dnd 5e – What happens if a character takes the Thief of Five Fates invocation, but doesn’t have Warlock spell slots?

The text of the Eldritch Invocation is pretty clear…you can cast bane using a Warlock Spell Slot.

If you don’t have Warlock Spell Slots, you cannot cast it. This same rule applies to a multi-classed Warlock: they have to use a Warlock spell slot for this, they can’t use a normal spell slot that they acquired from, say, Multi-classing Sorcerer.

The language used across these Eldritch Invocations is very consistent. If it was intended that you could cast these spells using some other Spell Slot, then it wouldn’t specify that you had to use a Warlock Spell Slot. It would instead say something like…

You can cast bane once using a spell slot.

But it doesn’t. It would have been very easy for them to leave the specificity out, and they did not. Thus it’s a safe bet that this is intentional.

This is supported by an interview with Jeremy Crawford (lead rules designer for WotC), found here. To transcribe…

Bart Carrol: “So, for example, if it requires a warlock spell slot, then in that case it would require a warlock to be able to use it?”

J. Crawford: “What this feat is saying, is that it doesn’t matter what the prerequisite is. If an Invocation has a prerequisite of any kind, only a Warlock can take it”

While not a definitive ruling (as it’s just an interview, not a formal Sage Advice post), and is using Crawford’s usual circuitious language…I find this to be fairly strong support. Crawford appears to consider “you need a Warlock Spell Slot to cast this” to be a prerequisite.

dnd 5e – What happens when you use the knock spell on an object with a magical lock that isn’t specifically arcane lock?

The knock spell’s description reads:

Choose an object that you can see within range. The object can be a door, a box, a chest, a set of manacles, a padlock, or another object that contains a mundane or magical means that prevents access.

A target that is held shut by a mundane lock or that is stuck or barred becomes unlocked, unstuck, or unbarred. If the object has multiple locks, only one of them is unlocked.

If you choose a target that is held shut with arcane lock, that spell is suppressed for 10 minutes, during which time the target can be opened and shut normally.

When you cast the spell, a loud knock, audible from as far away as 300 feet, emanates from the target object.

As far as I see it, the description of the knock spell describes 4 things:

  • What the knock spell can target.
  • What happens if the knock spell targets something locked by a mundane lock, or is stuck or barred.
  • What happens if the locking mechanism is specifically the spell arcane lock.
  • The spell creates noise.

Valid spell targets include magical locks. But it doesn’t seem the spell says what it does when such a target is selected (except for create a loud knock sound). This is the case, unless a magical lock is considered ‘stuck’ in which it is according to the spell the lock would be unstucked.

However, the spell says what it does to stuck things where it specifies what happens to a target that is held shut by a mundane lock, or stuck or barred. If magical locks were considered stuck, there wouldn’t have been any need to specifically say what happens to a mundane lock, because it would apply to non-mundane locks too.


I originally asked this question here, but the question unfortunately got edited into a different question. The answer there addresses the question it got edited to. So I feel it is appropriate readdress the main issue in a new thread. For this reason, I don’t think this is a duplicate question, even though I copied the majority of the content of this question from that thread.

dnd 5e – When my PC is polymorphed, what happens to her familiar from the Find Familiar spell?

Your familiar is still your familiar.

Find Familiar says:

Your familiar acts independently of you, but it always obeys your commands.

While your familiar is within 100 feet of you, you can communicate with it telepathically. Additionally, as an action, you can see through your familiar’s eyes and hear what it hears until the start of your next turn, gaining the benefits of any special senses that the familiar has. During this time, you are deaf and blind with regard to your own senses.

As an action, you can temporarily dismiss your familiar. It disappears into a pocket dimension where it awaits your summons. Alternatively, you can dismiss it forever. As an action while it is temporarily dismissed, you can cause it to reappear in any unoccupied space within 30 feet of you.

None of these requires you to be smart or humanoid or even to have an unchanging body. If your race is changeling or verdan, you don’t suddenly lose your familiar when you transform. Because the familiar has a magical and a telepathic connection to you, it will still recognize and obey you.

Also remember that the familiar is not a beast; according to the spell, it’s a celestial, fey, or fiend spirit that takes an animal form. As such, it likely has a greater comfort with magical effects than you’d expect from a typical beast.

You might choose to role-play that your familiar is momentarily confused the first time you change into a particular form, but no game mechanic requires this. As an analogy, consider how a dog behaves when reunited with its human after a long separation. They may display an initial hesitance, but as soon as the dog catches the person’s scent, there’s instant recognition and acceptance.

You’re dumber than you were.

Although your familiar still functions the same, you do not. As you quoted from Polymorph:

The target’s game statistics, including mental ability scores, are replaced by the statistics of the chosen beast.

In the case of the T. Rex, your Intelligence score is reduced to 2. To better understand what this means, it’s helpful to consider that number in reference to the scores of other common beasts.


INT = 1

INT = 2

INT = 3


So, as a T. Rex, you’re not effectively brainless like an insect, but you’re also not as smart as a dog. This will affect your communication, but it may not be as limiting as you might think.

Being dumb probably doesn’t limit your communication with your familiar.

It’s important to note that the Intelligence scores of Find Familiar‘s creatures are all between 1 and 3. Your owl shares the T. Rex’s 2, so you and it are now matching in intelligence.

You can no longer formulate complex thoughts, but your familiar wouldn’t have understood those anyway. You can still send telepathic commands, and although they’re likely not structured as language, they’ll still be as effective as necessary. For example:

  • Come Here
  • Go There
  • Fetch That
  • Stand Watch (i.e. remain alert and warn if there’s danger)
  • Distract that Creature (e.g. fly into its face)
  • Find “Timmy” (a party member or other creature known to the familiar)
  • Search for Goblins

Communication with your party members is limited, but possible.

Like a horse or bear, the T. Rex will be able to use body language and simple sounds to communicate with party members in a limited fashion. Typical messages might be:

  • I Acknowledge You (a huff)
  • Follow Me (taking a few steps and then looking back at the person)
  • I’m Angry, Excited, or Proud (a roar)
  • Leave Me Alone (an incomplete attack, like a snapping of teeth)
  • Thank You (a gentle nuzzle)

The giant ape you mentioned offers more interesting options. With an Intelligence Score of 7, it may well be smarter than any members of your party for whom Intelligence wasn’t prioritized during character creation! In this case, communication through more complex sounds, body language, and gestures would be feasible.

In fact, because some real-world chimps and gorillas have been able to learn rudimentary (and somewhat clumsy) sign language, you might take the time to develop a small set of useful signs to use with your party.

Don’t forget that you can’t cast spells.

One way your being polymorphed does limit your familiar’s function is related to their delivery of touch spells. Polymorph removes all of your spellcasting ability:

The creature is limited in the actions it can perform by the nature of its new form, and it can’t speak, cast spells, or take any other action that requires hands or speech.

The familiar would still be able to deliver any spells you sent its way, but your spellcasting has been disabled.

(Side Note: Some might argue that the wording here is ambiguous, and if your spells didn’t need somatic or verbal components — such as when using Subtle Spell metamagic — they would require neither hands nor speech, so you could still cast them when polymorphed. This interpretation is discussed here and here.)

dnd 5e – What happens when you use the knock spell on dimensional shackles?

The knock spell’s description reads:

Choose an object that you can see within range. The object can be a door, a box, a chest, a set of manacles, a padlock, or another object that contains a mundane or magical means that prevents access.
A target that is held shut by a mundane lock or that is stuck or barred becomes unlocked, unstuck, or unbarred. If the object has multiple locks, only one of them is unlocked.

If you choose a target that is held shut with arcane lock, that spell is suppressed for 10 minutes, during which time the target can be opened and shut normally.

When you cast the spell, a loud knock, audible from as far away as 300 feet, emanates from the target object.

As far as I see it, the description of the knock spell describes 4 things:

  • What the knock spell can target.
  • What happens if the knock spell targets something locked by a mundane lock, or is stuck or barred.
  • What happens if the locking mechanism is specifically the spell ‘arcane lock.’
  • The spell creates noise.

Valid spell targets include magical locks, but they aren’t a mundane lock, and we have good grounds to presume they aren’t limited to the arcane lock spell either.

Is something locked by a magical lock considered stuck for the purpose of what happens to a stuck object? This would be strange to me because why then do they specify mundane lock.

Moreover the part referring to things that are locked by a mundane lock, stuck, or barred seems to have an inclination towards the mundane (non-magical), are there magical means of making something stuck which would be included in this description? If so, where is the line between being magically locked and magically stuck?

Is the creation of noise the only result for using the knock spell on a magical lock that isn’t arcane lock?


I’m interested in the answer to this because I’m wanting to break out the dimensional shackles infusion on my artificer. Dimensional shackles seem to be magically locked for all intents and purposes. Moreover the item is designed to prevent teleportation, among any humanoid they were probably made for mages, can a mage simply open them with knock (presuming they know the spell and have it prepared)?

dnd 5e – If I get access to a spell attack that’s NOT part of a spell, can I use it when I take the Attack action?

Some creatures have entries in their stat block that are classified as ‘melee spell attack’, or ‘ranged spell attack’, without actually being tied to the casting of a spell. Some PC subclasses also get some of those, notably the Way of the Sun Soul and the Circle of Stars, but they are framed in such a way that still leaves no doubt as to when you can use it (with the Attack action, for the Monk, and as a bonus action on your turn, for the Druid). So let’s say I get access to the former, monster-like spell attacks.

  1. Can I use it when I take the Attack action?
  2. If not, is the reason that they are listed as ‘Actions’ on the creature’s stat block? So just like I can only use the Circle of Stars Archer feature as a bonus action, this would leave me with an Action and not a general combat option. It’s probably this, but I still need clarification about point 3.
  3. The rules for the Attack action state: “With this action, you make one melee or ranged Attack”. Nowhere here it says ‘weapon attack’. So even if the only attack option for a PC still is given by holding a weapon or having the possibility to make an unarmed strike, would this allow me to make a spell attack as a part of it if such an option were available to me outside of explicitly permittive wordings (as I said, I understand that casting a spell is its own thing, using a feature like the Archer form is its own thing, etc.).

I hope I made my question clear.

dnd 3.5e – Can a god make an epic spell permanent using alter reality?

It seems really overpowered, which is why I’m asking. But the text for alter reality:

…The deity can render a magical or supernatural effect permanent. The rest requirement varies with the effect: 10 minutes per level of the effect times the number of subjects affected, 10 minutes per total Hit Dice of creatures affected, or 10 minutes per 10-foot cube affected. Use the highest applicable value…

…says that any magical or supernatural effect could be made permanent (which an epic spell certainly is). So could a god invest in a really expensive epic spell to boost itself, then render the effect permanent?
Of course, the effect could be dispelled, but infinite duration is still insane for some spells.

dnd 3.5e – What types of bonuses can be applied with the fortify epic spell seed to boost intelligence?

The DMG lists all the bonus types, some are common improvements to abilities, like enhancement or inherent. But what other types of bonuses could be applied to intelligence?

I could see the following being applied: alchemical, circumstance, competence, enhancement, inherent, insight, luck, morale, profane, sacred.

Surely a dodge bonus to intelligence is dumb, but perhaps I’ve missed a few other ones.

dnd 5e – Can I replicate Spellwrought Tattoos with spells that are not on the Artificer’s spell list?

RAW, you can do this, but it’s definitely an oversight.

You have correctly observed: spellwrought tattoos are very similar to spell scrolls. Replicate Magic Item says:

Alternatively, you can choose the magic item from among the common magic items in the game, not including potions or scrolls.

You cannot replicate spell scrolls using the feature, and since spellwrought tattoos are also consumables that let you cast a spell once, it seems natural that they should be excluded as well. Based on this I would rule that you cannot replicate spellwrought tattoos.

As written, everything works as you have described, but it’s definitely a bug in the game. Technically it allows you to create a spellwrought tattoo with any cantrip or 1st level spell, even if you don’t know the spell. This doesn’t make sense, especially since it sort of overshadows your 11th level feature Spell Storing Item, which requires you store a spell you know.

The lack of clear rules for how this works is further evidence that it is an oversight.

There are no rules for how this works. Again, I must reemphasize that there are no rules restricting this use of the Artificer’s Replicate Magic item. As written, the Artificer can replicate a spellwrought tattoo containing any cantrip or 1st level spell. It is abundantly obvious that this is not intended to be the function of the feature. So the best answer, in my estimation, to the question “what are the restrictions on this infusion?” is “don’t allow the Artificer to create spellwrought tattoos with Replicate Magic Item.”

This bug was created by the publication of new material.

Prior to the publication of Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, the only common magic items besides spell scrolls and potions were those found in Xanathar’s Guide to Everything. Ergo, the Artificer’s feature is definitively referring to this section. The publication of Tasha’s created this bug by implementing a new type of common magic item consumable without accounting for it in the Replicate Magic Item feature description.

dnd 5e – Are Spellwrought Tattoos created like spell scrolls?

RAW, you can do this, but it’s probably an oversight.

You have correctly observed: spellwrought tattoos are very similar to spell scrolls. Replicate Magic Item says:

Alternatively, you can choose the magic item from among the common magic items in the game, not including potions or scrolls.

You cannot replicate spell scrolls using the feature, and since spellwrought tattoos are also consumables that let you cast a spell once, it seems natural that they should be excluded as well. Based on this I would rule that you cannot replicate spellwrought tattoos.

As written, everything works as you have described, but it’s definitely a bug in the game. Technically it allows you to create a spellwrought tattoo with any cantrip or 1st level spell, even if you don’t know the spell. This doesn’t make sense, especially since it sort of overshadows your 11th level feature Spell Storing Item, which requires you store a spell you know.

dnd 5e – Does the 3rd benefit of the (UA) Fizban’s Platinum Shield spell stack with Evasion, so that the character only takes 1/4 damage on a failed Dex save?

The new UA, Unearthed Arcana: Draconic Options, introduces a 6th-level spell called Fizban’s platinum shield that can be cast on a creature within 60 feet of the caster, granting them a few benefits. The description of the final benefit reads as follows:

  • If the creature is subjected to an effect that allows it to make a Dexterity saving throw to take only half damage, the creature instead takes no damage if it succeeds on the saving throw, and only half damage if it fails.

This has the same effect as the Evasion feature of a Monk or Rogue (or Hunter ranger, maybe).

Since this spell benefit and Evasion have the same effect but different names from different sources, would they stack with each other?
For instance, in the case of a 7th-level monk failing a Dex save against the fireball spell while under the effect of this spell, would they take a quarter damage?