For a creature to be affected by Color Spray, their hit points must be equal to or less than the remaining total of points accumulated from the Color Spray dice rolls. However, if the creature's hit points are equal to or less than the remaining total, that creature would be immediately killed.   Color Spray's description states, in part (emphasis mine):     Starting with the creature that has the lowest current hit points,   each creature affected by this spell is blinded until the end of your   next turn. Subtract each creature's hit points from the total before   moving on to the creature with the next lowest hit points. A   creature's hit points must be equal to or less than the remaining   total for that creature to be affected.   Therefore, there would be no purpose to the creature being blinded "until the end of your next turn" because the creature would be dead.   Am I missing something here? It seems like it's impossible for a creature to be dead AND blinded simultaneously because their death would take precedence. So, what's the point of the blinding effect if every creature that would have been blinded is killed first?
120782
I'm relatively new to DnD in general and 5th edition is my first experience with Dungeons and Dragons.  I am confused with some spell mechanics. Spells usually state that they do damage, such as:  Burning Hands (Lv 1)  A creature takes 3d6 fire damage  Ray of Sickness (Lv 1)  On a hit, the target takes 2d8 poison damage   But some spells only dictate that the hit points are affected:  Sleep (Lv 1)  Roll 5d8; the total is how many hit points of creatures this spell can affect.  Color Spray (Lv 1)  Roll 6d10; the total is how many hit points of creatures this spell can effect. [sic]   In this case what would I do?  Do I do 5d8 damage if I cast sleep or 6d10 damage if I cast color spray? If so, why on earth would I use any other Level 1 spell as these two would be exponentially better than any other D&amp;D 5e level 1 spells?
90204
There exist multiple spells/effects/mechanics that can trigger on the start of a character's turn. How in general should a DM rule the ordering, in cases where the order will matter?  As an example: Alice has been downed. She has 0 hit points and has been making death saving throws for a few turns now. She currently has 2 successes and 2 failures. She is also in the area of effect of a Cloudkill spell, which crucially has the following effect:     When a creature enters the spell's area for the first time on a turn or starts its turn there, that creature must make a Constitution saving throw. The creature takes 5d8 poison damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.   At the start of Alice's next turn, one of two things could happen, either:  The death saving throw goes first, in which case she has a straight 50/50 of surviving this situation (for now!) or dying right then and there. If she is lucky and gets her third success, the cloudkill is still a concern, but not a matter of life and death. Worst case she is put back into an 'unstable' state but her death saves are reset, buying her precious more time to be saved or evacuated by her party.   or:  The cloudkill check goes first, she dies instantly. Since no matter how well she does on the save to resist it, at best she still takes half damage, and any amount of damage is enough to permanently kill her whilst sitting on two failed death saves.   So whilst in many cases the order of 'start of turn' effects might not matter, in at least this example we have a case where the permanent death of a character could be drastically effected by the order ruled by the DM.   So how should a DM rule the ordering of such effects?
124102
What happens if I dip below 1 life from an effect that will also heal me after the damage is dealt?  For example:   If I bolt myself while I'm at 3 or less with a  on the board? Will I die while at 3 or less if I -2 , targeting myself? Will I die if a creature with my  on it damages me? Will I die if I target myself with enough damage to 'kill' me with a ?   and so on and so forth. You get the idea. I'm pretty sure there's a relatively simple answer that I just don't know about.
82292
The  feature from the  (EGtW, p. 185) triggers &quot;whenever you cast a spell on a creature&quot;, and has an effect &quot;if the target is willing to move, the spell hits it with an attack, or it fails a saving throw against the spell.&quot; It's not clear to me what kinds of spells can actually trigger this feature. Based on the singular phrasing of &quot;on a creature&quot; and the later use of the word &quot;target&quot;, I would normally read this as only applying to spells that explicitly target creatures (and perhaps only those with a single target, in contrast to the phrasing of the  feature of the  wizard, for example). However, spells that target a location can use the word target in a different sense (see ). What's actually going on here? Does this feature only work on targeted spells? Or does it function for area of effect spells as well? Or is this just an ambiguous phrasing that will rely on the DM's ruling?
15765
From the spell description:     Sleep (...) Creatures within 20 feet of a point you choose within range are affected in ascending order of their current hit points (ignoring unconscious creatures). Starting with the creature that has the lowest current hit points,(...) Subtract each creature’s hit points from the total before moving on to the creature with the next lowest hit points. A creature’s hit points must be equal to or less than the remaining total for that creature   to be affected. Undead and creatures immune to being charmed aren’t affected by this spell. (PH p.276)   Now, to build the ascending order of their current hitpoints, the spell instructs to count everyone in area of effect, but only ignore unconscous creatures. Then later on it says that Undead and creatures immune to being charmed aren't affected.  Are those two latter kinds of creatures excluded from the roll of current HP by default? Following the "if they were it would say so" philosophy of Sage Advice, it doesn't seem so to me.
98187
I've been looking at the rules for the combat phase and its steps, but I can't find this. It's clear when a creature becomes an attacking creature (when it's declared as attacking, created as attacking, or an effect otherwise says it is), but when does it stop?  I'd expect it to be either the beginning of the "end of combat step" or the end of the combat phase, but the distinction is important.  The situation that made me question this was, if you were playing as , could you use its ability to untap a creature after combat damage during the "end of combat step"? That would allow you to then use tap abilities (e.g. ) or keep them as a blocker, effectively giving your creatures vigilance. This also goes for cards such as , or even  if you really wanted to kill a creature after letting it deal damage.
2618
I have been thinking that temporary hit points were like virtual health as per:     Temporary hit points aren’t actual hit points; they are a buffer against damage, a pool of hit points that protect you from injury.   The fact that's virtual makes me think that you don't actually get hit per se. That is, you'd get out without even a scratch if you only lose temporary hit points (i.e. protect you from injury).  However, I have not seen anything anywhere saying that if you are bitten by a creature such as a spider and only lose temporary hit points, you don't get poisoned. Yet, if you don't even sustain a scratch, how could you get poisoned or paralyzed or sick?  How do you guys understand the rules in such circumstances?
117495
There are various features that affect "targets within X feet".  For example, the 's  table (PHB, p. 104) has the following result on a d100 roll of 83-84:     Each creature within 30 feet of you takes 1d10 necrotic damage. You regain hit points equal to the sum of the necrotic damage dealt.   Do you take this damage as well and then immediately heal it? (Thanks to user @RallozarX for pointing out that this does matter, say if they are concentrating on a spell)    Below are some examples I've found arguing that you are a creature within X feet:  There is the  cantrip (SCAG, p. 143):     [...] Each creature within range, other than you, must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or take 1d6 force damage [...]   Which seems to imply that you do count as "a creature within range".  Then there is the question "", and  states that "you are always within 30 feet of yourself".    Below are examples I've found arguing that you are not "a creature within X feet":  The Wild Magic Sorcerer's Wild Magic Surge table result on a d100 roll of 95-96:     You and all creatures within 30 feet of you gain vulnerability to piercing damage for the next minute.   This seems to imply that you would not be considered "a creature within 30 feet".  Then there is the  spell (; XGtE, p. 157), which states:     [...] Hit or miss, the shard then explodes. The target and each creature within 5 feet of it must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or take 2d6 cold damage [...]   This too seems to imply you do not count as "a creature within 5 feet".  There is also the question "", and  quotes :     The splash damage of lightning arrow affects each creature within 10 ft. of the target, not the target.   Crawford :     If I say, "Each person within 5 feet of me gets a cupcake," an idiomatic reading of that English doesn't lead to me getting a cupcake.     Do you count as "a creature within X feet" of yourself?
73378
Not every creature with Blindsight is immune to the Blinded condition (like bats). However, blindsight seems to work for those that can't see, and Blinded is about not being able to See.   RAW seems to point that if someone casts Blindness on a bat, they should suffer the Blinded condition even though they have Blindsight because Bats are not immune to that condition.   Is this correct?
37069
I had to make a call today and I'm wondering how this scenario should've gone down   The map was a U-shaped hallway; the party was on the lower left of the U, with the enemies on the upper right. The wizard has an owl familiar who could see an enemy caster, with the wizard seeing through the familiar's eyes, and the wizard was further back.   The enemy caster cast a fireball.  The player claims that since he was looking through the owl's eyes from his turn, he should technically have line of sight for a counterspell.   Could counterspell be cast in this case, even though there was a wall between him and the caster, and he was physically not able to cast towards the enemy caster?  Was I wrong in said judgement?
86490
is a creature with the ability "Whenever a nontoken creature an opponent controls dies, put a 2/2 black Zombie creature token onto the battlefield tapped"  Now, lets say 3 of my opponent's creatures die either through combat, spells, or sacrificing. Could I put the triggered ability on the "stack" so to say in order to get 3 2/2 black zombies for each non token creature that died that my opponent controlled, or am I forced to put one and only one despite 3 creatures dying?
77937
I've designed for a campaign a duo of rogues. My character is as , and his follower is a Knife Mistress. Couple of question about them. Our party is about to ambush several . My Sniper will hide near their camp, and shoot the weakest one when fight begins. His follower will then rush the troll and slice him in several pieces. My Sniper has the Bleeding attack feat:  Bleeding Attack (Ex) Benefit: A rogue with this ability can cause living opponents to  by hitting them with a sneak attack. This attack causes the target to take 1 additional point of damage each round for each die of the rogue's sneak attack (e.g., 4d6 equals 4 points of bleed). Bleeding creatures take that amount of damage every round at the start of each of their turns. The bleeding can be stopped by a DC 15 Heal check or the application of any effect that heals hit point damage.  Emphasis mine. Thus, a normal enemy would bleed every turn, until he get cleaned of the bleeding effect. However, troll have a special ability, which is  5 (acid/fire)  Regeneration (Ex) A creature with this ability is difficult to kill. Creatures with regeneration heal damage at a fixed rate, as with , but they cannot die as long as their regeneration is still functioning (although creatures with regeneration still fall unconscious when their hit points are below 0). Certain attack forms, typically fire and acid, cause a creature’s regeneration to stop functioning on the round following the attack. During this round, the creature does not heal any damage and can die normally. The creature's descriptive text describes the types of damage that cause the regeneration to cease functioning.  So, the troll will automatically get rid of the bleeding effect during his first turn. My question is: Does the bleeding effect apply before the regeneration, or get neglected, because the troll will heal during his turn? Am I right to assume that, Bleeding attack effect getting triggered at the beginning of the troll turn, it will deal him the damages before the wounds heals?
63478
For example,  says:  You create three glowing darts of magical force. Each dart hits a creature of your choice that you can see within range. A dart deals 1d4 + 1 force damage to its target. The darts all strike simultaneously, and you can direct them to hit one creature or several. At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, the spell creates one more dart for each slot level above 1st.  If a PC finds a scroll of Magic Missile, can it be cast as you would with a level 2 slot (and what are the conditions to do this)? Or will it always be level 1?
27059
There are many spells which explicitly target creatures:     Choose one creature within range   The target creature is normally supposed to make a saving throw in this case.  What happens when the caster chooses a creature, that is actually an object? For instance, a scarecrow, a mannequin, an illusion, or a corpse.  Examples:   An evil mage is hiding in the bushes. He casts an illusion of himself on the road, using the Silent Image spell. A PC sorcerer walks down the road, sees the illusion and casts Magic Missile on it. A cleric is standing near a pile of dead bodies. He has suspicions that a few corpses are actually undead creatures. He casts Sacred Flame on every corpse, see which if them succeed, hence, reveals the undead. A wizard casts Acid Splash on a mannequin, trying to damage it with acid.   Possible outcomes I can think of are:   The caster cannot even try to cast the spell, regardless of their information about what the target actually is. The caster tries to cast the spell, the casting fails, not expending the spell slot. The caster casts the spell, it expends the spell slot, then fails. The caster casts the spell, but it hits the original and not the illusion. The caster casts the spell, it flies to the target illusion but deals no damage to it (passes through it).   References in the rules and Sage advice  I was trying to investigate, but it didn't make things clearer:    has an answer, that Magic Missile won't hit. It says nothing about if it can be targeted at all, it leaves it up to the DM. Magic Missile automatically finds the original, even when the caster targets an illusion. At least . Now . This supports the counter-intuitive option 4.   on the other hand   , if there were no perceivable effects (let's say you can try to cast the Command spell on an illusion). That assumes that casters can waste their spells on illusion, which means they at least can target it. This supports options 3 and 5.
43424
The book says:     Concentration. Some spells require you to maintain concentration in order to keep   their magic active. If you lose concentration, such a spell ends.   So what happens if, for example, you are already concentrating on a spell, and cast Witch Bolt without concentrating. Would you get the initial arc of blue energy, or would it not even go off?  I am asking if you can cast a spell that says concentration without concentrating for an immediate effect. This would be useful to avoid interrupting your existing concentration. In essence, if you are concentrating on thing A (doesn't have to be a spell since other things need concentration), can you cast a concentration spell getting an immediate effect without losing concentration on thing A?  Since the definition of concentration is to keep the spell active (meaning it is already active) I would think that you would get the initial effect (if it had one) without the need to concentrate on it.
110517
A  not only grants me a Sentinel Raven, but also the handy ability to see through its eyes.  Unlike the telepathic connection with a regular familiar, I don't have to use an action to do so.    If I am blinded, but my Sentinel Raven is not (and within telepathic range), can I use my raven's sight to cast spells that require me to see my target? Would this negate any disadvantage resulting from me being blinded? Or would I still suffer disadvantage, for example, because I have to cast from my raven's perspective and not my own point of view?
33006
Looked and looked, can't find the answer anywhere (maybe I'm blind):  How long does Alchemist's Fire burn for?  In the item description within , it says:     On a hit, the target takes 1d4 fire damage at the start of each of its turns. A creature can end this damage by using its action to make a DC 10 Dexterity check to extinguish the flames.   Yet no mention of the burn rate.  One round after a hit?  2?  A minute?  Continuous until extinguished?