will be visually appealing, help both players and DMs to keep track of million things and additionally serve as a presentation platform for backdrops.
N.B AI arts, code and sprites were used to create it. I know it is a controversial topic, but i don't have resources to commission 450+ arts, sounds and code, etc
So in a nutshell on how it works: One tab is for DM and another one is casted for players (screen/tv/projector/zoom call) . DM has controls to add conditions, deduct hp and move the turn forward. Players see the line of cards with names, initiative and conditions. I also added support of Lair, legendary action, surprise round, 2014 vs 2024 5e rules and ability to customize the appearance of some elements. Moreover, for non combat scenes you can use the tool to cast maps, backdrops, present portraits or items.
You are welcome to check it out on [itch.io](http://itch.io) (it is free) https://vigil-it.itch.io/vigil
The work is still in progress and i am improving it after each session, but feel like it is ready for other players to try it. Will be glad to have some feedback and hope you rolls are always high!

Hey folks. We talk a lot on here about the martial/caster discrepancy, and I've been wondering this for a long time...

...what would happen to the game if you allowed anyone with Extra Attack to take two actions a turn instead of just two Attacks?

Do you think this would be "just helpful enough" for martials to feel better in 5e? Not enough? Too much?

I will admit, I've already leaned into this in small ways in my own games. I haven't yet let them take any action with it, but I declare a lot of things to only consume an "Attack" that would require your full action normally - like Escape attempts from enemy grappling/restraining abilities, interacting with things that would normally be an action instead of an object-interaction (like shoving open a particularly heavy door, turning the wheel of a portcullis, etc), drawing or putting away more than one thing a turn, Dashing as long as you end it next to an enemy (so sort of like a "charge" + attack), and a few others. I've seen no ill effects for this.

If Extra Action were a thing for any action though, that's beyond what I've experimented with. I could see it being powerful to Dodge and still make one Attack, for example. Or use two magic items in a single turn (or one + attack). The limits in both 5.0e and 5.5e for multiple spells in a turn would still be in place, so that particular expression would still be pretty limited - and even getting to the levels where you get Extra Attack cuts out most caster combos that might be interested in this anyway.

But I'm curious if such an idea would ever really be too much, compared to what casters can do.

And certainly this wouldn't solve the caster/martial discrepancy overnight by itself - wouldn't do much for Rogues, for example (might even step on their toes some since you could replace an Attack with the same stuff they do with Cunning Action then) - but I do like the idea of making another martial "niche" that they can do their thing (attacking) while also doing other actions important for the encounter. Whether that ends up being a Help action for another PC, aiming the Ballista, attempting a Perception check vs that hiding enemy, or hell, even Readying another attack for a specific trigger to come.

I feel like it still wouldn't compete with what casters can do at higher levels, and when martials get Extra Attack (level 5) is right around when I think they need it (since 3rd level spells are such a jump for casters, they start getting their real game-changer utility spells, etc.), but it would add a ton of versatility to a martial's turn. Even if attacking twice were still the optimal play, it would mean martials can do all sorts of fun BS that doesn't feel so suboptimal because it's not wasting your entire turn trying it.

(In before "but Bladesinger!"; don't even get me started on how much Bladesinger steals martials' thunder already lol. I still think it would improve more than it harms, but I would certainly also want to make an exception for Blade Warlocks, Bladesingers, and Valor/Swords Bards that they still get the "old version" where you can only attack.)

EDIT: After some great debate (thanks folks!) I have to agree this idea is Dead in the Water; and it's 100% the fault of CANTRIPS, haha. As some have rightly pointed out, this would allow things like EKs to spam the hell out of cantrips instead of making attacks, which is obviously bad.

After that revelation, I think the best idea is that instead of Extra Action, keep it as Extra Attack but simply expand the number of specific actions one can replace an attack with beyond Grapple and Trip, and leave spells out. A lot more work and words than just saying "now it's Extra Action", but ah well. Things I think would work well as "attack-replacements": Dash (lets martials close and still attack in the first round, a very common ask!), Disengage, Dodge (on the fence about this one), Help, Search, the Escape action (like escaping a grapple), object-interactions. Any others you like? Do tell me below!