First of all I would like to tell you that I know how to meditate but I tried doing that and the game prompts : "You cannot do that now." Why is it so?  Hint : I have been trying for long hours I'm not on a horse or during combat
120732
I just stumbled upon a bunch of wolves, and while I defeated them, I really have to regenerate my health now. The tutorial explained that I can do that by meditating, but I can't find any way to actually meditate in the controller scheme.  How do I meditate? Can I do that anywhere, or are there any restrictions on it?
62348
Are there any ways to maintain concentration on more than one spell at a time, or to interrupt and later resume concentration on a spell?  I do know the general rules says it can't be done, but the general rules also state that a specific rule beats a general rule.
60018
This came up in my session tonight. My players all had the cash to buy war horses and outfit them, I ruled that they're readily available in Neverwinter which they were near for their last adventure.   However, there are two bits of text that I'm trying to piece together and figure out how they work. The first is the following from the mounted combat text:     It moves as you direct it, and it has only three action options: Dash, Disengage and Dodge (PHB 198)   Does this mean that you cannot under any circumstances use your mount's attack (such as the Warhorse's Trampling Charge/Hooves attack)?  Reading the next section it really seems to come down to whether or not a Warhorse is considered an intelligent mount or not, answers should address this.
46844
I have read so many things already that I'm more confused than before. So decided to ask this by myself.  My paladin just got his Find Steed spell, and after some tweaking and talking, he decided to get a Worg and I was okay with it. This last session was his first time using it and I have few doubts when it comes to combat.  I know that while mounted, he uses the mounts movement and actions. But what about when unmounted? What if the combat began with him walking by his mount's side?   Does the mount share his initiative? Are the actions that the mount do, part of the Paladin's actions? Or are they both separately, having his Action, Movement and Bonus Action and then the mounts Action and movement?   We've stated that it can understand him but not talk back, he just telepathically receives feelings as a feedback to his commands, knowing that the mount understood what he needed. Last session he just said things to the mount like "I tell the mount to protect the ranger and the druid" and in case they got hit, it would attack them, but it didn't really do anything at all, as I didn't know when it would act and I had too many things already to remember about the mount.
51005
Can players in 5e ready an action before combat begins? If so, does this impose any penalties?  (, but it is written for 4e and IMO the answer left something to be desired)
92072
For years, I've had trouble keeping the players engaged in the narrative of combat and what happens during their turns. After the first 4 turns or so, it becomes hard to imagine what everyone does and even my players forget about their allies, and I forget about the villain's allies as well. After a couple rounds it starts becoming a &quot;you hit with a raise, well, throw 1d6 more&quot;, and I'm left wondering how I can make things seem more dynamic and cool, however I find it very hard to wait for players to end turns, throw dices, and then proceed to imagine and narrate what they do, it also makes players frustrated as they just want me to be down with other player's narrative and move on to their own turn.
83598
The rules for the monk ability Tongue of the Sun and Moon state:     Starting at 13th level, you learn to touch the ki of other minds so that you understand all spoken languages. Moreover, any creature that can understand a language can understand what you say.   PHB, pp.79   The text says that this ability is something you learn to do, not something that simply happens to you, so it's not necessarily always on. Further, it seems logical to say that this is something you would do actively. That is, you could choose not to touch someone's mind, thereby excluding them from understanding you. You could also choose not to understand someone yourself, just in case they're telling , or using a subliminal trigger.  Assuming you can choose not to touch someone's mind, let's reason further. Suppose you're speaking and don't know that there is someone listening in nearby. Would they understand you, i.e. is the default that you are or aren't touching someone's mind? Similarly, if you are speaking to a large group of people, would you have to focus on all of them at once for them to understand you? Would this take effort? Is there a range?  My questions are:   Can you exclude some characters from understanding you while allowing others to do so? Can you decide not to understand someone who is speaking?   Basically, these boil down to: Can you choose not to touch someone's mind?  Then, assuming that the answer to the above is yes:   Do you have to know someone is listening in order for them to understand you? Is there a limit to the number of people you can affect? A range?
109232
As a GM, what kind of techniques could I use to help a player re-join the gaming session after their character dies? I want to avoid any major interruptions to the flow of the adventure. I would also like to avoid having to end the session immediately or making them sit on the side-lines for the rest of the session.
53164
As  suggests, there seems to be a hole in the D&amp;D Basic rules.  Maybe.  The rules for readying an action state:     When the trigger occurs, you can either take your reaction right after the trigger finishes or ignore the trigger.   This seems to imply that it is impossible to interrupt a spell in 5e.  If you set your trigger to be "I attack the Wizard when he casts a spell", then you make the attack after the spell has been cast.  Does this mean that spells can no longer be interrupted in combat like they could be in previous editions?
18462
I told my follower (Serana) to wait. But this is different. I told her to go somewhere and wait so it will activate the enemies. Well it did and I killed them. But Serana seems to be not following me anymore. I can't tell her to follow me. And she is constantly in a squatting position. The only thing I can do is tell her to wait somewhere else to move her. And I can't part ways because I'm doing a main quest and she has to be there. Can anybody give me a tip on what to do?
103734
When the game loads there is a message on the loading screen. Tips about how to play (eg "the longer a dweller is in the wastelands the better the loot they will find").  Is there a list of these tips?
31664
I am level 24. Got the Blank Lexicon and Attunement Sphere from Septimus. Both of these items are in my inventory, so clearly I can't drop them.   For whatever reason, the actual pedestal that you're supposed to place the Blank Lexicon in isn't there... I obviously haven't gotten the Elder Scroll yet, because I need to use the Lexicon to do so (but again, I can't because the freaking pedestal isn't physically there...). I have both Elder Knowledge and Discerning the Transmundane in my quests.   Have no idea what the problem is.. On top of that, my last Save (not quick save) is from when I was like level 5, so if I load I have a hell of a lot to make up. I always quick save because I'm an idiot I guess.   I play on PS4 and use mods, but nothing I use should affect the game this tremendously.
115284
DMed for the first time yesterday and one of the things I feel I need to sort out, among other comments, improvements, and similar, is how combat itself is actually initiated. The main example I want to use involves  attempting to generate surprise conditions by players. Here the characters have entered a ruined city and generally been noisy about the whole thing - using a spell to make their voice louder and literally ask if there is anyone about. Any enemies around probably know what something is about to kick off but arguably don't know precisely what. After resting the PCs head up a long flight of steps to a temple on the edge of the city. At the top only one crests and finds 3 bandits lounging around, chatting, and doing whatever bandits do in their spare time. After a brief exchange of pleasantries a combat starts:  DM &quot;The bandit spits in your direction 'we're not done looting the temple, so you can clear off', and starts raising his crossbow as his mates emerge from their cover behind the pillars... PC &quot;I cast Firebolt at Bandit Keith&quot; DM &quot;Hang on, I hadn't finished, everyone rolls for initiative...  Which sparked a debate about whether or not the PC could preemptively cast/attack before the combat starts by &quot;instant actioning&quot; (as above) as I was describing the start of the combat. As far as the bandits are concerned a lone half-elf who is pretty heavily armed has popped up in front of them, not even tried to be diplomatic, and ended up saying something rather suggestive about their mothers. The PC then asked about it being &quot;surprise&quot; because the bandits wouldn't necessarily expect an attack, but my view of &quot;surprise&quot; is closer to an ambush where one party is unaware of the other's existence. (This precise example is close to how  works, however this specific PC was always the first of the party to go into rooms (only one with darkvision) and consistently felt they should get free rounds at the start of combat based on declaring attacks before I could &quot;start&quot; the combat.) The second example the party came to more bandits, who were not alert immediately, in an underground room. They used magic to yell something obscene at the bandits and shut off all the torches so the bandits were effectively blinded. At this point they wanted to burst into the room casting spells, swinging maces, and playing some &quot;meaty chords&quot; (the bard's words, not mine). Again they wanted surprise arguing that, despite the fact that the bandits were yelling and cursing in confusion, they couldn't be sure they were actually being attacked as such. In the end a character with darkvision wanted to sneak in to a corner and again wanted surprise based on passing stealth rolls, so they would start the &quot;combat&quot; by firing a crossbow. At that point I think I relented because it was clear that they would do anything to try and win combats in a single round. In a nutshell, my question is: &quot;how liberally can the concept of surprise be applied to combat - is it only when one party is literally unaware of a threat (as I read the rules), or just when they are caught slightly off guard by the exact situation?&quot; NB I already plan to address the attempts at interrupting descriptions with actions next session, because it happened at other times and actually threw me off quite a bit.
33797
As a fairly new DM, one thing that has commonly occurred in my sessions so far is my PC's starting combat outside of initiative.  For example after a telepathic conversation with a Nothic was going south, my Rogue said 'I shoot him with my shortbow'. At the time I wasn't sure of the correct ruling for this situation so I allowed him to attack and then rolled initiative to start the combat proper. I ensured that the Nothic wasn't surprised though as it was clear that these were two hostile forces trying to work each other out.   Coming away from the session I knew this wasn't right and wanted to get the official answer before next time. I came across this question . The accepted answer here as per RAW is that after the Rogue announced his attack, everyone should roll initiative and if anyone of the party go before the Rogue, then they will just move and ready an action. However I don't like the sound of this as I believe it takes a bit away from the players agency of quick-drawing an attack before the other side has a chance to respond.  Therefore my idea is as follows. In this situation again, the Rogue attacks and then everyone rolls initiative. Then in the turn order, the Rogue skips this 'turn' in the first round as they have already taken it at the top of the 'round'. After the first round the Rogue's turn then falls back into place depending on their initiative roll.   My question. Is this balanced and practical? I know that as DM I have the authority to have this as a house rule. But I wanted to make sure that this is not over-powered and that it is not in conflict with any spells/feats/abilities etc. Will it work?
119951
I really don't like the Ready Action. Smart (and/or tactical) players might be able to use readied actions to great effect and without problems, but my players and I find this game mechanic to be unnecessarily convoluted and not intuitive.  In my opinion, having a high Initiative should lead to an advantageous position throughout the combat encounter. Most of the time, this doesn’t seem to be the case. Sure, if you can defeat the enemy before it is even their turn, that’s awesome. But usually, combat encounters take longer and devolve to a simple back and forth between the parties.  The Ready Action should give characters with higher Initiative the possibility to wait and respond to the actions of their enemies. But that seems cumbersome. Readying a spell consumes a spell slot AND requires concentration. Plus, you have to use your reaction in order to take the readied action, which is bad for anybody who likes for example the Shield spell. This also screws with characters who have Multiattack.  That’s why I would like to make some changes to my home game and replace the Ready Action with Delay Action.  When it is your turn, you could just delay your turn. In order to do so, you would still have to define what you are waiting for. For example, you could wait for somebody to move, cast a spell, drop their weapon, etc. . Your turn could then happen immediately before or after the event that triggered your delayed action, but not during the event.  I think I read somewhere that the designers of DND 5e didn’t like delaying actions, because this could screw with the duration of effects that last “until your next turn”. I don’t think that’s a problem. Effects like that would just last until your original place in the initiative order, not until your delayed turn.  I am not a game designer and I don’t possess the foresight to predict all the consequences such a change could have on my game. That’s why I came here ^^. My question is:  What are potential problems or drawbacks this change could cause? Are there major balancing issues with delaying actions instead of readying actions?
104319
On the first puzzle of the quest Under Saarthal (the one with the six pillars), I enter the correct combination, but the door still doesn't open, and arrows are still shot at me. I've reloaded the game a couple hundred times, I've left the room, and it still doesn't work. What do I do?
28352
How can we make our character move smoothly across tiles? He moves tile by tile, but that looks unprofessional. In addition, when you hold down the arrow keys he zips across the screen. How can we prevent that from happening?