dnd 5e – Does a Monk gain benefits from taking a level in Fighter and choosing Unarmed Fighting from Tasha’s?

The Unarmed Fighting style from Tasha’s states:

Your unarmed strikes can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier. If you strike
with two free hands, the d6 becomes a d8. When you successfully start a grapple, you can deal 1d4
bludgeoning damage to the grappled creature. Until the grapple ends, you can also deal this damage to
the creature whenever you hit it with a melee attack.

Would a, say, 2nd-level Monk gain a benefit from taking a single level in Fighter, making unarmed strikes with a d8+STR?
This seems better than the 1d4 from the early levels.

dnd 5e – If a character with the Thrown Weapon Fighting fighting style has no weapons drawn, can they use Two-Weapon Fighting to draw and throw 2 daggers?

No, the interaction of these two rules does not allow you to draw and attack with two daggers using TWF.

(See @Medix2’s answer for how you might achieve the desired result anyway, though.)

The Two-Weapon Fighting rules (as you’ve quoted) require you to already have both weapons drawn (emphasis mine):

When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, (…)

The “holding in one hand” is a qualifier for both the first and the second weapon, meaning that at the start of this attack combo, you need to have both weapons in one hand each.

The Thrown Weapon Fighting fighting style allows you to draw them as part of the Attack action, which means that when you make attack #1, you do not have weapon #2 in your hand.

This concludes in grammatical nitpickery, because Two-Weapon Fighting specifies that the conditions (both weapons in a hand each) have to be met when making the first attack. Since this (implicitly) excludes drawing them within the action, you cannot use Two-Weapon Fighting in this case.

However, as a DM, I personally would absolutely let this slide. You are already taking a niche and likely non-optimal route, so why not?

dnd 5e – With the Thrown Weapon Fighting style can you make two throw attacks with daggers?

With a fighter using the Fighting Style: Thrown Weapon Fighting from Thasas’s cauldron can you, while not having any daggers equipped from the start, still take them out and make two thrown attacks using the dual wielding rules?


You can draw a weapon that has the thrown property as part of the attack you make with the weapon.

Dual wielding rules

When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand,
you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand.

You don’t add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.

If either weapon has the thrown property, you can throw the weapon, instead of making a melee attack with it.

address – If Cryptocurrency offers anonymity, why is it considered by forensic professionals to be the best currency for fighting illicit transactions?

I read about this in https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenehrlich/2021/04/13/janet-yellen-bitcoin-and-crypto-fearmongers-get-pushback-from-former-cia-director/

I have categorized privacy and anonymity involved in Bitcoin transactions as (based on few cases that I have studied):

  1. Network layer
  2. Blockchain
  3. External

Networking: Use of full node, Tor, i2p, etc.

Blockchain: Information available publicly for every transaction like amount, type of transaction etc.

External: Lot of users share information about their bitcoin addresses or transactions on social media. Example: You can search for “blockchain.com/btc/tx” on Telegago to check lot of transactions shared in different telegram groups or channels.

In terms of it being digital this makes sense, and of course the public ledger would showcase all transactions, but aren’t the identities of those transacting hidden cryptographically?

It is mentioned in the paper: “(It) is easier for law enforcement to
trace illicit activity using Bitcoin than it is
to trace cross-border illegal activity using
traditional banking transactions, and far
easier than cash transactions.

Yes, its easier to trace digital payments compared to cash transactions. One of the reasons governments are moving towards to cashless economy. Demonetization that happened in India few years back and usage of digital payments since then is a great example. Although I am not sure about banking transactions because it varies from one bank to another and different places in the world. There are lot of other things used by criminals which exist since years but I consider them to be off-topic here so will not go in to details.

If Cryptocurrency offers anonymity, why is it considered by forensic professionals to be the best currency for fighting illicit transactions?

I am assuming its because of their confidence in the use of tools they find helpful in tracing Bitcoin transactions. Also we cannot blame the privacy or anonymity of Bitcoin transactions in every case because most of the cases involve things like address reuse, using KYC exchanges, information shared on social media etc.

Michael Morell (Former CIA Director) has mentioned few things that support my arguments about their confidence in the use of tools used for tracking:

Blockchain analysis is a highly effective crime fighting and intelligence gathering tool.

But that is not all. Perhaps even more interesting to Morell was how analytic firms such as Chainalysis, CipherTrace, and Elliptic can employ forensic and artificial intelligence tools to find illicit actors and activity on blockchains. In fact, he said that he was “literally blown away by how they find illicit activity…this is great intelligence work.”

I don’t trust everything shared by firms like Chainalysis and artificial intelligence is helpful but has its own issues when using for analyzing Bitcoin transactions. I have mentioned the details of an independent investigation related to Mt. Gox case: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/101959/. You will find the investigator had to assume lot of things for tracing Bitcoin transactions.

Will share few charts that looked interesting although as I mentioned above firms like Chainalysis have incentives in promoting their business and mislead people about privacy and anonymity in Bitcoin:






You can check other details here: https://go.chainalysis.com/rs/503-FAP-074/images/Chainalysis-Crypto-Crime-2021.pdf

Lastly, how do we improve privacy and anonymity involved in Bitcoin transactions? Quoting sipa from one of the Reddit post:

Nothing is “sufficient” for privacy. It’s a goal to work towards, but it is so multi-faceted that no single piece of technology can “solve” privacy. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/e65vdf/could_bitcoins_privacy_benefit_from_litecoins_eb/f9oxfyk/

I have mentioned the difference between privacy and anonymity, best practices for Bitcoin transactions and few other things in this answer: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/103255/

world of darkness – How does a Hold or Clinch maneuver interact with the blind fighting rules in Vampire: The Masquerade v20?

Say two kindred are clinching one another, or one performs a Hold maneuver on another, in blind fighting conditions (in pitch darkness for example).
Let’s say one of them is Gangrel with Eyes of the Beast. Eyes of the Beast should mitigate effects of blind fighting (V20 Core Rulebook, p. 274).
Would they have the same Brawl+Str difficulty on rolls to break free from a Hold or Clinch? Or would someone who is under effect of blind fighting have +2 difficulty?

Another question:

Let’s say Arms of the Abyss is constricting a victim inside Shroud of Night. The description of Arms of the Abyss (V20 Core Rulebook, p. 189) states:

Breaking the grasp of the tentacle requires the victim to win a resisted Str roll against the tentacle (difficulty 6 for each).

Should the blinded victim roll difficulty 8 to break free? Or is it still difficulty 6?

optimization – Hold manuever during blind fighting (Vampire: The Masquerade v20)

I’m wondering if two kindred are clinching one another or one performs Hold maneuver on another in blind figthing conditions (in pitch darkness for exmaple). Lets say one of them is Gangrel with Eyes of the Beast. Eyes of the Beast should mitigate effects of blind fighting (p.274 v20). Would they have the same Brawl+Str difficulty on Hold or Clinch break free rolls? Or the one who is under effect of blind fighting should have +2 difficulty?

Another question. Shroud of night and Arms of the abyss. Lets say arms of abyss constricting viktim inside shroud of night. P.189 states:

Breaking the grasp of tentackle requiries the victim to win a resisted Str roll against the tentackle (difficulty 6 for each).

Should blinded viktim roll difficulty 8 to breask free, or itis still 6?

dnd 5e – Is Additional Fighting Style underpowered as the only class feature at a given level?

Weak? No. Boring? Maybe

You are correct that most of the offensive PHB fighter fighting styles don’t synergize very well, and that makes the Defense style an obvious go-to option for Champions. This lack of options may be not be the most interesting, which is a common complaint about the Champion subclass as a whole – but the Defense fighting style is not weak. Rather it is one of the most powerful fighting styles available for a front line character, particularly when they can also have one of the more offensively potent styles to compliment it.

Bounded Accuracy Makes Stacking AC Good

This question, Why are armor bonuses considered to break bounded accuracy? has a good explanation of why very high ACs are particularly strong in 5th edition. Thanks to Fighter’s having an already strong AC because of proficiency with heavy armor, they are well positioned to take advantage of further AC buffs from spells, magic items, and class features like the Defense fighting style.


At 10th level, the Battlemaster fighter subclass’s superiority dice increase from d8
s to d10’s. The average on a d8 is 4.5, and average on a d10 is 5.5, meaning this subclass feature is on average a +1 to all superiority dice rolls. Superiority dice are commonly added to attack rolls, damage rolls, and indeed – Armor Class, many of the same things improved by fighting styles!

Maneuvers are more versatile in being able to more easily choose a category, but are also a limited resource, unlike the always on fighting styles. So let’s compare the bonuses provided by that +1 on superiority dice to the defense fighting styles, and some of the styles that can be paired with it:

Defense we’ve already talked about, a flat +1 to AC. So it provides approximately the same level of benefit as the +1 average bonus to superiority dice rolls that boost AC.

Great Weapon Fighting is discussed in this question, How much damage does great weapon fighting add on average?. The answer is – about a +1 to damage. Making it also square up with the Battlemasters 10th level die increase in average benefit!

Dueling provides a +2 bonus to damage, coming out ahead of the +1 average boost on superiority dice. It has it’s own tradeoffs of course by excluding the higher-damage two weapon fighting or two handed weapon options, but it works great with a shield, and that AC bonus means it pairs even better with the already mentioned Defense fighting style, or the Protection fighting style.

Archery style gives +2 to hit, again beating out the +1 on superiority dice, but also once again coming with restrictions. Since ranged weapons use DEX, it gives greater downsides to using heavy armor with STR requirements. But the defense fighting style can help close that gap, or a player can just accept a lower movement speed since they have a ranged weapon anyway. A wood elf fighter has a great bonus to DEX for ranged weapons, and even taking the speed penalty from wearing heavy armor with a low strength would have a serviceable 25ft move speed.


The defense fighting style can indeed be easily combined with most other fighting styles, and most fighting styles provide a comparable bonus to the average +1 superiority die roll granted to Battlemaster fighters at 10th level. This leads me to believe that yes, this class feature is on par with that of the Battlemaster subclass’s ability.

dnd 5e – When a melee fighting character wants to stun a monster, and the monster wants to be killed, can they instead take a fatal blow?

One way to achieve this is to use Contingency spell:

Choose a spell of 5th level or lower that you can cast, that has a casting time of 1 action, and that can target you.

Choose Magic Missile, which can target any creature you can see see, including yourself. You must use a 2nd level spell slot so you get 4 darts.

it takes effect when a certain circumstance occurs.

As the circumstance, choose “when I drop to 0 hit points”.

So when you drop to 0 hit points, you will be hit 4 times. First one will be the “killing blow” in case you were merely knocked unconscious. Following 3 will cause 3 death saving throw failures. Congratulations, you’re now dead.

The obvious drawback is, that you need to be a Wizard or a Bard or a custom NPC to be able to cast Contingency, which is a 6th level spell.

You can also be Revivified, and unfortunately 5th level or below spells do not allow disintegration. Teleportation circle could be a solution, but it can’t target “you” so it won’t work. If you are in your base, you could use Dimension Door to drop yourself to a pool of acid or something, but if that is an option, you might choose to use it to escape instead of dying, which is out of the scope of the question.

dnd 5e – Are there any penalties for fighting in the same 5ft space?

Both characters are squeezing

The rules describe how a character can fit into a space smaller than the 5 ft. square they normally occupy, officially listed as Squeezing into a Smaller Space:

A creature can squeeze through a space that is large enough for a creature one size smaller than it. Thus, a Large creature can squeeze through a passage that’s only 5 feet wide. While squeezing through a space, a creature must spend 1 extra foot for every foot it moves there, and it has disadvantage on attack rolls and Dexterity saving throws. Attack rolls against the creature have advantage while it’s in the smaller space.

It’s not explicit that this would apply for squeezing two characters in one space (especially if both characters are Medium, which seem like they technically can’t squeeze in the first place), but it is a clear description of penalties that happen because a character isn’t able to occupy their normal space. While the two creatures are fighting each other advantage and disadvantage would cancel out for attack rolls, but they would both be very vulnerable to any other creatures and if either can force single-target DEX saves instead of attacking that would give them an edge.

Additional possibility that I think is very stupid

Strictly speaking, an earlier part of the rules includes this line:

Whether a creature is a friend or an enemy, you can’t willingly end your move in its space.

A possible interpretation of this rule is that whenever either character in the pit takes a turn, they must do absolutely everything in their power to attempt to leave the pit, regardless of how harmful it might be to them. This makes no sense to me and as DM I would ignore it, but this is certainly a rule that exists and is relevant to your situation. I would rather rule it as “each creature is in half-a-space” making the squeezing rule more applicable and this rule less, but I haven’t found a clear basis for that interpretation being more official than the other.

dnd 5e – Does the Thrown Weapon Fighting Style apply to ranged, improvised attacks?

I think it’s any thrown weapon because, when the rules seen to be talking about defined game terms, they tend to use the “weapon with the ______ property” phrasing. For example:

Hexblade Warlock:

whenever you finish a long rest, you can touch one weapon that you are proficient with and that lacks the two-handed property.


Monk weapons are shortswords and simple melee weapons that don’t have the heavy or two-handed property.

Improvised Weapons:

If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage.

However, this pattern isn’t ironclad and I found at least one example that breaks with it: Dual Wielding Feat.

You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren’t light.

Notably, however, this example is inclusionary whereas the others are exclusionary. That is to say, the rules more often start with the option of using “any” weapon and then exclude certain types whereas Dual Wielding simply adds a discrete category of weapon weapon types to an existing list of acceptable types.

Given this, I think the rules for the Thrown Weapon fighting style are written to work with any ranged weapon attack that isn’t made with a sling or bow or firearm, regardless of whether or not that weapon has the thrown property.

Why not just say “any ranged weapon attack that isn’t made with a sling or bow?” Conceivably, to hedge against the possibility of a new category or rules change that would make that wording problematic. I can imagine a magic item that shoots projectiles using a mechanism that isn’t a bow or sling or firearm but which also isn’t thrown.

It makes sense to me narratively. The fundamental skills of the thrown weapon fighting style used to throw, say, a hatchet might reasonably scale up to a thrown battle axe without much difficulty.