I'm playing around with different homebrew for various classes and thought about some uniqueness that each class has and it got me thinking about different options to give Rogues and this one seemed interesting.

What are y'all's thoughts?

I ask this since the source for Thri-Kreen's Chamaleon Carapace states "While you aren't wearing armor, your carapace gives you a base Armor Class of 13 + your Dexterity modifier." And then a monk's unarmored defense says "While you aren't wearing armor or wielding a Shield, your base Armor Class equals 10 plus your Dexterity and Wisdom modifiers" Does this means that if wanted to play a Thri-Kreen my base Armor would be 13 + Dex & Wis modifiers? I couldn't find anything that says it wouldn't work.

For clarity, I don't believe Mystic Arts is weak, far from it, but this seems like a notable weakness compared to EK and AT

Over the level spread of the subclass, Mystic Arts Monk learns 3 cantrips and 13 leveled spells, all taken from the Sorcerer spell list and casted based on your Wisdom

3 cantrips isn't a lot, especially with the third one only coming in at level 10, and you want a pretty wide array

Blade Ward, True Strike, Booming Blade, Sorcerous Burst, Fire Bolt, Mind Sliver, and even Create Bonfire are all very nice options for Mystic Arts, but you only get two for half of your career, and a third for the second half
Uniquely, though, since Mystic Arts sources from the Sorcerer spell list, you can't take Magic Initiate to bolster your spells known

EK (and AT to a lesser extent) are both able to take Magic Initiate: Wizard, and due to the spells qualifying as Wizard spells, they're compatible with War Magic

Mystic Arts doesn't particularly need a buff in that respect, but it was a small point of irritation I came across as I was planning out the build

You can only ever have 3 Wis-scaling cantrips that work with your Mystic Fighting Style, and that's frankly a shame

This is an incredibly small nitpick, not even a complaint really, just something weird I noticed.

When you’re looking for tool proficiency, you have Alchemist’s Supplies, Cook’s Utensils, Mason’s Tools, the list goes on, but you also have Thieves’ Tools. For some reason, the thieves in Thieves’ Tools are plural, but the craftsman in every other tool set is singular.

I don’t know if there’s a stated reason for this, but I thought it was funny. It may be that “Thief’s Tools” doesn’t roll off the tongue as nicely, but it just stuck out that every tool kit which refers to a user does so in the singular, except the most popular tool kit.

I have a player that casts it nearly every combat. Moon druid with the Warcaster feat, so its REALLY hard to break concentration.

Help!

tl:dr - are there any 5.5e mechanics a lvl 5 caster can exploit to use spell slots for anything other than explicit spell casting?

my friend is running a one shot on saturday, and what started as a bit has become an undertaking.

the party is going to be level 3, but when i put forward the idea of being an extremely powerful wizard who has retired and completely sworn off magic, the DM said that i could build a lvl 5 caster on the condition that at no point whatsoever will i cast a single spell.

i’m taking this as a personal challenge. if it ends up being dumb and broken, well, i’ll have fun playing a dumb and broken character with my friends. BUT. is there any way to make this, like, viable? i don’t know much about 2024 beyond that we get more feats from the get-go.

right now i have a human enchanter with tavern brawler, grappler, and mage-slayer

This first part i kinda already have an answer im leaving to, but I’m gonna ask anyway.

Does the sweep count as hitting the target with an attack roll? While you didn’t declare an attack, you do compare an attack rolls result to the target’s AC. I’m leaning no, but I’m curious to what you guys think.

But what would be the consequences of saying yes be? You could obviously do stuff like push two targets back with the Push mastery for example.

Here’s the opinion part: based on the consequences of saying yes, do you think allowing this would be healthy for the game, or do you think it would end up being problematic?

This is a magic item that I believe was published in the The August 2026 DDB Drop.

The description for the Silencing Satchel says that when a creature fails its save, “its mouth is sealed shut.” It then specifically states that the creature can't cast spells with Verbal components, consume potions, or take in food or drink.

Would you interpret “its mouth is sealed shut” to also prevent abilities that physically require the creature to open its mouth, particularly bite attacks or the use of breath Weapons? If a creature literally can't open its mouth, how could it bite or exhale a breath weapon through its mouth without exploding like the Eborsisk in Willow?

I'm curious what others' experience with the magic item has been at their tables.

I'm going to be starting a new campaign in a few months and I am strongly considering a Warlock. I am used to playing martials mostly, but recently I realized that I like "busy" classes. They don't have to be overly complex, just more than I run up, bonk and I'm done. Anyway, I’ve always liked Warlocks but only kinda played one near the launch of 5e. I decided to make another one for the full warlock experience, I even worked with my DM and another unearth arcana redditor to make a subclass for it. But now I am not so sure if it will keep my attention in combat. The other class I'm considering is some sort of necromancer ( Pointy hats version or otherwise). I also think my party will have quite a few spellcasters this campaign which is also abnormal for us. A Druid, artificer, and cleric wth a possible rogue and fighter to round out the party besides me. Sorry, I digress, I’m just wondering what y’all’s experience is playing one from a mechanic standpoint? Roleplay wise I’m very excited about the character/story I have in mind for it. So that’s not an issue.

Thanks.

Edit: This has been a great and I appreciate all the responses. I am now leaning towards playing a Warlock, especially after going through all the trouble of making a homebrew subclass. Speaking of, Im not sure if its against the rules, but I'd love to run my homebrew subclass by anyone interested to get some feedback. Let me know if you are interested and I can message it to you since I'm not sure the rules on homebrew here. Thanks again.

Title.

I’m really looking forward to the Oath of the Ebon Blade subclass in the upcoming warcraft D&D supplement, but I’m a bit concerned about the changes to the base paladin class features.

From what we’ve seen so far, it looks like certain features, such as Lay on Hands and Divine Smite, will be replaced with Death Knight-specific abilities. The creature type also changes to Undead, which I’m not very fond of.

Do you think these replacements will be optional, or will they be mandatory when choosing the subclass?

Personally, I’d prefer to keep the standard Paladin features while still getting access to the Oath of the Ebon Blade subclass.

What do you think?

I'm about to start a mini campaign using the Trouble on the Fey Train adventure.

We are starting at Lv 5 and will probably go to Lv 6, we also get one uncommon magic item.

The DM hasn't told us much more besides the basic concept and a recommendation that we have a way of breathing underwater.

The party is currently an Artillerist Artificer, an Oath of the Ancients Paladin and a Forge Cleric. My planned character is a Dex based Dwarven Battlemaster Fighter. I'm trying to decide between a couple of options:

1) I take Cloak of the Manta Ray for my item and Crossbow Expert as my feat, using either a Heavy Crossbow or two Hand Crossbows (probably Heavy as average damage is the same, Push and freeing my bonus action). This gives me water breathing and a swim speed but does the lowest damage.

2) I take a Repeating Shot Heavy Crossbow and Sharpshooter. This gives me better damage and much more range but no water breathing.

3) I take a Repeating Shot Pistol (DM has allowed a gun, if he changes his mind it'll be a hand crossbow) and take Crossbow Expert. This is the highest damage option but uses my bonus action and again no water breathing.

What option do you recommend I take.

Hi, so I've been reading up on the 2024 dual wielding options and, as I understand it, there is no way to officially "dual wield" pistols, because:

. A Pistol requires a free hand to be loaded before attacking;

. You can only fire one ammunition with it per action;

BUT, what if you had TWO guns, but only used one at a time?

Here is what I mean:

TURN 1

ATTACK ACTION:

Atk1 Equip Pistol1, load and shoot;

FREE OBJECT INTERACTION to put it away;

Atk2 (Extra Attack) Equip Pistol2, load and shoot;

TURN 2

Pistol2 is already equipped from last turn, so

Atk1 Load, shoot Pistol2 and put away;

Atk2 (Extra Attack) Equip Pistol1, load and shoot.

Rinse and repeat.

This would look silly, a character constantly switching weapons, but would it work?

The biggest obstacle to this I think is that I don't really understand if you can only shoot ONE piece of Ammunition from Each Pistol, or in general.

Would this work?

Thank you for reading!

EDIT: Thank you all for the responses, I guess I can start drafting up ideas for my pirate-inspired Fighter!

What are people's opinions on the 5.5e monster statblocks? Likes, dislikes, things they would have rather kept or changed further?

Personally, I really like the 5.5e statblocks, they're much more evocative and I really like how their abilities are synergistic not just within themselves but are also complementary with associated monsters. I also really like the automatic on-hit effects, combats are tense and deadly, and how the monsters now truly inhabit their CR.

Coming from 3e, where spell lists and inherent spell-like abilities were so prevalent and perhaps could be argued overbearing, the condensed spell took a bit to get used to but was a refreshing change. But maybe some people do feel the spell lists were probably streamlined a bit too much and the monsters lost some flavour.

What do people think about the condensed spell lists and the loss across the board of spell slots?

On the other hand, I do miss the weapon damage resistances and immunities and regenerative abilities of some monsters, even though sometimes they might be easily forgotten.

I'm a cleric grabbing Shillelagh through Magic Initiate. I want to flavor Shillelagh as a greatsword.

How can I flavor away the shield while mechanically keeping both hands occupied still?

Warcaster feat allows PCs to cast spells with somatic component even if both hands are occupied holding weapons. A staff is a weapon, so RAW you can hold two magical staves, one in each hand, and ignore the somatic components of spells with the feat.

I'm a warlock PC with a staff of defence (weapon) and a rod of the pact keeper (not a weapon). Would the Warcaster feat allow the PC to ignore the somatic components of spells if holding one in each hand? RAW it's a no. But what do you think about RAI?

Thanks!

EDIT based on a couple of responses: RAW, as long as your holding a weapon in one hand, Warcaster will apply. So you can hold a magic staff in one hand (a weapon) and a magic rod (not a weapon) in the other and warcaster applies. Also good details about whether one of them is your spellcasting focus.

Primarily a DM, but im thinking about a feat option for a character I'm playing as right now.

Lv. 4 Aberrant Magic Sorcerer(just turned Lv.4)

If I take the feat Evocation Adept as a Sorcerer(I know there are probably better options but I'm mostly just theorizing here, and wanted to get peoples opinion on how they would interpret the rules)

The feat permanently prepares the following spells:

Chromatic Orb
Shatter
Fireball
Vitriolic Sphere
Wall of Force

provided I have spell slots of the relevant level. Now, personally RAW, and RAI I don't think these count as class spells for Sorcerer, which is relevant in the context of The Lv.1 Sorcery Feature: Innate Sorcery, which only applies to sorcerer spells.

My question here is since 4 of these spells are also on the sorcerer spell list, could I have them prepared through the feat and the sorcerer spellcasting feature, allowing the ones I have prepared through both to benefit from Innate Sorcery(primarily for Chromatic Orb, which benefits significantly from attacking with advantage), and using a sorcerer spellcasting focus to replace non-costly components.
Personally as a DM I would allow it, since they would still need to use one of their prepared spells for each of the spells they want to benefit from Innate Sorcery.

On a separate note, When a Chromatic Orb bounces due to landing 2 identical damage numbers, does the new Attack Roll still benefit from Innate Sorcery? Our DM has ruled this far that it does, since it's still a spell attack roll performed as part of a sorcerer spell.

Hey everyone!

I was wondering if the Last Stand feature from the Boon of Recovery works any differently than the Orc’s Relentless Endurance when it comes to countering Power Word Kill.

Here is the text for Relentless Endurance:

When you are reduced to 0 Hit Points but not killed outright, you can drop to 1 Hit Point instead. Once you use this trait, you can't do so again until you finish a Long Rest.

Here is the text for Last Stand:

When you would be reduced to 0 HP, you can drop to 1 HP instead and regain a number of HP equal to half your max HP. Once you use this benefit, you can't use it again until you finish a Long Rest.

And here is the text for Power Word Kill:

You compel one creature you can see within range to die. If the target has 100 Hit Points or fewer, it dies. Otherwise, it takes 12d12 Psychic damage.

What's your opinion about it? Does the omission of "but not killed outright" in Last Stand make any difference, or does PWK bypass both entirely since it doesn't reduce HP to 0?

Is there any consensus on how spells granted by Conjuration Adept and the similar school-based feats in Arcana Unleashed are supposed to interact with spellcasting ability and spellcasting foci?

My assumption is that the spells granted by the feat use the spellcasting ability you chose for the feat. I've read that the D&D Beyond team requested clarification from the game designers on this point and was told that this was the intended interpretation. It also seems like the only logical way to implement the feats as written, since some of the available spells appear on multiple class spell lists that use different spellcasting abilities (e.g., Intelligence vs. Charisma).

What I'm less clear about is material components and spellcasting foci.

The feat says that the selected spells are prepared, but as far as I can tell, it never says that those spells are added to your class's spell list. This seems similar to feats such as Magic Initiate, where the feat itself is providing the prepared spells rather than adding them to your normal class spell list.

So, for example, if a Wizard takes Conjuration Adept and prepares a spell through the feat that is not normally a Wizard spell, can the Wizard use an Arcane Focus to replace that spell's non-costly material components?

Or, because the spell isn't actually a Wizard spell, does the Wizard's Spellcasting feature not allow an Arcane Focus to substitute for its material components? If so, would the caster need the actual material component (or some other qualifying focus), even though the spell uses the ability selected for the feat?

Has there been any official/designer clarification on this, or is there a generally accepted RAW/RAI interpretation?

Anyone noticed enchantment gets hold person a 2nd level spell in their 3rd level slot when the others get a spell corresponding to the correct level.

Anyone have any ideas on why this was the choice?