dnd 5e – Can you tell if someone transfers Hunter’s Mark or Hex if the original target is reduced to 0HP?

The spells hunter’s mark and hex both have this clause:

If the target drops to 0 hit points before this spell ends, you can use a bonus action on a subsequent turn of yours to [mark/curse] a new creature.

Both of these spells have spellcasting components that would be observable to another creature when the spell is cast. If I want to mark or curse someone, anyone nearby will know.

If the original target is reduced to 0HP, is it observable in any way should the caster choose to transfer their mark/curse to another creature? Or is this essentially untraceable after the initial casting?

Obviously for this question, I am ignoring a sorcerer’s Subtle Spell metamagic. We can also assume that this is not from stealth; the caster is not trying to hide what they are doing, this is more about whether or not there is anything to hide beyond the initial casting.


dnd 5e – Can alcohol boost the effect of the dragonborns fire breath?

The Rules As Written don’t describe any effect on dragonborn fire breath from alcohol. Your DM could choose to issue a house rule if they wanted, but otherwise there is no effect.

Alcoholic drinks don’t even burn unless they’re at least 40% alcohol (80 proof). Beer and wine are less than that. If you drank something very high in alcohol content, your DM would probably rule that you’d get alcohol poisoning before you got an effect on your fire breath.

dnd 5e – Can you combine an Artificer’s Enhanced weapon infusion with a +3 magic weapon?

No, per RAW, since the +3 sword is already magical

Artificer Infusions
Artificers have invented numerous magical infusions, extraordinary processes that rapidly create magic items. To many, artificers seem like wonderworkers, accomplishing in hours what others need weeks to complete. {bolding mine; E:RftLW)

There aren’t any rules yet in AD&D 5e that modify a magic item (beyond what a DM cares to do). If you go back to your Enhance Weapon feature and read up on the general statement there, you see that the general case for Artificer Infusions indicates that the infusion itself does {something magical} and ends up with a magical weapon. Since the +3 weapon is already magical, it isn’t eligible for an upgrade, unless your DM is good with it. What your artificer probably needs to do in order to Enhance the weapon is find one that isn’t magical, and then make it magical.

The highest bonus for a magic item, even a legendary magic item, is +3.
Adding that flat bonus would put the weapon in to the artifactt category, with a +4. I suggest that you read up in the DMG about how hard artifacts are to make – well, only the DM makes them – before discussing this with your DM.

dnd 5e – How does a Ring of Spell Storing function?

Spells cast from the ring use normal actions and no components.

Many magic items allow the user to cast spells. The general rules for this are on p. 141 of the DMG, under the Spells subsection of Activating an Item:

Some magic items allow the user to cast a spell from the item. The spell is cast at the lowest possible spell level, doesn’t expend any of the user’s spell slots, and requires no components, unless the item’s description says otherwise. The spell uses its normal casting time, range, and duration, and the user of the item must concentrate if the spell requires concentration.

(emphases mine).

Beyond these rules for magic items, casting a spell follows the rules in the Player’s Handbook; generally, the character casting the spell takes the Cast a Spell action on their turn.

Here’s what the Ring of Spell Storing says about casting the spells in it (DMG, p. 192:

While wearing this ring, you can cast any spell stored in it. The spell uses the slot level, spell save DC, spell attack bonus, and spellcasting ability of the original caster, but is otherwise treated as if you cast the spell.

Let’s look at two examples of stored spells being cast:

  1. Fireball stored in the ring at 3rd level by a 10th Level School of Evocation wizard with a save DC of 16
  2. Magic Circle stored in the ring at 5th level by a 11th level Cleric with a save DC of 17.

Fireball, cast from the ring by a 3rd level Sorcerer (save DC 14):

  • Will require one action to cast (same as the spell)
  • Will do 8D6 damage; the original casting wizard’s Empowered Evocation feature will not apply since it is not one of the characteristics that the ring lists as being ‘stored’.
  • Can be used with Quickened Spell by the casting sorcerer, since that falls under being “treated as if you cast the spell”.
  • Will have a save DC of 16, from the original caster.

Magic Circle, cast from the ring by a 19th level Fighter:

  • Will require one minute to cast (same as the spell).
  • Will not require any chalk or other material components, even though that is normally required.
  • Will have a duration of three hours (base duration plus two extra hours for using a 5th level slot).
  • The fighter has no spellcasting ability, and thus no spell save DC, but the Magic Circle will have a save DC of 17.

dnd 5e – Interaction between an Intellect Devourer and a Simulacrum

An Intellect Devourer Has an ability called Body Thief, which states:

…the intellect devourer magically consumes
the target’s brain, teleports into the target’s skull, and takes
control of the target’s body. While inside a creature, the
intellect devourer has total cover against attacks and other
effects originating outside its host. The intellect devourer
retains its Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores, as
well as its understanding of Deep Speech, its telepathy, and
its traits. It otherwise adopts the target’s statistics. It knows
everything the creature knew, including spells and languages.

If an Intellect Devourer takes over a Simulacrum of a Wizard, can the Intellect Devourer recover spells with a long rest, or is it beholden to the simulacrum rule:

The simulacrum lacks the ability to learn or become more powerful, so it never increases its level or other abilities, nor can it regain expended spell slots.

This literally just happened to us and we are stumped. I think the Devourer is a new creature and thus can recover spells. As it would choose to gain the abilities but not the short comings of the new form.

dnd 5e – What happens when allies occupy the same space?

Unfortunately, Mike Mearls is not the proper authority on these matters – although he does try his best to help. Since he openly admitted he could not recall the rules on the matter and gave an educated guess, Jeremy Crawford recalled them for him.

As per the intended RAW in PHB pg. 191, under “Moving Around Other Creatures”:

“…you can’t willingly end your move in its space…”

Further explained by Jeremy Crawford in the tweet linked above:

“…you can’t willingly end your move —any part of it— in another creature’s space…”

So let’s first clear up some confusion as to the phrasing of this rule.

  • We know each creature gets a turn (1 turn) in the initiative each round; which starts being explained on PHB pg. 189.
  • We know each creature may take 1 action (Attack action, Cast a Spell action, Ready action) and possibly 1 bonus action (there are several) during that turn, with details also beginning on PHB pg. 189.
  • We know from PHB pg. 190 that you may also move an equal distance up to your speed, and can use as much or as little of your speed as you wish as well as breaking that movement in between various forms of travel (walking, climbing, jumping, etc) and that there is no ‘Move Action’.
  • We know from the next section on PHB pg. 190 that you can break up your movement in between attacks and other actions.

With what we know from the above clearly written rules, it then becomes clear that when Crawford says you can not end any part of your move (as detailed above) in a creature’s occupied space, he is referring to your Speed-based movement, and is not solely referring to ending your turn as a whole, which can include any of the above listed. Your only choice is finishing your movement in an unoccupied space near the creature in question, attack your target of choice, then move back through (if you have movement remaining) the occupied space making sure you (once again) do not end any part of your movement in that creature occupied space. Then you can end your turn. Keep in mind that each time you move through the space, it is difficult terrain, and costs you extra movement unless you have the ability to ignore difficult terrain.

With this in mind… the only relevant question you have remaining perplexes me, and I think there are only 2 outcomes.

  1. If Alice tries to move through an ally’s space, but she is stopped by a Ready-action grapple from a hostile creature near the ally’s space, then the Ready action you had in mind triggers (I am assuming?) the moment Alice is in range, interrupting her movement while she is still in her ally’s space and effectively reducing her speed to 0, as per the Grappled condition.

Her movement has just been forcefully (unwillingly) stopped in another creature’s space.

  1. Alice tries to somehow move through a hostile creature’s space but they Ready a grapple. In this case the Ready-action grapple would trigger when she got within attack range, because a grapple is always dependent on the Attack action, which you must forgo in place of a grapple. An enemy could never Ready a grapple to trigger when Alice steps into or onto their space.
  • There are no rules that apply any penalty for this outcome.
  • The space is difficult terrain anyway, so the addition of Alice to the space changes nothing.
  • We know a 5-foot ‘space’ is generally 5 feet of ‘effective creature threat’, and not a humanoid/creature 5 feet wide. So roughly 10 humanoids could stand grappled together in a 5-foot space, which is 25 square feet.
  • Stacking is another story entirely, and then you are dealing with distance/height in feet versus the creature’s speed (which becomes 0 and so couldn’t be tossed, thrown, or otherwise put on top of a grapple ‘pile’ higher than 1 foot tall).

dnd 5e – Is this combination of a pre-cast Shadow Blade with a Quickened Green-Flame Blade and then a Twinned (action) Green-Flame Blade legal?

I agree with above post, you can by RaW cast gfb off shadowblade but can’t twin gfb as it can hit multiple targets, it should be noted that boomingblade CAN be twinned, as it is a single target spell.

It should also be noted you should ask your DM if you can take both greenflameblade/boomingblade AND shadowblade, as shadowblade is from xanthars guide, while the other two are from the sword coast adventures, it would violate the standard phb+1 in AL, and some DMs prefer to use this ruleset as well so as to prevent gamebreaking builds, and while it’s fine at base level upcasting shadowblade while applying the cantrip damage, can get pretty nutty at higher levels for sorcerer, assuming you maintain concentration, and upcast, at maximum level

Example: with a 7th tier slot at lvl 18 the combo can deal 5d8 psychic+3d8 fire and 3d8fire+mod to a secondary adjacent target per round, if you quicken AND twin boomingblade after that’s an additional 5d8 psychic+3d8thunder to two targets in range plus an additional 4d8 thunder to each if they move before your next turn.

That’s a possible total of 35d8+3x str/dex mod+1xCha mod damage between two adjacent targets for a single 7th tier slot, every turn after you summon your blade, where you lose out on the gfb strike. then the combo only costs 3 sorcery points for every turn after, which you can do for 5 more turns. All For Sorcery points and a single 7th tier slot if you maintain concentration.

And thats WITHOUT taking a 2 level dip in paladin for divine smite.

Assuming max upcast At lower levels and accounting for cantrip scaling it’s still up to

29 d8+3x str/dex mod+1xCha mod at lvl 14 with a 7th tier slot.

26d8+3x str/dex mod+1xCha mod at lvl 11 with a 5th tier slot.

20d8+3x str/dex mod+1xCha mod at lvl 9 with a 5th tier slot.

17d8+3x str/dex mod+1xCha mod at lvl 5 with a 3rd tier slot.

8d8+3x str/dex mod+1xCha mod at lvl 3 with a 2nd tier slot.

Granted you can only use the combo with 3 sorcery points, but the higher lvl you get the longer you can potentially sustain this ridiculous output, and you can always swap out the gfb spell for something like fireball or disintegrate, or just twin boominblade for 1 sorcery point a turn for around 70% of the previously shown damage output.

dnd 5e – Where can I find official commentaries by the D&D 5e designers on why they designed certain rules the way they did?

Homebrewing is difficult work. I’m the kind of person who likes not only to understand the rules, but also the reasoning behind the rules before I alter or amend them myself.

However, as I’ve discovered recently, finding sources that explain said reasoning is really difficult. Google shows a multitude of useless results for any sort of thing resembling a developer commentary. My go-to resource for these things, this site, has designer-reasoning questions declared off-topic (yet I’m still asking here). I never get answers on Reddit.

Throughout the process of asking this question, I’ve learned a few things. The original question (Have WoTC ever made a designer commentary) has basically been answered (they have). However, they also decided to disappear said commentary along with lots of community dialogue, presumably leading to the difficulty I am having.

Therefore, I ask: Where is a good source that I can find official designer commentaries that explain the reasoning behind the rules of D&D 5th edition?
Note that this is distinct from things from Sage Advice. While that clarifies various rules, I’m looking for developer insight into the construction of the rules.

dnd 3.5e – Is there anything that either confirms or denies the possibility of a druid techsmith?

Techsmiths are devoted to the development of new inventions and the progression of achievement in the name of the Wonderbringer.

Followers of Gond believe in actions over words and results over intentions. They strive to hone their crafting abilities until they can create elegant and useful devices to suit any circumstances. So, a druid who also embraces technology & inventions (whilst still honouring & respecting nature) isn’t the traditional “Druid.”

Is there anything in the books that either confirms that druids can be techsmiths, or else explicitly states that they cannot?

dnd 5e – Can any of the found greater steeds benefit from the weapon proficiencies granted by Tenser’s Transformation?

The mount summoned by the 4th level Paladin spell find greater steed has this interesting ability:

While mounted on it, you can make any spell you cast that targets only you also target the mount.

The 6th level wizard spell Tenser’s tranformation grants weapon proficiencies;

You have proficiency with all armor, shields, simple weapons, and martial weapons.

After casting Tenser’s transformation while riding my found greater steed, technically my mount would have proficiency with all simple and martial weapons.

Obviously the primary issue here is going to be the question of “appropriate anatomy” – can magic that makes the uncoordinated wizard with no weapon skills a martial juggernaut also give my griffon the basic ability to firmly grasp a short sword? Are any of the mounts listed1 able to make use of any of the weapon proficiencies granted by Tenser’s transformation?

1 a griffon, a pegasus, a peryton, a dire wolf, a rhinoceros, or a saber-toothed tiger.