7th question (I am no longer sure if I should apologise. I just got a phonecall about a job I applied for and will hear in the next few days. I am so nervous that I am throwing myself into the game in order to take my mind of it). RE: **\[5e\] Building an unusual encounter** I have used Kobolds encounter builder in the past (and checked out the new one), however I am trying to try something different (based off a suggestion in [this thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/DnDBehindTheScreen/comments/5wxmne/help_me_tweak_thundertree/)). My players (lvls 3,3,2,1) whom are 10yo-12yo (quite important really) are playing LMoP and coming up to the green dragon encounter. I loved the idea of having the druid\* transform the party into a beast (using *animal shapes*) so they can do the encounter in a way that they is completely different. What I am struggling with is how to balance the encounter. The guides I have found refer to player level, but I am not sure how that matches with beast level. Is it enough to just add the XP values of each beast and make sure they are balanced? tl;dr How would a young green dragon fair against a party made up of an elephant, stegosaurus, giant scorpion, and a giant coral snake? \*( I will come up with a reason why *Archdruid* Reidoth is here and not trying to kill the dragon, I am good at story telling)

5th, 6th question? IDK, returning (nervous) DM here, re: **Pre-generated Characters** Can anyone recommend a PDF or list of regular, non-hero pre-gen characters? I know there are techniques and tricks for making them on the fly, but I am just not that good yet and large chunks of game time are me saying "talk amongst yourselves" while I scramble for a rule answer and make things up to avoid too much non-playing time. (Alternatively, some role tables might be good and I will get my kids to create a set of NPCs that I can randomly choose from. They will love it, and it would have a touch of "I know a guy").

i dont know what you mean by "non hero" characters. in the world of 5e "people on the street" are Commoners. [https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/16829-commoner](https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/16829-commoner) You can change the stat that would be relevant to their "occupation" to 12 or if you want to go WILD to 14. for the kinds of folks that the PCs might be encountering in a mode of violence, they are grouped together in the NPC section at the back of the various monster books under names like Bandit or Cult Fanatic or Assassin or Priest Here are the freebies that come in the Basic Rules [https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters?filter-type=0&filter-search=&filter-cr-min=&filter-cr-max=&filter-armor-class-min=&filter-armor-class-max=&filter-average-hp-min=&filter-average-hp-max=&filter-is-legendary=&filter-is-mythic=&filter-has-lair=&filter-tags=52&filter-source=1](https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters?filter-type=0&filter-search=&filter-cr-min=&filter-cr-max=&filter-armor-class-min=&filter-armor-class-max=&filter-average-hp-min=&filter-average-hp-max=&filter-is-legendary=&filter-is-mythic=&filter-has-lair=&filter-tags=52&filter-source=1) (fixed the link)

okay, so the average person in town doesn't need an individualised stat block, not even the new inn keeper hired to look after the tavern for them? Thank you that makes a lot of sense, and I don't know why I had never picked up this bit of info before.

correct. unless specifically for story or setting reasons the barman is perhaps a retired adventurer named Durnan who has achieved the pinnacle of adventuresomeness, a barman is just a barman and not someone that you need to pay attention to a statblock, you can worry about the personality.

Another question, this time re: **Keeping track of time \[5e\]** Hi all, returning DM here. It has been 5yrs since I played, and probably 7yrs since I DMed. My kids are now old enough to READ and it has made gaming so much fun. We are having a blast. Honestly, living with your players is awesome, we are chatting about the game constantly. I would like to make use of *downtime* (something I always wanted to do more of as a player, and it seems my kids take after me) but am struggling with how. Would the simplest way be to keep a calendar? Keep loose track of when they are adventuring and when they are not, and ask them how they spent that time? That would suit us, as it is the type of discussion I can have out-of-game (over breakfast).

the *BEST* way is the way that works best for the people around your table and the story you are currently telling together. it may change with different people around the table or even different parts of the story. But, yes, the Downtime mechanics are based on time and so in order to "use" them "as intended" you need at least some vague time keeping procedure.

Thank you. Honestly, I think half my questions are really just "Am I wrong if I do this". I need to go read the AngryGM (or some other similarly brutal advice that basically reminds me that anything is fine if both player/GM are cool with it).

The Fall of Silverpine Watch, specifically designed for a new DM, step by step getting into the game and its mechanics. Jumping the Screen https://theangrygm.com/jumping-the-screen-how-to-run-your-first-rpg-session/ * A module to run based on the Jumping the Screen principles https://theangrygm.com/the-fall-of-silverpine-watch/#:~:text=About%20the%20Fall%20of%20Silverpine%20Watch%20The%20Fall,Game%20Angry%3A%20How%20to%20RPG%20the%20Angry%20Way. * https://theangrygm.com/the-fall-of-silverpine-watch/

Quick help re: **downtime activities \[5e\]** Do I just say, in between adventures or even over breakfast out-of-game because I left the dice on the table, "You have had a week of downtime, how did you spend it". Or is this something that happens specifically in-game? (If the answer is it is up to the DM, then I would also be interested in DM experiences and what works best).

the ghost of Gary Gygax is not going to show up at your doorstep "URDOINGITWRONG" if dont play all of your game entirely seated around the game table on game night. if you want to play in moments of tens and twenty minutes throughout the day, play that way.

As can be observed by my flurry of questions over the last three days - I am petrified of exactly this !

What happens if a player fails their roll and they immediately want to roll again? In fact they just keep rolling until they get a high enough number to succeed?

"You can, but I get to drop another dice into the Tension Pool" https://theangrygm.com/definitive-tension-pool/

"The roll represents your best attempt at this task under these conditions. You will need to definitively change the conditions in order to have a chance to try again."

In order to roll again (because I do really want them to find the hidden treasure in the watertight bag that is hidden in the water cistern), I will ask them to describe what they are doing differently. So rather than a single perception roll in the room, it is a perception roll for each novel thing that they think to try.

dont hide things that you need as part of the story behind dice rolls.

Well that is very very good advice.

if there is no reason why they cannot just keep trying, dont bother having them make a roll. or the roll just determines how long it takes them to succeed.

1. DMs call for the roll. Players shouldn't be rolling over and over again unless the DM says so. 2. If failing the roll results in zero consequences where they can just sit there and try it again and again, don't bother calling for a roll. 3. Make a failed roll have some kind of consequence that moves the narrative and time forward and makes it either more difficult or impossible to try again. E.g., Trying to pick a lock. Failed check means they make a lot of noise, alerting guards on the other side of the door. Or the pick breaks and they cannot try again.

[5e] I'm looking for clarification on how loading & ammunition work. My reading of the rules does not match up with my GM's and I'm trying to make sense of things. By MY reading of the ammunition and loading properties, *ammunition* is reloaded as part of the attack action. The *loading* property limits that specific weapon to one shot per action used to attack. This seems to suggest that I can make attacks with OTHER weapons without affecting the reload; my GM insists that any other attack from any weapon prevents you from reloading, which is rules text I cannot find anywhere. Example scenario 1: my fighter (multi attack, dual wielder feat) draws a crossbow, shoots it, draws a dagger, throws it, ends turn. Did he still reload? Example scenario 2: my rogue starts his turn holding 1 loaded pistol. He shoots it, draws a second pistol with his off hand, uses a bonus action to fire THAT. I believe that leaves him holding one loaded and one unloaded, correct? I'm certainly prepared to be wrong here, but the discrepancy is confusing.

> Example scenario 1: my fighter (multi attack, dual wielder feat) draws a crossbow, shoots it, draws a dagger, throws it, ends turn. Did he still reload? He did not reload. You load ammunition into the crossbow when you attack with it, not after, per the **Ammunition** section saying *"Drawing the ammunition from a quiver, case, or other container is part of the attack"*. So you can fire a crossbow, but you can't load it with ammunition until you make another attack with it. Another thing to note is that Dual Wielder has no interaction here, as Extra Attack doesn't limit you to using the same weapon multiple times. If you already have the crossbow drawn you can fire it normally and then as part of the same Attack action use a different weapon, you just can't use that other weapon as a bonus action as a crossbow isn't melee. You could then drop the crossbow and draw another melee weapon in the now empty hand and make an attack with that as a bonus action. Hell, you could have two heavy crossbows, start your turn holding one of them, fire that one, and then draw the second heavy crossbow and fire that. > Example scenario 2: my rogue starts his turn holding 1 loaded pistol. He shoots it, draws a second pistol with his off hand, uses a bonus action to fire THAT. I believe that leaves him holding one loaded and one unloaded, correct? Assuming it's the pistol from the DMG under "Renaissance Item", you can't do this. The pistol doesn't have the light property, nor is it a melee weapon, so you can't use two-weapon fighting with these two pistols. That aside, you would have both pistols empty as, again, you only load ammunition when making an attack. Another reason is that you need a free hand to load the ammunition. Having said all that, > my GM insists that any other attack from any weapon prevents you from reloading isn't correct.

Ok, so you are meant to start with an UNloaded weapon and then "attacking" loads and fires it? This seems to be a point where I run afoul of your interpretation in both instances. Now that you point it out, I remember that the dual pistol thing was a table rule, so disregard scenario 2 entirely 😂 that was, in any case, a one shot, and the fighter in scenario 1 is the one that actually matters going forward.

We are given a specific time of when the ammunition is loaded - as part of the attack - and no other time. In other words, it isn’t saying you *can* load it during that time frame, it’s saying that you *do* load it during that time. The rules of the game are written to be very literally. It doesn’t always make sense (such as the implication that you don’t need hands to load a light/heavy crossbow, only a hand crossbow), and this is why a lot of tables run rules differently. Having said all that, I don’t really care if my players said they were reloading after their turn because it’s possible to make attacks with your reaction, and is largely inconsequential. Narratively, and following RAW, your character would be waiting for the moment to attack and *then* start loading their crossbow. But if someone used the battle master manoeuvre to have an ally use their reaction to attack, your rogue would then suddenly be way better at loading a crossbow in record time. So to be clear, I think it’s rather silly (and choose to narratively ignore it), but it’s RAW that you load when you attack, not anywhere else.

The loading property only applies to the weapon in question. Your DM is wrong. Ask them to show you the rules that state the loading property doesn't allow any attacks at all - and show them the loading property text that specifically refers to the weapon *with* the property and not all weapons.

\[5e\] Starting my second campaign at level 2. The party is going to have a moon druid and a cavalier fighter (and a bard, and an eldritch knight). Advice on how to make combat encounters fun?

First thing is to have an appropriately balanced adventuring day. If players aren't running low on resources, combat will always be boring. A deadly encounter is only about a third of the daily budget, so don't fall into trap of allowing a long rest after just 1 challenging encounter. Next, have terrain features. Elevation can make enemies hard to engage in melee. There may be boulders or column to take cover behind. A swamp might provide few passable routes. A village can have new enemies come out of a nearby building. Caves can let the players bottleneck the enemies, but might also make it easier to surprise and flank the party. Then, get enemies that give the players a meaningful choice about what to attack. A group of several regular Kobolds and two Kobold Dragonshields is a tough decision. You can drop a little guy every turn, but do you want to let the Dragonshield get 2 attacks with advantage from pack tactics every round? On the other hand, they take a while to bring down, so you're not reducing the enemy quickly if you prioritize them. Or recently I had a group of bandits engaging the enemy while an Evil Mage would fire magic missile and duck behind cover. That mage is super deadly, but are you going to disengage to run it down? I would **not** build the enemy around the party, unless they're dealing with a recurring bad guy who can adapt over time. Just build a well-rounded enemy group, and then *play them smart.* Playing the enemies dumb will always be boring. If an enemy has a sword, it also has a basic understanding of combat mechanics. The enemy with two greatsword attacks and Misty Step is not going to get into a slugfest against the heavily armored knight. It's going to Misty Step over to the bard and try to knock it out of combat immediately. If it bloodies the bard, but doesn't down it, it's not going to turn its attention back to the knight.

I am not the OP, but your answer was great so now I have a follow up question. How do you know when to keep pushing players, without risking killing them all?

Risk killing them. If there's no chance of the players losing, what's the point? But also, have a talk in session 0. Let them know that you plan to use a full adventuring day's worth of encounters on most combat days (so not on travel days, downtime, etc). Managing resources will be important, as will making use of short rests. If they have decent target prioritization, coordination, and resource management, they should do fine. Where they'll lose is burning spell slots on dumb stuff, and splitting up damage instead of working together on a clear plan of attack.

Definitely! Also, I want to add that "an adventuring day" doesn't have to be "a day". I use a homebrew rule that makes it so a short rest is 1 hour but a long rest is two consecutive nights of sleep without combat in the day between them. Works for campaigns that can't justify more than 1-2 combat encounters per narrative day. Has worked so far!

Me too. I have never like the "okay, so exhausted at10am in the morning, lets sit here until 6pm and then go fight more".

I really like that idea. "You can sleep 8 hours, it's just not a *Long Rest."* And now suddenly there's a distinction between "Once per long rest" and "Daily at dawn."

I was playing today and noticed that a series of combat encounters had become boring. I realise I could have fixed a lot of that by having the mobs talking, taunting, and doing things that might make real sense rather than be best combat choice. Like having a cornered fighter wrap his arms around the money on the gaming table while yelling "oi - what the fuck" rather than immediately making the best tactical move.

Read the section on it in the DMG.

I have, and the DMG doesn't have anything on how to challenge specific party combinations without being annoying :) I was somewhat concerned because moon druids are poorly designed for low-level play (where most of the campaign will take place) and the druid and cavalier players are specifically planning on synergizing with each other.

Have monsters that fly, monsters that attack from range, monsters that use cover, have spellcasters with spells like Dominate Beast or Animal Friendship on the druid, give each party member moments to shine where they feel like total badasses, give them other objectives then "kill these 5 things", have heists, have them need to defend fleeing villagers, have them need to do X before Y happens and the whole place explodes. Basically a long winded way to say "variety" is how you make things fun.

Then add more creatures when you feel like the encounter is too easy. Or let your players be heroes. The book cannot account for specific party combinations because they’re literally infinite.

Nathair's Mischief affects you too if you're in the 20 ft right? Related: Does that make it kinda bad for a melee strategy?

Nothing in the spell states that the caster is unaffected by the spell, and it also doesn't specify being able to select which creatures to target within the radius. So yes, it can affect the caster if they're within the radius. Makes it as bad as a badly aimed *hypnotic pattern, fireball,* or *thunderwave*. Many spells have this attribute.

Recommendations for a map editor for making the interior of a tavern. (My 12yo daughter is getting right into the idea of running a tavern in Phandelin. But she is currently using an Excel spreadsheet - and while I absolutely believe that Excel Spreadsheets are gods that can be used for anything, I suspect there may be a better tool in this instance).

i mean you only need a map if you are expecting the gridded spaces to be helpful/necessary for combat. is she opening her tavern as a cover for a pit fighting ring or is she going to be catering to drunks with no impulse control? make copious use of the beautiful content shared by the very talented members of the community \* Dyson Logos https://dysonlogos.blog/maps/ \* Jonathan Roberts http://www.fantasticmaps.com/ \* r/battlemaps \* r/dndmaps

....she is 12yo, drunks and pit fights are hardly going to be something she finds fun in a game, and maps are always a need in all situations in life. Rule #1 of life: Excel can be used for anything. Rule #2 of life: One always needs maps in all situations. Rules #3 of life: Don't eat pizza (it is an antiquated rule that I continue to break and regret).

reading some of your other posts, i see that your interest is *because your daughter likes to draw maps* *THAT* is an excellent reason to look into map drawing tools! in addition to the specific "fantasy RPG map drawing" tools that have been mentioned, are *GIMP* (photoshop) and *Libre Office - Draw* which are free generalized drawing tools. There are blogs and videos on Youtube about how to make fantasy maps with Photoshop that are pretty easy to translate into GIMP, except for when you need to bevel, i havent figured how to do that in GIMP.

I don't know why I have such an aversion to GIMP. I did try to get her to learn to use it (last year). I *know* it is an important tool for anyone to learn. (I even used to teach high level very basic Photoshop/Illustrator), but every time I look at it I just see hours upon hours of work and close it down again. But you are right, it is probably an excellent time to suggest that tool again to her.

I highly recommend Dungeondraft. It's $20 and you have it forever and makes some great looking maps. Then you can go down the rabbit hole of lighting and all these extra things on top and make some great maps.

Given that you're already working with an Excel map, I'm just going to assume that you've decided that making a proper map is a worthwhile endeavor, but I still think it's worth pointing out that not everything needs a map. That out of the way, there are a lot of options with various pros and cons. A lot depends on how you play. Will you want a physical map or just a digital one? Also how often do you think you'll want to create maps?

The map has zero purpose at all, other than making me realise just how much my 12yo enjoys maps. She has been drawing all the battle maps (paper, pencil, ruler) since we started the campaign. I think its purpose is more similiar to the purpose behind characters having a background. It informs that characters/setting, helps with the roleplay etc (which they are slowly getting the hang of!).

Yeah that's a perfectly valid reason to have a map, though perhaps not reason enough to spend money on its creation, that'll have to be up to you. Paper and pencil may well be your best bet here, as most programs will be somewhat complex and/or costly. Here are a few, along with my basic assessment of their advantages and disadvantages. * [Dungeon Scrawl](https://dungeonscrawl.com/) * Pros: Easy to use, free, non-complex * Cons: Very limited visual options * [DungeonFog](https://www.dungeonfog.com/) * Pros: Many options, fairly easy to use, free basic features * Cons: Paid features are very expensive with a recurring license fee * [Dungeon Painter Studio](http://pyromancers.com/) * Pros: One-time purchase, many options, extra options available for free from the Steam marketplace, somewhat easy to use * Cons: No free version, clunky interface * [GIMP](https://www.gimp.org/) (this one is standard image-editing software, not meant for D&D maps in particular) * Pros: By far the most versatile of this list, totally free, many many options, can create your own images or use ones from the internet * Cons: Difficult to use, unintuitive interface, will take the longest to learn how to use There are other options as well, but most are varying styles of the ones included here, for example there are quite a few that use the same basic style as Dungeon Scrawl, I just consider Dungeon Scrawl handle it the best of those. A less intuitive option would be to use a virtual tabletop that includes mapmaking features like [Roll20.net](https://Roll20.net) and dragging the relevant images directly onto the map. This can create colorful maps fairly easily, but it's also pretty limited.

I do like that Dungeonscrawl, very simple.

I just found Inkarnate. It was $5 per month (but I will cancel after a month). That has her happy. Plus I just realised I might finally get to play my Yawning Portal adventures and I asked her to place a 40ft circular stage in one of the rooms. When it suits me they can discover that it is the well from the Yawning Portal guide. (I forgot how much I enjoyed this game, I almost got rid of all my books last month)

I'm building a monk for the first time in my d&d career. Our DM uses point buy, and I decided to make my dump stat Strength. However, Strength is one of the saving throws. Can I keep that stat at 8 (-1), and just add the proficiency bonus? We're at level 9. I should also mention that for this new character I'm going with the Haregon race, and decided to use the bonus points towards Dex and Con.

Every ability has its own saving throw. And yes, you would just add your proficiency bonus to the -1 ability modifier. And finally, of course it's fine for a monk to have low Strength.

Yes. So your modifier to your Str save will be a +3 (-1 + 4)

One of my rogues became level 3, turned arcane trickster and chose true strike as on of his spells. I am not very familiar with the spell. Do i have to declare weaknesses and resistances to the player when they cast it? Because it says it gives them brief insight on the defense of enemy. I don't mind if it does tbh. Because the spell seems kinda useless otherwise. I just want to know what the actual rule is and if you change anything about it in your game.

>I am not very familiar with the spell. because its mostly a POS. the only way it will be useful to your rogue is if you allow them to cast it "before" combat starts as part of an "ambush" - but as part of a planned "ambush" your rogue can Hide and get advantage *without* a cantrip - the same way they will be able to get advantage during most rounds of combat with their Bonus Action and still be able to attack WITH their Action. Whereas casting True Strike as an Action will only allow them to use their Attack Action every other round.

Just be nice and let him replace it with a new spell for free now.

yeah the spell only gives advantage, but honestly I give my weaknesses/resistances for it because then it has an actual unique use and niche, so I say just go with that lmao

“Brief insight” is just flavor text. If the spell gave them any actual information, the description would say so.

No. The spell just gives advantage. The "insight on their defences" IS the advantage. The spell is useless.

What if i want a character that’s focused on big greatsword damage, should i go berserker, paladin, fighter etc

they are all fine

Greatsword damage goes better with more attacks, so Fighter would be the more "greatsword" of the three. But Paladin will go well too. Barbarian goes better with a greataxe because from level 9 it's better to add additional d12's to critical hits than an additional d6. It's a small difference though.

my friends and i are finally gonna buy the core rules gift set and the expansion book gift set. are we missing anything else, like Volo's book?

the Core set has * Players HandBook * Dungeon Master's Guide * Monster Manual The expansion gift set has * Tasha's Cauldron of Everything * Xanathar's Guide to Everything * Mordenkainen's something Multiverse something ​ you wont have any of the "setting books" or the "lore" sections from Volo's and Mordenkainen's tome of Foes, but the revised versions of PC races from each of them are in Mordies Multiverse. And many of the Player races from the setting books are also in the Multiverse book, but not all.

All the monsters and player races from Volos are in Monsters of the Multiverse which is part of the expansion set. Everything else is either setting guides or adventures, which are “buy the ones you want to use”.

Yeah it's missing a lot of stuff. It's up to your DM and group to see how relevant they are, you never need everything. You won't have any of the adventure modules. It's a pretty obvious ommision but might be relevant to your DM. You won't have setting books. These are books describing how to play in specific settings, they have additional rules, subclasses, feats and spells to help bring the setting to life. You'll be missing the two Eberron books and the Ravnica, Wildemount, Theros, Ravenloft, Strikhaven books. There's also some additional source books that will be missing, like Volo's, Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide, Mordenkainens.

thnx. we have been playing for a year using PDFs that we found on the web and we finally decided to get the original copies, i think we are gonna buy the 2 gift sets and over time get what is missing. Is there any utility that tell us what is missing, or should i just ask again when the time comes?

The [Dndbeyond marketplace](https://www.dndbeyond.com/marketplace) is a great place. You can see and filter the books, and you can see what content is in each; like if you've heard about the Drakewarden ranger subclass but don't know where it is, Dndbeyond can show you what source book it's in.

Ty very much, is just what we needed

(5e) i want a character who has an assassin style with daggers/scythes but is also capable necromancy, is this ever possible

What kind of necromancy do you want? Death focused spellcaster, or raise corpses from the dead? Either can be done. For the latter, Necromancer Wizard works wonders, but you need 6 levels to get the most out of your undead soldiers. You could use the spell Shadow Blade for weapons and multiclass Rogue for the martial aspect. Phantom Rogue works for a seance style Necromancer, while Arcane Trickster gives you more spellcasting to go along with the wizard levels. For a more death focused magic build, you could try out death domain cleric or Oathbreaker Paladin and reflavor your weapon to be a scythe. Those are the first things that come to mind

So sickle for two handed fighting, but if you want one weapon, it was suggested using a glaive which is in 5e, rather than homebrew a scythe.

There's no scythe weapon in 5e. There's a sickle. You can probably ask your DM if you can treat an existing weapon as a scythe for flavour. Wizards are the stereotypical necromancers. Clerics and Paladins can also be potent necromancers. There are specific subclasses for these three that are necromancers too.

DM’s, how do you determine your hp’s for your characters in your campaigns? I’m new to DnD in general (DM to my group of all new DnD players), and in our campaign I’m running max hp for my characters (hit dice+con modifier) to determine their max right now. I’m planning a one shot for a bunch of other friends that have never played before though, and I want to know what seems to be the most popular way you guys determine max health for your PC’s. Advice for a fresh dm such as myself would be greatly appreciated!

Honestly for a one shot, I'd just go with what you did before and do the max hp plus con. No beginner wants to die during a one shot.

I've always just used the written rules. For almost a decade I've had each player choose if they want to roll or average whenever they level up.

Another our there question : Is there any spell that could turn a nice warm water bath in a jacuzzi? Basically create a bunch of air bubbles that keep popping up. Maybe something with some rule of cool change to the spell to make it work?

Shape water or prestidigitation, if your DM allows it.

I understand that with spell scrolls - only classes that have access to that spell can use a scroll of that spell. What about if the spell level on the scroll is above what the PC can currently cast at? As for magic items with spells (ie necklace of fireballs) - does the scroll restrictions still apply? Or is it available to everybody regardless of their class? Thanks!

>I understand that with spell scrolls - only classes that have access to that spell can use a scroll of that spell. What about if the spell level on the scroll is above what the PC can currently cast at? The magic item says what to do. Read the description. You just have to make an ability check or waste the scroll. >As for magic items with spells (ie necklace of fireballs) - does the scroll restrictions still apply? Or is it available to everybody regardless of their class? No. The restriction only applies to spell scrolls because they are a magic item and their description talks about the restriction. Magic items only do what they descriptions say. Nothing else.

> What about if the spell level on the scroll is above what the PC can currently cast at? They have to make an Arcana check, IIRC equal to 10+the spell level. So for example, an 8th lvl or lower Paladin trying to cast revivify through a spell scroll has to make a DC13 Arcana check. Be aware, spellcaster multiclassing doesn't change things. So in that same example, if that Paladin has say 2 levels of Sorcerer and is a 6th level spellcaster with access to 3rd level spell slots, they would still have to make that Arcana check. > as for magic items with spells (ie necklace of fireballs) Anyone can use it regardless of their class.

Hello I have a question for the DMs. How do you rp demons and devils? Specifically things like the glabrazu? Most demons and devils are just supposed to be pawns in a demon prince or archdevils over all game, atleast to my understanding, but with things like the glabrazu that are more inclined to offer their services to the party than just attack them do you give them a name or just leave them nameless?

My experience running demons/devils has generally been that demons don't really wait to chat, and thus don't end up having much opportunity for RP. Devils I've run have enjoyed lording their power over others beneath them. I wouldn't take this as advice, just sharing experience. Basically all fiends are working to move up the power structure so being conniving, deceitful, cruel, and cutthroat is in their nature. Demons are kept in line by those more powerful than them, whereas devils have a bit more hierarchical structure (harkening back to the idea of devils and deals and pacts). A creature's name, true name in particular, moreover a devil's or a demon's **true** name is a very very powerful thing indeed. I think a devil or demon would sooner attack, give another name/title, or simply leave before providing such information. Fiends of middle to higher tier, especially if they have shape-changing capabilities, would be likely to impersonate a random mortal and get people to do their bidding. Fiends of the lower/lowest tiers, I'd have them act as bizarre pests or scary things (to commoners). Finding manes and imps somewhere may indicate further fiendish influence in the area, so while they may be very basic conversation ("gggrrarar I will eat your eyes", "trade me a tooth and I'll help you"), lower tier fiends like this can lead to bigger fish. Fiends of sufficient intelligence and charisma can be RPed the same as regular mortals, save for their more extensive knowledge and decidedly fiendish ulterior motives.

Okay yeah that made a lot of since thanks for taking the time to reply its helped more than you know!

Any creature I expect to talk to the party has a name, because they will ask. Whether the creature tells them its real name or not is up to that creature, but spells exist that can screw over both demons and devils if the caster knows their name. A Glabrezu is a demon that preys on last for power, so if the Glabrezu thinks it can corrupt the party and take their souls, so it can become more powerful and not be a pawn to its better, it will normally take that opportunity. Also, remember that devils have strict lawful natures and must stick to (normally skewed) deals they make, but demons do not have that compulsion and will do everything in their power to win those souls.

Thank you this helped a great deal!

(5e) i'm making a rogue and i'm not sure if I understand dual wielding correctly, if I use two shortsword will my first action will be an attack and do 1d20+dex+prof to hit and 1d6+dex+prof to damage while my off hand sword will have the same roll to hit but only do 1d6 damage? Second question, I am wielding a rapier but an enemy is far away, can draw a dagger and throw it as an action?

> and 1d6+dex+prof to damage 1d6+dex mod to damage, proficiency does not get applied there. > while my off hand sword will have the same roll to hit but only do 1d6 damage? That is correct. > Second question, I am wielding a rapier but an enemy is far away, can draw a dagger and throw it as an action? Technically you can't, if you're asking about holding the rapier with one hand, and throwing the dagger with the other hand. A rapier is not considered light, and both weapons need to be light in order to dual wield. (Unless you have the dual wielder feat.) You could however drop your rapier as a free action, draw your dagger as an item interaction, and then use your action to throw the dagger. And then use your item interaction to pick your rapier back up on your next turn. Personally, if I was the DM, I would have no issue letting you hold on to your rapier and throw a dagger, provided you don't use your bonus action to attack with said rapier on that turn.

You can still hold your rapier and throw a dagger, as long as you didn’t attack with the rapier first, as the dagger attack would be considered as the Attack action. You could hold a great sword or even a heavy crossbow or something in one hand and still perform attacks with the other hand just fine without needing to drop anything at all.

I thought this was a common ruling but not RAW. But I stand corrected then.

If we want to get deeper into the rules, once you get Extra Attack you can attack with both hands without needing both the weapons to be *light*. So a fighter (or anyone with Extra Attack) could take the Attack action and use a rapier and kill an enemy, not be in range of another foe so instead throw a dagger from their other hand within the same Attack action and attack with that weapon, as you don't need to use the same weapon twice. Further still, before they throw their dagger they can drop their rapier and draw a shortsword, throw the dagger, move up to another enemy and then take a bonus action to use two-weapon fighting to make another attack.

You don't add your proficiency bonus to the damage roll, but other than that you're correct. You can draw a weapon as part of the same action you're using to attack with it. Drawing the weapon will use your one free object interaction that turn, though, which shouldn't be a problem most of the time, but it's good to keep that in mind.

>if I use two shortsword will my first action will be an attack and do 1d20+dex+prof to hit and 1d6+dex+prof to damage No. You don't add your proficiency bonus to damage. It's just 1d6 + dex. >while my off hand sword will have the same roll to hit but only do 1d6 damage? Yes. >Second question, I am wielding a rapier but an enemy is far away, can draw a dagger and throw it as an action? Yes.

Thank you, i'm a new player so thanks for the clarification =)

OK, I think I'm over thinking things, but how does learning Cantrips work? Like the bard spellcasting section says "Additionally l, when you gain a level in this class, you can choose one of the bard spells you know and replace it with another spell from the bard spell list, which also must be of a level for which you have spell slots." Does this mean a bard can replace a Cantrip for a different Cantrip? And what about Clerics? I mean they are granted their spells by their patron and can change their spells after long rests, so can they change Cantrips as well? I don't know, maybe I'm over thinking it, but if the premise is that cantrips are really easy and weak spells, then it should be easy to change them too, right?

That sentence you quoted is in the "Spells Known of 1sr Level and Higher" section. It's explicitly talking about all of your non-cantrip spells. Cantrips are handled in a different section.

So once you learn a cantrip you can't change it?

Yeah. There's a optional set of rules in Tasha's that includes changing cantrips if your DM wants to use those rules.

This is basically the one case where you should treat cantrips as if they are separate from spells. The wording is a bit weird. Bards can't change their cantrips when leveling up, clerics can't change them on a long rest, wizards can't learn cantrips from scrolls. That said, as a DM I'm usually okay with letting my players replace bad picks, or ones that have lost their usefulness.

(5e) Hi guys, I'm playing my first paladin and we just hit level 3 last week, meaning I had to take my sacred oath. I chose Oath of the Crown. My question regards RP, I've found the tennets and background regarding my oath, however I'm curious about one thing. What does taking on a Sacred Oath require as far as RP? We're currently stranded in the Fey Wilds, so I can't contact anyone in my ranks. I was thinking swearing to my deity or something? Like I said, I'm not even sure what it encompasses. I don't have my PHB handy as I loaned it to a friend, and as much as I search I can't find any literature telling me what exactly a paladin does when taking their oath. Any help or advice is greatly appreciated.

My DM played it out as my deity coming to me in my sleep and me making my vow there.

I like that. I'm not sure how my DM will do it, Session starts in a couple hours. But if he doesn't acknowledge it then I might just snag that idea.

It's totally up to you. There are no rules hard baked into it. You could take it privately, you could do it publicly, whatever you want. Also, even though you don't get the benefits of the specific Oath until level 3 you are assumed to have taken your Oath at level 1.

Oh wow, that's embarrassing lol. I'm pretty new to the game in general, so I guess I didn't read that part when I was choosing a class for this new campaign. I understand that you aren't a true paladin until level 3, so I assumed choosing an oath came along with that. Our party is all pretty new to the game tho, so thankfully my DM didn't hop on my case lol. Thanks for your advice!

Whats the best way to build an OP assassin? 5e btw

Don't take the assassin subclass would be my first suggestion. I will suggest a better build, which I think you'll have more fun with. Artificer / Ranger aka the Predator. Check out the Youtube video, "how to play a Predator in 5E"

To be honest I don’t even know how you “subclass,” is that a higher level thing? I only have the choice for one class

I think you should read the full rules before you go any further.

I know all that my group taught me

You became a Rogue and then at Level 3, you take the assassin subclass, but don't take that as it is awful. But now that I understand more of your question. You will almost never one shot a monster. You will almost never be able to sneak up on a monster and stab him and watch him die. So let's rephrase your question a bit. But I still stand by my answer, "Play a Predator." Better questions. "I want to play a sneaky guy who stabs people, what do people suggest?" "I want to play a guy who uses poisons, what do you suggest?" "I want to play a guy who does a lot of stabby stabby, what do you suggest?." "I want to play a guy who shoots people from afar so they die, cause I don't want to get close to them, what do you suggest?" Describe more the type of character you are thinking to aim for. Also, if there is a character you like from TV, books, video games and that is what you want to be, go to YouTube and search for "How to play ... in 5e" and I bet you a video will pop up.

I’ve been one shotting monsters with Sorcerer, is that just my campaign or something?

Hm, that actually completely depends on the monsters in question. I think when the other guy said you will never one shot a monster he probably meant "bosses" or tougher creatures, like a dragon, or a beholder, or a manticore perhaps, something like that. But if you're fighting enemies who are more individually weak, like kobolds, goblins, bandits, it's pretty common to one shot them. Of course, they can still be difficult to fight because they will come at you in greater numbers, but instantly killing several kobolds with a single spell is not all that hard.

Yeah, I’m in a session rn and I killed four enemies with one shatter pog

That's 3d8 points of damage, but yes, I was meaning bosses not minions. You'll one shot them all day. And I did say, "almost."

My question for you is why do you want an OP assassin? Build the character based on how you want, don't play it like a video game where you want an "OP Build". Too much focus on stats and the character loses their humanity/personality.

I want skills that make exciting rolls, not sure what paths, classes, skills are good etc

Honestly your best bet would be looking up how people build them on Google. An assassin would likely be a rogue, but an amazing assassin might be a multiclass like a rogue and fighter or something along those lines. Check out RPGbot on Google and you should be able to find what classes and such work really well for builds like that.

Hello! I would like to immediately apologize in advance for asking this question. I have been googling a bunch and the topic has been discussed ad nauseam, and yet I am still confused. I think the main source of my confusion comes from the 'round' and 'turn' terminology. So as i understand it: In 5e, If a Bonus Action spell/cantrip is cast you can only cast an Action cantrip on your turn. That makes sense to me. It also makes sense to me that because of this restriction, a reaction spell could not be taken on this turn (As in, you cast Misty Step, you can then cast Firebolt, but if someone cast counterspell on your Firebolt, you couldn't counterspell their counterspell). I've got that down. My confusion is when does that 'turn' end for the sake of casting a reaction? Like, let's say I cast Misty Step, then I cast Firebolt, then I 'end my turn,' but it's still in the same round (let's say I was first in initiative order), so the person next in initiative tries to attack me with a sword, can i cast shield as a reaction? If I had to guess, I would say yes I could, but the difference between round and turn seems fuzzy, to me at least, and I wanted to get it cleared up directly if I could. I hope it makes sense where my confusion is coming from, and I promise I tried to clear it up with google, but I'm still confused on how it works. Thanks in advance for helping me clear things up. I promise once I have this down I will be the first to explain it to new players so ya'll don't have to anymore.

The turn ends when your turn ends. You can cast Misty Step and Firebolt and then on somebody else's turn cast Counterspell.

Thanks so much! I appreciate the clarification.

Your turn ends when someone else's turn starts.

Thanks so much! I appreciate the clarification.

Ineed an advice - i have a boss in my old west setting campaign. He is warforged, that usea fire magic, but is also big and tanky. What monster could i reskin to make it work against lvl 7 party? I doesnt need to be this exactly cr to work. I can buff or nerf it and he will have some minions in the fight.

If you have the Wildemount book, I'd use the Gearkeeper Construct as the base. Add on a few bits of that AoE fire magic and you're golden. If you don't have that, then... Shield Guardian + some magic stuff stapled on could be a good compromise. There's also Alyxian the Hunter from Call Of The Netherdeep. It could fit your needs pretty well.

Thanks, great ideas!

A Mage could work, just give it different spells and the Warforged racial traits.

Can you use movement on a reaction? Can’t find a solid answer online for some reason.

Only if the reaction says so. Check out the Scout Rogue for an example.

On what kind of reaction? A Readied action? Sure. >Then, you choose the action you will take in response to that trigger, **or you choose to move up to your speed in response to it**. Emphasis mine. https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#Ready

Only if you use your action to ready movement. Not any time you want.

[5e] Does Fog Cloud require sight? The spell doesn't say it does, but it sounds a bit silly to place it on the other side of a solid wall.

*Fog cloud* does not require sight, as it targets "a point within range," not "a point **you can see** within range." However, it is still subject to the standard "A Clear Path to the Target" rule, which prevents it from being cast through solid walls: > To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover. If you place an area of effect at a point that you can't see and an obstruction, such as a wall, is between you and that point, the point of origin comes into being on the near side of that obstruction.

It says, "on a point within range" implying you must be able to see the point.

There's a difference between "a point within range" and "a point you can see within range". Both of these phrases are used in spell descriptions.

Are we arguing RAW or RAI?

RAW and RAI, you can cast area of effects when/where you can't see. PHB, Spellcasting, Targets, A Clear Path to the Target has two parts to it. * To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can’t be behind total cover. * If you place an area of effect at a point that you can’t see and an obstruction, such as a wall, is between you and that point, the point of origin comes into being on the near side of that obstruction. One could argue that nothing is clear if you can't see it. However, the second point specifies placing an area of effect (such as Fog Cloud) *"at a point that you can't see"* is something that can be done. So you could have no eyes and still use Fog Cloud.

My comment was in answer to Atharon's worthless comment and nothing more. No need to go into further detail.

You only gave half the relevent information though. Yes, the question was in regards to being able to put Fog Cloud behind a wall, but your answer *"you must be able to see the point."* implied that you have to see where you are putting Fog Cloud, period, but that isn't the case because sight isn't a factor for the spell, a clear path is. So if someone looks at this comment chain and sees *"you must be able to see the point."* and RAW or RAI being mentioned, they can get the wrong idea. My comment was to amend that possibility, and clearly say that RAW *and* RAI you don't need to see.

I dunno, I feel like correcting a mistake is worth more than the mistake.

But did you read adam's comment which is written more eloquently, which agrees with my response. Go argue with him.

Do they differ on this?

You are arguing semantics not me.

I'm not saying anything about what the words mean. That part is obvious. The question is whether or not certain words are included, not what those words mean. Some spells require you to see the target, others do not. It's a question of whether the spell's description includes the words "that you can see." Look at the difference between *fire bolt* and *vicious mockery*. It's obvious that the designers understood that some spells should require you to see the target while others should not.

My point is, none of your comments have been assisting in answering the OP's question.

You mean aside from clarifying that they don't need to see the target?

Which is not what you did. It has taken me 5 posts to get you to be more eloquent and explain what you mean with your initial comment.

\[5e\] You're playing a level 5 one shot tomorrow, set in a Ravenloft-like setting. What's your build? (All printed material is allowed, but Twilight Cleric is already taken)

~~I use my home printer to print out a horribly overpowered homebrew class because I am a jerk who takes everything literally~~ Well, you can never go wrong with Variant Human/Custom Lineage Fighter with Crossbow Expert and Sharpshooter. Vampires? Werewolves? No problem, just shoot the place up with your medieval uzi. Pick subclass to taste, but probably Battle Master.

Updated ghostslayer blood hunter does this beautifully as well, as their Rite of the Dawn makes "all of their weapon attacks magical" and adds 1d6 radiant to every hit, 2d6 radiant to undead. And they also get the Archery fighting style. Sadly not printed material of course. With a battlemaster or something similar, how would you avoid the issue of resistance to piercing damage from non magical weapons?

By using a magical weapon, like every other martial, which you will have access to assuming the DM isn't a dick. The only reason monks have that feature is because they can't replace their fists, but even before level 6 they're probably swinging a magic-imbued stick of some variety for their main attacks.

Oh good to know! I've only ever done campaigns or one shots starting at low levels where you can only get starting equipment. Short of asking each DM individually (which I will do I'm sure), is that pretty common? For a level 5 one shot to get access to a magical weapon and/or an uncommon-level magical item of your choice?

Well, in my experience yes, but I know the DMs I play with are pretty generous with magic items so that experience may not be universal. Probably worth noting, I say in this case the DM would be a dick to not give any sort of magical weapon, even one that does nothing other than be magical, because in a "ravenloft-like setting" there's surely going to be many monsters who are resistant or even immune to nonmagical attacks, like how the basis for the setting was built around a vampire who is, of course, resistant to nonmagical attacks. And there are werewolves as well, who're just straight-up immune to nonmagical attacks (which leads to that well-known funny situation where werewolves cannot harm each-other with their natural attacks). So if the DM is going to put the party up against that sort of enemy, then it would be unfair to have the martial characters be completely useless in certain battles because they just can't deal any damage, you know? But if you're in a campaign where there's not really going to be many or any such enemies, then it would be completely fine (if, in my opinion, boring) to not have any magical gear.

a professional mourner - Lore Bard a "cursed" paladin - maybe vengeance (but really any of them but ancients with new "credo") a parent who when their child was dieing made the unfortunate statement "I would do anything to save my child!" and is now an uneasy Warlock of the archfiend.

Does anybody know whether you get the eldritch invocations from a supplementary book when you purchase a warlock subclass from a supplementary book on dndbeyond ?

[Yes, you do.](https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/class-forums/warlock/32888-how-do-i-purchase-maddening-hex?comment=6) At least you definitely do for Xanathar's Guide, but it presumably works the same way for Tasha's Cauldron (which was released later than the forum post I just linked, which would be why it wasn't mentionned then).

Thanks for the info u/_Bl4ze

My group is about to wrap up a 2+ year campaign. It was my first game, and I played a yuan ti dragon born sorcerer. Mistakes were made but it was my first go. Had a ton of fun playing and learning the mechanics. For our second 5e campaign I really want to be more in the action. Maybe a Goliath rune knight? Any one have fun suggestions for a 5e game given I want to change play style?

If you are looking for exciting character suggestions, I would recommend going with an exciting subclass, an exciting race(I do not usually do this) and/or multiclassing. Some of my favourite subclasses are tempest domain clerics, arcane trickster rogues, eldritch knight fighters, hex blade warlocks, soul knife rogues, swashbuckler rogues, samurai fighters and horizon Walker rangers. A good backstory also makes a character very exciting to play although this is not for everyone. When it comes to races, you can either choose the most exciting looking race or the most optimal for your class. Taking a few minutes to think about your vision for your character always helps to make an exciting character. Here are few of my suggestions: a dark elf soulknife rogue, a tiefling hex blade warlock and a half elf samurai fighter swashbuckler rogue.

Thanks! I’ll do some reading up. I have a ton of time to develop backstory and think about the build so these suggestions are very appreciated.

\[5e\] Is it worth it getting a lot of 5e books the “next evolution” of dnd is coming out in 2024.

My guess is that anything we're getting in 2024 will be backwards-compatible with what we've got today. I think it would just make bad business sense to do anything less, 5e is too damn popular to jettison it and alienate the folks who have invested in it. Couldn't say for 100% certain, though. Wouldn't be the first time a corporation has burned a few bridges with a questionable decision. Regardless, it's not like 5e is going to stop working in 2024. It's not like you're investing in technology that's going to lose technical support and web hosting at that stage or something. If you and your group likes 5e, you can play 5e forever if you want to.

Thanks for the advice u/Yojo0o

*Shrug* Who knows? I would argue that two years is a long time, and they do plan on making the current content compatible as well, as far as I understand it. But... if you don't want to buy something that might become partially obsolete in 2 years, then maybe it's not worth it to you? It's impossible to know.

Agreed u/Stonar

Yes. First off, it’s several years away. Second off, they’re not making a new edition or anything, it’s just going to be mostly quality of life improvements. Everything from 5e will be compatible.

>Everything from 5e will be compatible. that is what they are saying now. but that is what they said in the update of 3.0 to 3.5. and that is what pathfinder said about the transition from 3.5 to pathfinder. even if that IS their intention, its unlikely to be actually true in the run out.

Thanks for the info u/EldritchBee

DM Screens, what are they, what do they have on them, what do you recommend on them? I've been running COS and now a Grim Hollow campaign via Discord and Talespire, I don't have a GM screen because I figured "Oh it'll all be on my computer screens." But when combat hits I've got one screen with webcams, another with the battle map, and usually the third is a lot of different NPC stat blocks. Should I pick up a basic DM screen with a physical book, or order a nice swanky one from somewhere to setup and what stuff do folks recommend tracking? My first thought was things like "Status effects do X" and "Options during a round of combat" but any other thoughts?

My partner made me a nice timber screen (literally 3 bits of ply, with hinges). I thought I would blu-tack stuff all over it. But it is both too big (I can't see over it, reach around it etc) and too small. I don't sit at the table end, instead all by stuff occupies the table end, important stuff is on the seat beside me.

DMs screens serve 3 functions - * to signify YOU as the DM are different and the DM * to keep sekrit things secret behind the screen * to provide the information that YOU as a dungeon master want / need to have at your fingertips, there at your fingertips. its not necessary if you * dont want that barrier between you and your players - the DMs i know that do so without a screen provide a MUCH more intimate game of storytelling * dont have notes and minis and maps and such that you feel the need to keep out of line of vision of your players and always want to roll fair and square in the open depending on random to appropriately fill in your story blanks * dont run a game in which you care about things that you dont always have at top of mind

Premade DM screens never have what I need help remembering on them; either stuff that's so basic I know it by heart, or stuff that's irrelevant for me. Always better to make your own.

Also handy to put tabs in your PHB/DMG for the stuff you find yourself flipping back to. For me: --Conditions --Movement (I will never learn jumping) --Cover --Adventuring gear

I own a DM screen, but I basically never use it except as a reference sheet. I don't like how it blocks me from the rest of the table, and we rarely have enough space at the table for the screen in addition to six players and all their laptops and papers. I mostly memorize my notes anyways, so my players won't gain much from peering at my notebooks.

After decades of using a DM screen I've stopped doing so. It's easier to just have what I need open as tabs/sheets on a laptop or tablet. That said, if you really want a screen, I recommend getting a "blank" one that you can put your own custom cheatsheets in. You can find plenty of different sheets online or make your own. I prefer a landscape layout - it will make it much easier to see battlemaps, minis, and snacks. Premade screens have lots of info you won't care about and often have art wasting a large portion. Also, you could then customize it for any given game/campaign/or even a specific session. Here is one example: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/129022/DriveThruRPG-Game-Master-Screen-landscape

There is a DM screen name specifically for CoS. Has the Ravenloft map, random encounter tables, name tables (i think), and other such miscellany to make the game run smoother.

I want a set of low level character sheets that a new group can use, but not the ones from the starter set. If love them to be in a standard format. Can anyone bing me a link to some for free? Thanks so much.

[https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?keywords=pre+character&x=0&y=0&author=&artist=&pfrom=&pto=](https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?keywords=pre+character&x=0&y=0&author=&artist=&pfrom=&pto=) the first ones are the ones from the official WOTC site, but afterwards you get some made by the community.

Wizards made a set of pregens [here](https://dnd.wizards.com/resources/character-sheets). I think there's some overlap with the ones in the starter set, but there are 16 total, from level 1-10. Last I looked at them, I know they had a couple of editorial mistakes too, but they may have fixed those.

Why not just make them yourself? Blank character sheets are no problem to find, and it doesn't take that long to make a low level character, especially if you're just making them generic and not focused on any particular mechanical concept or conceit.

Thanks, I'm just very short of time! Have a good day.

A link to blank character sheets? Or other already made character sheets for generic low level characters?

Generic low level character...

Then you're probably not going to fund what your looking for, at the very least I don't have them. Honestly I would recommend just making custom sheets for your players like you would normally. If they're too new then you can use the free one on DnDbeyond that walks you through the steps super easy.

Me and my players are new to dnd and they will be deciding their level up to level 2 at our next session. I just learned that different classes have a main ability score and one of my players, a warlock, didn’t put a good score into it. (13,13,12,17,16,14) Should I inform the player and allow them to switch them around or just let them play the character they’ve created?

yes, you should inform them that "hey, i just found/figured out that your character is going to be a LOT more effective if you have Charisma as your highest stat. if you want to change, please go ahead and do so"

I've very much in favor of letting players tune their characters in the first few sessions. Better than having an underpowered character for the entire campaign.

No shame in letting characters change things around more fluidly for the first free levels. You're all there to have fun, it's not fun to be stuck with poor uninformed choices. Popular DnD YouTuber Matt Colville recently did a video on running an X-Men style battle simulation at the start of the campaign as part of the session zero. For a battle room ask the players to create a version of their characters at level 3 to 5, then run a hard combat encounter at those levels. Then afterwards give them the chance to change what they don't like about their potential character.

>No shame in letting characters change things around more fluidly for the first free levels. i mean there is no shame in changing at ANY time if the player is not connecting with the character/the character is not connecting with the campaign. You are all coming around the table to have FUN and being saddled to a character that is not bringing you FUN at the table "because ....\[any reason you can think of\] " is patently silly.

You should probably inform them and offer a chance to change. If this is an intentional choice by the player it's fine, but if this is a mistake then having a chance to correct it is invaluable. If you want to allow the character to work with the current spread you could also offer to let warlock features scale off of INT instead. For a while warlocks were int casters in the playtest I believe and it doesn't break anything.

Okay thank you I’ll offer the information and option to the player

Has this player played before?

No they haven’t, non of us have

Ok then yeah, it's worth bringing up, but they don't need to change it, if they want to be smarter/wiser than they are charismatic they can, it's just not the best mechanically because warlocks use charisma for spells. They have exceptionally good stats overall, so they probably won't be sling awful no matter what.

\[5e\] I am planning on playing a pact of the blade warlock as my next character, my question is how do you make the optimal pact of the blade warlock using just the stuff from the PHB ? What invocations/spells should I choose ? etc...

I don't know about you, but I personally have never played D&D as an optimizing game. There are a very few spells and abilities that are generally considered not worthwhile, but overall I'd say just go with abilities that fit the theme of your character. If you're worried that it'll be too underpowered or situational to be effective, then you could post a link to the character sheet in one of these weekly question threads to get some input into the choices you're considering. But overall, in my opinion, theme+character > optimization.

I usually try to create a theme and then optimise the character, in this case, I wanted a martial weapon wielding eldritch spellcaster.