#ydiw

[survive-object-poll-island]

YDIW let's go on a date after the competition :)

[simul16]

5E - You're Doing It Wrong - Hide

Normally, you can't hide from someone if you're in full view. A lightfoot halfling, though, can try to vanish behind a creature that is at least one size larger, and a wood elf can try to hide simply by being in heavy rain, mist, falling snow, foliage, or similar natural phenomena. It's as if nature itself cloaks a wood elf from prying eyes -- even eyes staring right at the elf! - Sage Advice Compendium, p.2

In Fifth Edition D&D, the rules for using Stealth to hide consist of three paragraphs in a sidebar in the section of the Player's Handbook that covers using Dexterity as an ability, so in a sense, it's a bit unreasonable for me to claim that DMs are doing Stealth wrong when the official rules support for how to actually do Stealth correctly is so sparse. Nevertheless, the actual rule does specifically state a distinction between hiding and being actually invisible ("An invisible creature can't be seen, so it can always try to hide. Signs of its passage might still be noticed, however, and it still has to stay quiet."), and as a result implies a distinction between being hidden and being invisible that, if stated explicitly, would make adjudicating Hiding situations correctly a lot easier...except for one thing.

The distinction is actually fairly easy to state, once you understand it:

When you are invisible, other creatures can't see you.

When you are hidden, other creatures don't know where you are.

Understanding the distinction between those two things makes a lot of what the rules do say make much more sense. For instance, the note above about invisible creatures being always able to hide; if you can't be seen, then you can attempt to move or otherwise mislead another creature into thinking you are standing in a place you actually aren't, or at the very least that it doesn't know that you're standing where you are. Whether you succeed or not depends on how you try to accomplish this, and whether you succeed at the appropriate check -- a Stealth check would certainly be appropriate if trying to move somewhere to make a creature think you're still in the space you 'disappeared' from, while not actually being in that space anymore, but misleading a creature, say by throwing a pebble to make a noise somewhere else, might actually require a Sleight of Hand check or even just a straight Dexterity check without a skill modifier.

But the most egregious use of Stealth is from those folks, often who have played a previous edition of D&D and gotten into the habit of using Stealth as a way of claiming a combat bonus -- this is true in 5E as well, particularly for the rogue class, as rogues not only can take advantage of the advantage granted by attacking an opponent who isn't able to see the rogue to gain Sneak Attack on that attack, but also by using the rogue's Cunning Action ability to hide as a bonus action either before or after attacking in order to set up the attack. And in this, the biggest aider and abettor of this kind of abusive rules exploitation is, sadly, the Sage, who seems to not really understand the distinction between being hidden and being invisible.

The Naturally Stealth ability of the lightfoot halfling does say that the character "can attempt to hide even when you are obscured only by a creature that is at least one size larger than you." However, nothing in the ability says that a halfling can do this while being observed, and the rules for hiding, scant as they are, do at least point out that "[y]ou can't hide from a creature that can see you". It's the next phrase, though, that really nails down the distinction we're trying to make here: "and if you make noise..., you give away your position." Being hidden is a matter of creatures not knowing where you are, and if you've given away your position (say by openly walking up to another member of your party and trying to hide behind them), any creature that saw you walk up to your fellow party member still pretty clearly knows where you are -- behind the other person.

Similarly, the Mark of the Wild ability of the wood elf does not provide an explicit exception to the general rule that you can't hide from creatures that can see you: "You can attempt to hide even when you are only lightly obscured by foliage, heavy rain, falling snow, mist, and other natural phenomena." Despite the Sage's flowery text, nothing in the ability actually allows the wood elf to simply vanish from the eyes of enemies simply because there's a heavy rain or snow falling.

So what good are these abilities if they can't be used the way the Sage implies? Well, there are two things to focus on in the rules, and then another thing to consider that's not explicitly within the rules, but probably should be.

The first thing to focus on that is within the rules is the use of the word 'obscured' in both abilities discussed above. Obscurement comes in two types, heavy and light, and heavy obscurement imposes the blinded condition on all creatures who don't have an ability that allows them to see otherwise (for example, mundane darkness is heavy obscurement, and thus blinds creatures that don't have darkvision; creatures that do have darkvision, though, can see even in the area). If a creature is blinded by being in a heavily obscured area, it can't see a creature trying to hide, which takes care of the problem that you can't hide from a creature that can see you. Light obscurement, though, generally only provides disadvantage to Perception checks, it doesn't prevent them entirely, so even though it may be more difficult to see in light obscurement, it's not impossible. Nevertheless, presuming that both abilities are referring to 'obscurement' caused by the things they describe in their text would allow characters with those abilities to attempt Stealth checks in circumstances where other characters could not; the effect of a successful check, though, is not to make the character invisible, but only to make the observer think that the character is still in the last space they saw them in -- recall, being hidden means that other creatures don't know where you are, but they won't just forget the last place they did see you, especially in a combat situation ("In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you."). If you actually are in the place that a creature thinks you're in, then you're not actually hidden, even if you made your Stealth check -- as noted above, you need to move to another position so you are not actually in the space the observers think you're in, or create some distraction or other misdirection to make those observers believe you're no longer in the place they last saw you. Being successfully hidden is what allows that misdirection to be successful, as being hidden means that while an observer may believe it knows where you are (based on where it last saw you), it actually doesn't. Admittedly, this may be a bit more difficult for a halfling hiding behind a single ally than for an elf hiding in an area of foliage consisting of multiple 5-foot squares, but neither is impossible.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the rules also explicitly say that "when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses." For people that want to do the 'attack, hide, repeat' mambo, this just means to them that they need to make a Stealth check each round, but keep in mind that once you've given away your position, not only are you no longer hiding, but creatures that you were hidden from, who didn't know where you were, now do know where you are. Trying to hide in exactly the same position you were just in creates the same problem as trying to hide in the space that creatures can actually see you're in before you try to hide; if your enemies think you're in the space you're actually in, because that's the space they last noticed you were in, you're not actually getting the benefit of being hidden. So what's the benefit of being hidden in combat if you're not invisible? That's easy, and spelled out right in the combat rules: "If the target isn't in the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but the DM typically just says that the attack missed, not whether you guessed the target's location correctly." If an enemy doesn't know where you are, and attacks a space it thinks you're in, but that you're actually not in, the attack automatically misses, and depending on the attack roll, the enemy might not even realize that he missed because you're not actually in that space.

There is one thing that isn't in the rules that probably should be, though, and it comes down to how enemies can detect you if you are hidden. Imagine you're a rogue and you sneak up to a wall behind which you can hear enemy monsters. There are archways to allow movement between the monster's room and where you are, but you're not standing in the archways -- you have full cover from the enemies and thus they can't see you. So you declare your intention to hide, which is perfectly reasonable: the creatures can't see you, and you want to be sure they don't know you're there. You make your Dexterity (Stealth) check against their passive Perception and succeed. Then, one creature leaves the group and walks through an arch into your area. You're hidden, so the creature doesn't know where you are, but you no longer have cover blocking the creature from being able to see you. Does the creature see you? (In previous editions of D&D, the creature would automatically notice you if it now had line of sight to you, which I always found irritating as a player.)

While there are many different situations that might affect a general rule (is the creature carrying a light source, or does it have darkvision? how much general detritus is there where you are that might provide additional cover or concealment from the enemy's location?), I'd argue that a general rule should be that, if you don't take an action that might reveal your position, enemies don't automatically get to spot you, though they could use an action to try to find you if they had reason to suspect you're there.

Going back to our imagined situation, when the enemy walks through the archway, as long as you're still not acting, you haven't done anything to give away your position, so the default hiding result -- the enemy doesn't know where you are -- continues. However, if the creature can see something that doesn't look 'normal' to it -- a gnome-shaped mass pressed up against the wall, for example -- it can attempt a Wisdom (Perception) check against your Dexterity (Stealth) check result to try to figure out that what it sees is you. If it fails, your ability to hide was good enough so that the creature presumes that it either isn't seeing what it thinks it sees, or that it misinteprets what it sees as something else (just a weird-shaped rock, for instance). However, if the creature then returns to the other room and you decide to move to the archway in the hopes of peeking around the corner and seeing just how many creatures are there, now you've done something that might give away your position; you need to attempt a new Dexterity (Stealth) check to confirm that your movement and action didn't give away your position, and if one of the creatures had actually come through the other archway stealthily without you noticing (it made a Stealth check against your passive Perception, so it's effectively hidden from you), then that creature would automatically notice you when taking your action, unless there was some other reason it wouldn't be able to perceive you while you are moving.

Generally speaking, as long as you as the DM keep in mind that 'hidden' does not equal 'invisible', and that a creature can be hidden independently of being invisible or vice versa, adjudicating situations where your players are trying to hide from monsters should be a lot easier, and provide for a lot fewer opportunities for rules abuse.

[kurojiri]

Youngblood dipped into war

Fandom: Harry Potter Pairing: Neville Longbottom/Pansy Parkinson Summary: Pansy Parkinson grew up believing in love, and when the coming war had started to shape her life she wondered again if love could save her this time. A/N: @slytherdornet, @hprarepairnet Word Count: 3,075 Additional Tags: internal struggles, falling in love, pinning, semi-canon compliant, enemies to friends, sort of, background pining darry

Or read on ao3

She hadn’t ever considered the following parts of her life changing so dramatically, of her mind swimming and suffocating when Draco told her and their usual crew of what had happened after the summer before beginning their fifth year. He never explicitly said what had happened in the walls of the Malfoy manor, but she had known by the way his skin was pale and how tired he looked when he tried to keep the image of being a proud Slytherin. It almost was pathetic how much she felt crushed herself.

To see the day when she began to doubt her family and the colors she wore for years, and now onwards in her fifth year.

She had always been a happy girl, with known privileges since her status had been high for a while. But the price her parents paid, and her choices becoming slimmer Pansy knew it would all topple in some manner. And it would be by Potter’s lot too. She would have loved to hex them, but she had also understood their stance. Young people were always monitored by their elders and fewer had the courage to stand up again the Dark Lord. It could have been simpler; but it couldn’t either because the war was more than Harry Potter and Lord Voldemort.

It was about principles that had been lost. Of the more rowdy and bigoted people that blew over the traditionalists views of conserving old practices and the overly progressive people feeling too ignorant of not being heard enough. The balance had tipped too far and extreme that it had been hard to be a pureblood with traditional views and not look like a bigot. Merlin knows her mother had trouble when the first war had divided the wizarding world in Britain. The few years since the demise, and now apparent resurrection had made it all feel real.

She was sure Draco had been acting for the safety of his family being, as they evidently had been chosen into helping their Dark Lord soon, as well for allowing his crowds find refugee in the Malfoy Manor for their meetings.

None of them said anything, knowing perfectly well, that soon the Dark Lord would eventually use more of Draco’s home.

It still didn’t make her forget about Umbridge.

The woman had been a terrible person. A deplorable example of someone how should have never been allowed to teach; she had been far too extreme with her ideas of how the world should have worked. On the outside Pansy did her best, she knew she had made her mistakes when she heard of the detentions. But self-preservation had taught her enough to survive that year. (Even if their hands and arms would still haunt her.)

Neville Longbottom was not just an idiot. He was a moron and far too much of a Gryffindor for her tastes. And yet, she couldn’t stop watching him. Herebology hadn’t been her area of expertise and while she knew she would have her strengths and weaknesses, she still wanted to gain better grades each year. It had been a mistake when she sat close to Longbottom and took notes of how he personally worked the plants they were introduced and the way he taught other people that asked him questions. They were far more helpful than the textbook explanations that Granger gave. He had a knack of being soft and tender.

He was not someone she should have found interest in, and yet, Pansy was losing control of her thoughts. She knew well enough, had enough experiences too, to understand where her heart strained. Draco had been the same when he struggled to maintain his own pretenses. Their little outings had been a cover. A brief steam of having them curling into balls of worries without having to maintain their masks.

She did not want to accept it.

The sense of having her old memories crashing and colliding with the present did not bode well for her. It had only complicated everything else that revolved in her life. Especially, when it concerned to Longbottom; he had grown since the first time she had to mingle in the same room as him in Hogwarts. Devastating really. All his old quirks had become enduring. It distracted her more the longer she anticipated and gravitated to his magic.

One day she wouldn’t be affected by him; she constantly prayed it would near. Until then, Pansy would just have to suffer until it would come or her heart to move along to another phase or face.

He couldn’t have picked the worst time to enter the greenhouse. Pansy had suppressed her tears, but it had been too late; he had seen her losing her heart. Longbottom, the ever gentleman didn’t outright mock her. Didn’t pity her the way she thought most boys did when they encountered a crying girl, he had been calm and patient. She didn’t give him an inch for her to clean her face and walk away. The air may have been heavy with her emotions and magic humming, but Longbottom had allowed her to pull her mask up before she left the place.

He never said anything about when he caught her again the next week.

He never did, and it annoyed her how his eyes were too kind and forgiving when she knew she had bullied him before. Honestly, sometimes she thought that the Gryffindors were hopeless as they were reckless. They could be so explosive with their tantrums and righteousness; however, Longbottom had been one of the rare ones where his angry never truly reigned in his actions. He started to gain more confidence within himself, and she had had seen it in random hallways and other classes they shared. (She didn’t want to acknowledge it, because if she did then she would lose more of herself for wanting something with him.)

But nothing couldn’t stray for the truth to not come forward. It had started subtle, but she had known that Longbottom had been becoming a new version of himself each day she looked at him from afar. His back straighten as much as he started to pry off bullies for the younger years. And as selfless he was, Pansy was becoming more lost. She couldn’t walk away from her path her heart took her to, and even with Draco being a lovely friend they both knew what would happen. She would lose the battle. Her heart would ruin her, just like how Draco lost his years ago when he met Potter.

They were such idiots for believing in love, and with having the war becoming more real with each passing day they knew their luck would run out soon enough. Neither could fault each other, and as much Pansy knew how wrong it had been to keep on hoping for love, she knew more that Longbottom was her own poison. They never interacted, and while she didn’t outright bully him anymore the rest of the world had still believed that she was a bloody wretch. (She didn’t correct them; couldn’t when she felt it had been impossible to even try to lessen the blow when she heard of other girls seeing what she saw first.)

Pansy Parkinson did not sneer, but it had been so close when she encountered The Golden Trio. She had been minding her own business when they appeared. The heated looks hadn’t been worse than before, the only difference was how Potter glanced at how she had laced her arms with Draco. She very quickly and with perfect elegance she might add, leaned her head on Draco’s shoulder. (Pansy wanted so much to laugh out loud at how she noticed Potter’s jaw tensed and how his arms and whole body really, became stiff when she matched her grin with his glare.)

Draco, being a good sport, allowed the public (but very mutual and platonic) affections. The side comments didn’t bother her, and while Draco had loved the verbal clashes he shared with Potter, Pansy grew tired of it. She loved Draco, she really did, but that had been the difference. He loved someone who was both stubborn and righteousness to butt heads with him; whereas, Pansy, she’d love a gentle lover that didn’t fear her whip of a mouth and streak of independence. He could have fun with his banters with Potter. She just wanted to live in the same world where she could love and not hide how afraid she was once they left Hogwarts.

(When they left the trio Pansy didn’t bother to look at how Longbottom had been too close to Lovegood and Weasley girl.

She would not show how much it hurt. She was a Parkinson, and she would not cry over a boy. Period.)

They never had a good reason to talk to each other. And that had helped her curb her desire to get to know more about him, it didn’t seem like he and the universe wanted the same things as her. It all bared when potions class turned the tables. Snape’s assignment had reached her table as people were called up and partnered. And as she grabbed her bag she heard Longbottom’s name with hers. She didn’t bat an eye, nor did she pity Draco for being paired with Weasley. Potter though, had been moved to a table behind hers and next to Draco’s. Granger had been lucky with her being partnered with Blasie.

The class time swelled up with her reading the instructions and having a sheepish Longbottom hesitating when he touched the ingredients. As he should! They both knew that she would be working for the bulk for them.

It still didn’t stop him from being a fair guy as he tried his best to collect, grind and chop most of the easier and tamer ingredients they had. He was a slow worker, and if they had all day Pansy was sure he could have been a mediocre assistant. Nonetheless, they didn’t and Pansy had to work with the double trouble while at the same time trying to give him a crash course of potions 101. She knew he had listened to her advice, but it still didn’t stop from him stumbling into having part of the potion destroyed.

It had been one of the rare days when Pansy had a terrible mark in that class.

And one when she didn’t explode outwardly. (She hated how his face paled when she calmly cleaned their workspace. And also, when they had missed their lunch for completing a makeup assignment for that failed mark to compensate their averages.

That had been the only good thing, with Snape liking her a bit more than compared to him loathing Longbottom’s work in his class.)

She had never understood why he kept quiet. Each time she had been left alone, Pansy restrained herself from walking up to Longbottom to find out his reasoning. Nobody could be that kind.

Nobody.

Only a fool—only, Pansy could (almost) see why he did.

Pansy had always valued people that could hide their intentions but still be pure. She respected those that had their flaws out in the open too without shame. Draco was her friend for a reason; they each been given requests, expectations, and they had always been walking in a tight sharp line. Neither of them had mastered being hanged, but they got close to it several times. She still wanted to be loved, but power and influence sometimes helped her survive another day in Hogwarts.

Longbottom had obviously learned to grow strong and humble under conditions others would have perished. Pansy knew that, had seen it when she didn’t want to, but it hadn’t helped her when she was once again inside a random greenhouse. She had not been crying.

Longbottom had. (Quietly, with few droplets falling when he had looked up at her loud entrance.) Pansy did not know how to broach the topic when it had been her turn to see him crumpled and alone.

“Longbottom,” her voice had been ambivalent. She had taken a step forward. Tentatively, as Longbottom studied how her face had been pale and flushed from the cold winds outside.

The corner of his mouth quirked up. It singed with emotion. “I’ll be alright. Thank-you for your concern.”

They had never been friends. Self-sufficient to say, she left with a pounding heart. It pounded harder when he didn’t look any happier the following days. Not that she had a good reason to care.

(But she did anyways.)

Longbottom and Pansy had been working on another section of potions together again, upon Snape’s request she and Draco would rotate working with him and Potter and Weasley. Verses with Granger and Patil working with Goyle, Crabbe and Finnigan. It had been an experiment that so far, had been working.

Her only complaint was how dense Potter was that Draco liked him back too. At least Weasley and Granger knew that she and Draco were not an actual item. It made it intolerable when she worked with Potter though, with him scrutinizing her when he thought she didn’t know. She laughed it off when it had been Weasley and Longbottom. As strange as it had been, Weasley lived in the same space of hearing from Potter liking Draco. (It had been because of that reason that they shared few stories of their lives with those hopeless fools when the potions had been long and tedious.)

Longbottom, though, his time with her had also changed. It became calmer and anxious; Pansy had remembered how cold and lonely he had been that day. She never brought up.

He did.

He had been in the middle of cleaning their cauldron when he spoke. It had been both uneasy and silent when his mouth moved. A hand brushed away some stray locks from his face.

“I’m sorry for snapping at you that day.” Longbottom had outwardly looked composed, the only thing she could pin that he had not been okay was how in end his words slurred into a sad hum.

Pansy could still comprehend what he wanted to do, what he prayed she would give him for all the hours and days he gave her when she had been the one crying. Her head nodded at the same she replied.

“It’s no problem.”

“Still.” Longbottom had always been known for wanting to get along with others.

Regardless of house, the older he got. (Sometimes Pansy could see why he had not gone to Hufflepuff but, rather Gryffindor.) His righteousness to be bold had made him daring to challenge others and their ideals.

“I mean it Longbottom. We’re sort of past that, aren’t we? With how many times you’d already seen me a mess. I won’t tell a soul, so long as you find a buddy to talk to about it.”

“Like how I am right now?”

She eyed him, “Depends. Do you really fancy talking about your worries with a Slytherin?”

Longbottom didn’t look output, he actually looked like he had been perfectly fine with talking to her. Almost relaxed too. Color came back to his cheeks as he rinsed the rest of their tools. “You haven’t pulled any hexes yet. I count that as us being okay to talk now. Or have I presumed too much?”

“I—” Pansy paused. “I don’t think your Gryffindor buddies would agree if you suddenly started to converse with—”

Longbottom didn’t bat an eye. “My real friends will accept it.”

She squared her shoulders, contemplating if it had been worth it to splurge a couple of more minutes with him alone in the potion’s classroom. “So longs you don’t go mopping on me. Merlin knows I already have to waste enough of me precious hours listening to my best friend pining over Potter.”

They chuckled together as they both have seen Draco and Potter when they bantered and aggressively started to flirt in their undertone insults. (They both really needed to confess. Pansy couldn’t handle another day of Draco whining and pinning.)

“But seriously, Longbottom. If you ever do need an ear to listen I’ll be there.”

She hadn’t meant for her own voice to have been uncharacteristically gentle with someone who had not been within her circle of confidants. He saw that; Longbottom had sensed how vulnerable they both were. With no witnesses left in the classroom his whole face lit up, quickly like a flower blooming under a high beaming sun. It blinded her how her own face burned too when it had been directed for her. Only for, and specifically her.

“Thank-you, Pansy.”

And right away, he pushed the limits by calling her by her first name and not last name. (He would be the death of her.)

“Only you Gryffindors and the Hufflepuffs get over excited when someone shows you a bit of empathy or sympathy.” There hadn’t been any heat in her words. They had been—playful. Borderline teasing. “As if, were friends for a long time.”

Longbottom’s smile didn’t disappear. “But wouldn’t that been nice if we had been?”

Yes, it would have been. Pansy thought.

If they had not lived in the same world they did now. One where the Dark Lord had not been brought back, and nothing could have hurt her to love him. Because in this one, her happiness had started to become thinner. Her own family would not agree. Could not when they had already pledged with Draco’s family to him.

She didn’t bother to reply for him to know her answer. Her own silence had been enough for them to know that somethings were nice to think about. Even if they would always be that, simple musings.

Pansy would not yet tell him everything that had been in-scripted inside her heart. She probably would never with the up coming war. But for now, she would bide her time on earth and foster these few moments with him. Because, it meant that it would be harder to continue loving him soon when they both knew the war would eventually part them away for their personal ideals and families’ concerns and views.

Pansy Parkinson grew up believing in love; and with the war coming screaming in the background of Hogwarts she wondered if love could save her this time around. If not, then at least she felt and known Neville Longbottom’s compassion when he had asked her to be his friend.

[kenny-santucci]

The boys are back with another episode of @askmen You’re Doing I️t Wrong! This time we are making sure your gear is on point when you walk in the gym! #strongnewyork #ydiw #askmen #citystreets (at Solace New York)

[pbsdigitalstudios]

No longer will leftovers live as merely a shadow of their former selves. Give them a second life by reheating them properly!

[lysztomania523]

Tumblr Confusion

I don't think I accurately know how to Tumble...

[drunkjohnny-blog]

Saw a drunk ass roid rage joke pick a fight with a homeless man and his dog today. Terrible noise. Asshole juice head even hit the dog. It wasn't a little dog either. The worse part is that if the dog would have bit the asshole guy, the dog would have got put down... This is is what happens to high school football heroes when you take high school away and force them to live the real world.

Also saw a lady on the back of a moving motorcycle talking on a cellphone. 

[survive-object-poll-island]

Ydiw, you can make friends!!!! Don’t worry!!!

Use the power of friendship (hot pink speedboat with all terrain drive) to make friends!!!!! It’s what I did :3

- anti science cohost

[simul16]

5E - You're Doing It Wrong - Two-Weapon Fighting

A lot of weapons in 5e with the Heavy property also have the Two-Handed property. Which means you can't dual wield them even with the Dual Wielder feat. - Role Player's Respite (https://roleplayersrespite.com), "Your Simple Guide to Dual Wielding in DnD 5e"

Wielding two weapons is one of those things that looks bad-ass and as a result, players often want to be able to do with their characters. However, the process of actually fighting with two weapons is something of a mixed bag for most classes, and it doesn't make it any easier that many tables get the rules for two-weapon fighting wrong, most significantly, using the rule for two-weapon fighting when it doesn't really apply.

How most characters fight with two weapons

The key rule for fighting with two weapons, for most classes, is found on page 77 of the Player's Basic Rules (or page 195 of the Player's Handbook -- the text is identical):

When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative. If either weapon has the thrown property, you can throw the weapon in stead of making a melee attack.

First off, some rules explanation. A 'light' weapon is a weapon that has the Light property on the Weapons list on page 48 of the PBR (page 149 of the PH). In fact, the description of the Light property specifically says the weapon is ideal for two-weapon fighting and references the chapter with the rule for Two-Weapon Fighting.

However, one thing folks frequently forget is that the rule also requires that you attack with a 'melee' weapon, which is a weapon listed under 'Simple Melee Weapons' or 'Martial Melee Weapons' on the same list. I have seen a number of charts of 'eligible weapons for two-weapon fighting' that include the hand crossbow (including the linked article in the introductory quote above), because the hand crossbow is a light weapon, but the hand crossbow is not eligible for the rule for two-weapon fighting because it is not a melee weapon, it is a ranged weapon, even when used to make a melee attack. (You can still effectively 'dual-wield' light crossbows, but it requires the use of the Crossbow Expert feat, which contains a variant of the Two-Weapon Fighting rule that allows you to fire a loaded hand crossbow as a bonus action after using the Attack action to attack with a light weapon; note that this variant of the rule does not specify that the initial attack be made with a melee weapon, which enables the use of the light hand crossbow to enable a second hand crossbow attack. However, there is some discussion that this may not allow you to dual-wield hand crossbows for more than a single round, as while the Crossbow Expert feat removes the Loading quality for crossbows with which you are proficient, the feat does not remove the Ammunition property of the hand crossbow, which requires a 'free hand' to reload the crossbow after firing. Holding a hand crossbow in each hand prevents those hands from being considered 'free', based on a similar wording in the spellcasting rules for which the War Caster feat serves as an exception.)

The rule also points out that you use your bonus action to attack with a 'different light melee weapon that you are holding in the other hand', but this does not require that you be using two different kinds of weapons -- you can in fact dual-wield with two daggers, or two scimitars, or two of any identical light weapon, so long as you are actually holding two of them, one in each hand. (The rule effectively prohibits wielding one weapon and simply moving it to your other hand to qualify for the second attack.) In addition, if you have a positive Strength modifier that you would normally add to your weapon damage roll, you do not add this modifier to your damage for your bonus attack. (There are a few other implied restrictions, which we'll cover later when we talk about the rules that allow you to ignore them.)

Note as well that light weapons tend to do less damage than non-light weapons; there is no light weapon on the basic weapon list that deals more than a d6 of damage, while there are a number of 'two-handed' and/or 'heavy' weapons that can deal significantly more than that. This might make some players believe that two-weapon fighting isn't as effective as fighting with one big weapon, but in fact the rules are designed to try to equalize those situations as much as possible for most 'typical' characters. So, for example, say you have two characters with the same Strength score, one of whom is wielding a greatsword while the other is wielding two shortswords. The greatsword wielder will attack once, dealing 2d6+Str damage, while the two-shortsword wielder will attack twice, dealing a total of 1d6+Str+1d6 if she hits with both attacks. This sets up the basic mechanical difference between the two types of fighting: a 'normal' fighter will sometimes miss with a single attack, resulting in no damage, while the dual-wielder, while they will only reach the expected damage of the greatsword fighter if they hit with both attacks, will more frequently hit with at least one attack, resulting in at least some damage.

If you choose to go down the munchkin path, be aware that most optimization sources come to the conclusion that, with the appropriate feats and class options in place, two-weapon fighting is slightly better than great-weapon fighting at low levels, but great-weapon fighting becomes more effective at higher levels, for reasons we're not going to cover in this article. Just be aware that the rule we've already covered applies to all characters, regardless of class, so technically, anybody can fight with two weapons!

How Fighters and Rangers dual-wield

However, as you might expect, some classes are designed to be more effective at fighting with two weapons than others. For the Fighter and Ranger, this comes from the Fighting Style feature that the Fighter gets at level 1 and the Ranger gets at level 2. In each class, one of the options for Fighting Style is this one:

Two-Weapon Fighting When you engage in two-weapon fighting, you can add your ability modifier to the damage of the second attack.

This may seem like a fairly tame benefit, but for most low-level characters, not only is this a great bonus, but is the main effect that causes two-weapon fighting to be better than great-weapon fighting at low level. Recall our two-shortsword versus greatsword character from above; if the two-shortsword character has taken the Two-Weapon Fighting fighting style, now that character always does 1d6+Str damage on a hit, regardless of which attack hits, and does 2d6+(Str*2) damage when hitting with both attacks. Since melee fighters tend to have high Strength scores, this means that the two-shortsword character now expects to do more damage overall than the greatsword character.

You may notice that I didn't mention Paladins in this section, even though Paladins also have a Fighting Style class feature; this is because Paladins do not get Two-Weapon Fighting as an option in their class feature. This doesn't mean that Paladins can't do two-weapon fighting, but it does mean that they would need to take a level of Fighter or two levels of Ranger to get the Fighting Style feature, if it's important to them.

Notice as well that I didn't mention Barbarians in this section; Barbarians don't even get a Fighting Style option (at least none of the archetypes in the Player's Handbook do), so they do not have the option to take a Fighting Style without multi-classing, either.

How Monks dual-wield

Here's the next part of two-weapon fighting where people tend to do the rule wrong. Even experienced players can get this one wrong, as Cody of Taking20 does in his video essay on "Absolute Worst Dungeons and Dragons 5e Rules as Written". Cody wants to hate on the Two-Weapon Fighting rule because you can't use it with unarmed strikes. The rule could not be more explicit (on p.76 of the PBR, p. of the PH):

Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed strike: a punch, kick, head-butt, or similar forceful blow (none of which count as weapons).

Since the rule for Two-Weapon Fighting above only applies when you make an attack with a light melee weapon, you don't get to use it when making an unarmed strike, since an unarmed strike is not a weapon. In addition, since the rule specifies that you make the bonus action attack with a weapon that you are wielding in your other hand, and an unarmed strike is not a weapon, you cannot make an unarmed strike using the bonus action attack enabled by this rule. Cody may have a point when complaining that bar-brawler type characters can't take advantage of this rule, but he's completely wrong when he complains that monks can't use this rule. Well, he's not wrong that monks can't use this rule, but the point is that monks don't need to use this rule: monks in fact have two different class-specific ways to effectively dual-wield without making use of this rule, both of which are at least as effective if not more effective than this rule.

First, monks have access to the Martial Arts ability at level 1, which resembles the rule for two-weapon fighting quite a bit; a monk has to use a 'monk weapon' which is defined as a shortsword or a simple weapon that doesn't have either the heavy or two-handed properties. The monk can also explicitly use unarmed strikes, as per the text of the rule. When the monk uses the Attack action on his turn to make an attack with a monk weapon or an unarmed strike, the monk can then use a bonus action to make an additional unarmed strike. Though this ability is less restrictive in terms of what weapons can be used, it is more restrictive in that the monk is also restricted in his ability to wear armor or wield a shield. In addition, martial arts attacks start with low damage (d4), but improve as the monk goes up in level, eventually reaching a d10 in base damage. Lastly, unlike with Two-Weapon Fighting that prevents the adding of damage to the bonus attack without the enabler of a Fighting Style, the monk can always add his Dexterity modifier to damage with this attack. On the whole, I grade Martial Arts as at least comparable if not equal to 'base' Two-Weapon Fighting for classes that don't have access to the Two-Weapon Fighting Style.

But that's not all the monk gets! At level 2, the monk gains Ki powers, one of which is Flurry of Blows. The only obvious restriction on Flurry of Blows is that the monk must spend a ki point and a bonus action to make the extra attacks. But the benefits are that the monk gets to make two bonus unarmed strikes, the monk isn't required to be unarmored or not wielding a shield, and the monk technically doesn't even have to attack; the rule for Flurry of Blows only specifies that the monk "take the Attack action on your turn", not that they use it to make an attack or to attack with specific types of weapons. Thus the monk could use a Flurry of Blows after making a shove or grapple attack (PBR, p.77, PH, p.195). And the restriction of spending a ki point grows less onerous as the monk goes up in level, as the monk has a number of daily ki points equal to his level, and recovers them all after a long or short rest; in the correct party (a fighter, monk, and celestial warlock walk into a dungeon...), a monk can often use many times his normal amount of 'daily' ki points between long rests.

So the real answer to 'how do Monks use the Two-Weapon Fighting rule' is, they don't -- they have better options in their class features, so there's no real reason for them to ever need to use the generic Two-Weapon Fighting rule.

How Rogues dual wield

The Rogue is an interesting case for Two-Weapon Fighting. On one hand, most rogues find Two-Weapon Fighting a bit too restrictive for their tastes; not only does it require the rogue to close to melee range (where the lightly armored character tends to be less viable than the more heavily-armored and higher hit-die front-liners like the Fighter, Paladin, and the like), but it also requires the rogue to use her bonus action to make the bonus attack, which the rogue generally wants to use for other things, most commonly a Disengage via Cunning Action. Most significantly, the main benefit that a rogue would gain from making multiple attacks in a turn doesn't actually apply, since the bonus damage from their Sneak Attack class feature can only be used once per turn; while making multiple attacks does give the rogue more opportunities to make a Sneak Attack, and thus less of a chance to pass through a turn without using her Sneak Attack, the trade-offs for a typical rogue generally aren't worth it except in exceptional circumstances.

However, with the release of the Sword Coast Adventurers Guide came the Swashbuckler Rogue, a rogue archetype explicitly designed to try to make use of Two-Weapon Fighting. This rogue doesn't gain any additional 'uses' of Sneak Attack, but she does gain an additional condition in which her Sneak Attack applies (via the Rakish Audacity feature), as well as the ability to move away from targets she hits in melee combat without requiring she use the Disengage action (via the Fancy Footwork feature); the former allows the Swashbuckler more flexibility in attempting to land a Sneak Attack and the latter allows the Swashbuckler a chance to get away from an opponent she's struck with Sneak Attack without suffering that opponent's melee wrath. The Swashbuckler was re-printed in Xanathar's Guide to Everything, so Organized Play games presume you are using that version of the class, but there doesn't seem to be any actual difference in the two versions printed in SCAG and XGtE, so from a practical standpoint, if you have either book, you have the ability to play a Swashbuckler, which would appear to be the 'official' way to play a rogue who wants to make use of Two-Weapon Fighting.

How casters dual wield

If non-Swashbuckler Rogues have a difficult time using the Two-Weapon Fighting rules effectively, then the casting classes, for the most part, have at least as difficult a time using that rule. Generally, the reasons for this boil down to one or more of the following:

Casters generally use spells rather than weapons to deal damage, which can't be used to enable a bonus attack via Two-Weapon Fighting.

In most cases where a caster does make a weapon attack, they do so via the Cast a Spell action rather than the Attack action, which also prevents the attack from enabling a bonus action attack via Two-Weapon Fighting.

Caster classes that do allow for actual weapon attacks often have restrictions within their class that make Two-Weapon Fighting difficult if not impossible to combine with their key class features.

Most caster classes simply don't have spells to buff their existing weapons; instead they typically create weapons that attack on their own using the character's actions or bonus actions

Reason One is pretty straightforward: most casters deal their consistent round-by-round damage via cantrips, whether that's the Warlock's Eldritch Blast, the Sorcerer/Wizard's Fire Bolt, or the Cleric's Sacred Flame. None of these are weapons, so they can't be used to enable additional weapon attacks via Two-Weapon Fighting.

However, the Sword Coast Adventurers Guide introduced a trio of 'weapon cantrips', cantrip spells that enable weapon attacks. These cantrips, Booming Blade, Green-Flame Blade, and Sword Burst, allow a Sorcerer, Wizard, or Warlock (mainly the Bladesinger Wizard also introduced in that book) to make weapon attacks by casting a spell. Note, though, that the Two-Weapon Fighting rule specifies that the character use the Attack action to make a qualifying attack, and these cantrips don't make use of the attack action; they each use the Cast a Spell action, and specify that the weapon attack made during the spell is "part of the action used to cast this spell". Since these spells don't make use of the Attack action, they also do not enable Two-Weapon Fighting.

But a Bladesinger Wizard might decide they want to try Two-Weapon Fighting anyway; though Bladesingers in prior editions tended to use longswords, nothing in the 5e version of the Bladesinger requires the use of that weapon; indeed, a sidebar of Bladesinger Styles in the SCAG points out that hafted weapons like axes or hammers have their own style, and both the light hammer and hand-axe are valid weapons for use with the Two-Weapon Fighting rule. At this point, though, you run into a potential issue with the key class benefit of the Bladesinger, the Bladesong, which ends if "you use two hands to make an attack with a weapon". Though some DMs do rule that this only prevents a bladesinger from making an attack with a two-handed weapon or a versatile weapon wielded in two hands, DMs familiar with prior editions of the Bladesong will often interpret this rule as preventing the Bladesinger from attacking with weapons in two hands.

To avoid this problem, you can switch gears and instead make use of the Hexblade Warlock, a warlock archetype that explicitly gains a bonded weapon that they can use with their class features. So long as this weapon qualifies for Two-Weapon Fighting, a Hexblade can use that rule with their bonded weapon. And it's at this point that you encounter the final problem with using Two-Weapon Fighting as a caster -- Rogues can use the rule to try to more reliably land their Sneak Attack, and Fighters and Rangers have class features that make the rule more efficient when used as intended, but casters just simply don't have spells that can be used to take advantage of having a bonus action attack available via Two-Weapon Fighting.

There are spells that buff a character's weapon, but most of these spells are Paladin spells, such as the various Smite spells (Branding Smite, Staggering Smite, etc.), and though they are cast on you rather than explicitly on one of your weapons, meaning they would trigger from a hit with a bonus action Two-Weapon Fighting attack, they only trigger once, meaning that you're not so much getting more use out of the spell as ensuring that the spell goes off more quickly. Of the few spells that buff weapons that aren't Paladin spells, the main one in the Player's Handbook/Player's Basic Rules is Magic Weapon, which Organized Play and games based on its rules of awarding magic items has rendered all but irrelevant (when every character has a magic weapon by level 5, there's little reason to learn or prepare a spell whose only purpose is to make a weapon magical after that point), and as with the Smite spells, most of the other spells buff you rather than your weapon, such as Tenser's Transformation from Xanathar's Guide to Everything, or Tasha's Otherworldly Guise from Tasha's Cauldron of Everything.

Lastly, there are spells that summon or conjure weapons, but most of these do so to create weapons that act on their own. The most familiar to most players is the Cleric spell Spiritual Weapon, which not only doesn't qualify for Two-Weapon Fighting, but is basically what the Cleric uses instead of Two-Weapon Fighting, as both the casting of the spell and the use of the spell to attack while the spell is running make use of the caster's bonus action, and since the conjured weapon is superior to just about any off-hand weapon a Cleric might wield at low level, it's hard to see a Cleric choosing to make use of Two-Weapon Fighting when they could nearly as effectively just cast Spiritual Weapon. The spells Mordenkainen's Sword and Black Blade of Disaster do similar things, but at much higher level, and again basically have effects that make anything you might want to do with an off-hand weapon attack pretty much irrelevant.

About the only spell that would in fact enable a caster to perform Two-Weapon Fighting is the spell Shadow Blade from Xanathar's Guide to Everything (page 164). This spell creates a magical sword that counts as a light weapon and that you use with the Attack action, which would trigger a possible bonus action attack via Two-Weapon Fighting if you as the caster are actually wielding a second weapon that qualifies (or conversely, might allow this weapon to serve as the bonus action attack after attacking with a different qualifying weapon in your 'main hand'). The downside is that the spell is a concentration spell, which means you can't conjure a second one while you already have one, and the blade is defined as disappearing if you drop or throw it, which likely prevents another caster from conjuring one and giving it to you. The damage of the blade also scales up as you cast it with a higher level spell, meaning that classes with limited spell level caps like the Arcane Trickster, who you might think would be ideal for such a spell, wouldn't get quite as much value from it as the classes that get it directly on their spell list, the sorcerer and warlock.

So, without actually doing the math, it would appear that the best Two-Weapon Fighter caster class would be the Hexblade Warlock with the bonded weapon in the main hand, and a conjured Shadow Blade in their off-hand, triggered by the attack with their main bonded weapon. This also means that the Hexblade could still cast Shadow Blade without the need to take the War Caster feat (noted below) in order to 'set up' Two-Weapon Fighting mode.

Final caveats and thoughts

There is one last rule that can impact the use of Two-Weapon Fighting, and that is the Dual Wielder feat (PH, p.165). That feat grants a slight bonus to AC when holding a weapon in each hand, allows you to wield weapons that aren't light and still use the Two-Weapon Fighting rule*, and most significantly, allows you to draw or stow two weapons in the same amount of time that you would normally use to draw or stow one weapon. This last benefit exposes perhaps the biggest unwritten restriction of Two-Weapon Fighting: the 'free' draw or stow a weapon action that characters get each round only allows you to draw or stow one weapon. So if you go into a combat with no weapons drawn, in the opening round you cannot make use of Two-Weapon Fighting without this feat, barring something like the Fighter's Action Surge or a friendly casting of Haste before your turn: either you draw just one weapon, leaving you without a second weapon to use to make the bonus action attack, or you spend your Action to draw your second weapon ("Use an Object", PH, p.192), leaving you without an Action to use to even attack.

* - This brings us back to the quote that leads this essay: the author points out that, even with the restriction of only using light weapons removed via the Dual Wielder feat, you still can't use Two-Weapon Fighting with a weapon that has the Two-Handed property, as the rule requires you to make an attack with a weapon in one hand, which you cannot do with a weapon with the Two-Handed property. The trick is that the author notes that 'a lot of' weapons with the Heavy property also have the Two-Handed property, suggesting that there are some Heavy weapons that you can actually use in Two-Weapon Fighting. This is incorrect, as every weapon with the Heavy property on the weapons list in the PH and PBR (the Glaive, Greataxe, Greatsword, Halberd, Maul, Pike, Heavy Crossbow, and Longbow) also has the Two-Handed property. There are weapons with the Two-Handed property that do not have the Heavy property (the Shortbow and Light Crossbow), but these are both ranged weapons and wouldn't qualify for Two-Weapon Fighting even if the Two-Handed property could be removed.

A caster who wants to make use of Two-Weapon Fighting should also consider the War Caster feat, as that feat explicitly allows the casting of spells with somatic components while holding weapons in each hand, which without the feat would not be allowed.

[xxvera-sandersxx-blog]

You're Doing it Wrong | Leon.

Vera walked up to the spear station. There were two or three people already there so no one noticed her. She picked up a spear and with all her power, threw it at a target. It struck though the neck. Vera was good with spears, as well as other similarly shaped weapons. She picked up another spear and threw it, this time nailing through the stomach. From her peripheral she saw a spear whiz straight past a target and hit the far wall. Vera looked at the thrower. It was a boy who she hadn't seen before. "You're doing it wrong." She informed him as his second spear missed the target. 

[pbsdigitalstudios]

Good fruit gone bad? Probably because you’re storing it wrong.

Think you have a foto fail we can use for “You’re Doing it Wrong?” Tag #YDIW and we’ll check it out! 

[survive-object-poll-island]

This is ooc cause there will be timeline mention, soo

Its about that one timeline where YDIWGMTC got shot twice, what wouldve happened to PLAYER 2?

- Starglaze Co-Host💫

(( OOC: You know I've thought about thar a little bit... Depending on the tools that Hosty used and the exact mechanics of the injury, there could be two outcomes.

One option is the entirety of YDIWGMTC is compromised, no matter which alter is present....

Either that, or it is only Player 1 who is compromised, which would surely be immensely distressing for their headmates.

The first option is more likely, but the second one could be more interesting, as YDIW could still have a running in the competition, but would surely be very upset... ))

[simul16]

5E - You're Doing It Wrong - Sneak Attack

As a Dungeon Master, one of my jobs is to adjudicate the rules of the game at my table. I can honestly say that no single rule in D&D gives me more of a headache than Sneak Attack. It's not that the rule is complicated (though the number of options have increased with the release of the Sword Coast Adventurers Guide), but rather that people bring a lot of preconceptions into their understanding of Sneak Attack, often borrowing from earlier editions that don't really apply in Fifth Edition terms.

The best way to cover those misconceptions is to break down the actual Sneak Attack rule, pointing out where people seem to get things wrong.

Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an attack if you have advantage on the attack roll.

Let's begin with one that should be obvious: Sneak Attack does not give you advantage on your attack roll. I've had two different players claim that they were using Sneak Attack to gain advantage on their attack roll, and that just doesn't make sense -- you need advantage before you can use Sneak Attack (but see below).

In addition, though this isn't as prevalent, if a character has more than one attack per turn, only one successful attack during that turn can deal Sneak Attack damage. Since rogues don't get the Extra Attacks feature, this only occurs with multi-classed characters, usually ranger/rogues or fighter/rogues. And though this does allow a rogue to deal Sneak Attack damage again if he makes an attack when it isn't his turn, every method for doing so currently in 5E D&D requires the character to use his reaction, which is only usable once between turns. So if you have a character who is using Extra Attacks, Action Surge, or Haste to deal multiple instances of Sneak Attack during the same turn, that's wrong. Note that, because the rule specifies that the character has to hit to deal the extra damage, a character with multiple attacks does not need to declare Sneak Attack prior to the attack roll; declaring after a successful hit is sufficient, but once declared, the character cannot change that declaration.

Lastly, since Sneak Attack damage is expressed in dice, they are multiplied on a critical hit. However, if a fighter/rogue has already dealt Sneak Attack and then rolls a critical hit on a subsequent attack, it is too late to go back and declare the crit as the Sneak Attack.

The attack must use a finesse or a ranged weapon.

Note that the definition of 'ranged weapon' is not 'a weapon that can be used to make ranged attacks'; in 5E, a 'ranged weapon' is a weapon listed as a ranged weapon on the weapon tables. Thus, javelins, spears, hand-axes, light hammers, and tridents cannot be used to make Sneak Attacks, even though they can be used to make ranged attacks -- they are all listed as melee weapons on the weapon charts.

The following are ranged weapons, by the definition of 5E D&D:

Light Crossbow

Dart

Shortbow

Sling

Blowgun

Hand Crossbow

Heavy Crossbow

Longbow

Although the net is also a ranged weapon, it cannot be used to Sneak Attack -- the net deals no damage, and thus there is no way to apply the 'extra' damage from the Sneak Attack to it. (Some players may argue that you can add damage to zero, but that is effectively a ruling from Third Edition, not Fifth -- in 5E, the net doesn't deal zero damage, it deals no damage, and thus can't do extra damage when it deals no damage to begin with.)

The dagger, however, can be used to make sneak attacks, as it is a finesse weapon. The following are finesse weapons, since they contain the finesse property in the weapon list:

Dagger

Dart

Rapier

Scimitar

Shortsword

Whip

Note that, because being a ranged weapon is defined by the weapon chart and not by the mode of attack used with the weapon, finesse weapons like the dagger can still benefit from Sneak Attack when used to make ranged attacks. Likewise, a ranged weapon used to make a melee attack (typically as an improvised melee weapon) can benefit from Sneak Attack. Nothing in the rule for Sneak Attack requires the rogue to use a weapon with which he is proficient, nor use it in a specific manner.

Single-classed rogues can effectively use Sneak Attack with any allowed weapon, but multi-classed rogues will almost always choose rapier as their weapon of choice, since it has the highest base damage. (Multi-classed rogues with the Crossbow Expert feat might choose to use the heavy crossbow instead, as long as they are at least Medium size.)

Now things start to get tricky:

You don't need advantage on the attack roll if another enemy of the target is within 5 feet of it, that enemy isn't incapacitated, and you don't have disadvantage on the attack roll.

There are a couple of potential 'gotchas' in here that I've messed up myself as a DM that should be pointed out.

First, though most D&D combats take place between only two sides, Sneak Attack does not require that the creature within 5 feet of your target be your ally -- only that it be an enemy of the creature you are attacking. (This can be significant if there are 'non-combatants' in the combat as well -- do they count as enemies of your target? If so, you can use them to Sneak Attack, if not, you can't.)

In addition, the restriction that you don't have disadvantage on the attack roll is not a general prohibition against using Sneak Attack while having disadvantage. It's actually true that having disadvantage will prevent you from making Sneak Attack by using advantage:

If circumstances cause a roll to have both advantage and disadvantage, you are considered to have neither of them...

So, if something applies disadvantage to your attack roll, you cannot have advantage on that roll at the same time, and thus the rule that allows you to Sneak Attack when you have advantage doesn't apply. However, note that in this situation, you are also not considered to actually have disadvantage on the roll either, so if your target has an active enemy within 5 feet of it, you still get to apply your Sneak Attack, if you hit.

Lastly, note that nothing in the rule for Sneak Attack mentions 'reach' or 'threatened areas' -- the latter is another rule carried over from previous editions of D&D -- the creature enabling Sneak Attack must be within 5 feet of your target for you to be able to claim the Sneak Attack benefit from it, so Polearm Masters and mounted lancers won't always be your friends.

In addition to the above, the Swashbuckler archetype adds yet another qualification for Sneak Attack, as part of the Rakish Audacity ability.

In addition, you don't need advantage on your attack roll to use your Sneak Attack if no creature other than your target is within 5 feet of you. All the other rules for the Sneak Attack class feature still apply to you.

Note that the restriction is on you -- as long as creatures aren't within 5 feet of you, there can be as many creatures within 5 feet of your target as can fit and you can still take your Sneak Attack.

The 'all other rules still apply' text means that, even if you have an adjacent ally and thus can't use the special Swashbuckler feature, you can still Sneak Attack by having an enemy of the target within 5 feet and not having disadvantage. The Swashbuckler feature is in addition to, not in place of, the general conditions for Sneak Attack in the Rogue feature.

Note as well that Swashbucklers have a harder time using ranged attacks than other rogues do -- the 'no creature other than your target' restriction means that your target does have to be within 5 feet of you in order for you to use this version of Sneak Attack. (A DM could rule that 'no creature other than your target' doesn't require the target to be within 5 feet, but other aspects of the archetype {specifically the ability to move away from a creature attacked in melee without provoking an attack of opportunity} suggest that the Swashbuckler is meant to be dealing Sneak Attack damage from melee range, not with bows or crossbows.)

Most importantly, note that the Swashbuckler feature mentions nothing about disadvantage -- this means that a Swashbuckler with disadvantage who can maneuver into a position to attack without any other creature other than the target within 5 feet can still Sneak Attack.

Hopefully, this gives you all the information you need to make correct rulings on when to allow Sneak Attack.

[damienmckenna]

Two weeks ago I posted the first in what will be an ongoing blog series on how not to do some things in Drupal.  With all of the excellent books how how to build sites & functionality in Drupal I saw a gap in instruction on things to not do.  Please leave all feedback on the blog post.  Thanks :)