This post is just focusing on D&D 5.5e (2024) rules.  This general category is so messy, I don’t dare try to simultaneously describe  the 5e (2014) variants.

Some of this material is already covered (so to speak) in my posts on Cover and Surprise.  At some point in time I should probably integrate it together, but, until then …

Surprise

5.5e significantly changed the Surprise rules.  Gone is the “you’re frozen until your first turn, then you’re still gimped until your next turn” stuff, in exchange for being at Disadvantage on Initiative.  5.5e also tried to normalize the Hiding / Cover aspects of Surprise, in part by making being Hidden the functional equivalent (and called it by the name) of being Invisible (i.e., having the Invisible condition). Which sometimes makes for odd situations, but …

After a session where things got a bit complicated, I did a re-read of the 5.5e rules (links for all this are down below).  The rules, as always, look straightforward, a framework that should make sense, whether it does or not.  The devil, as always, is in applying it to an actual combat situation.

I’ve linked to some of the rules at the bottom of the post, and [footnoted] to them in what I’ve collected below.

At any rate, fundamentally Surprise happens under a combination of two conditions:

• when a combatant is “caught unawares by the start of combat” [3] or, as phrased in the 5e rules,  “doesn’t notice a threat.”
• in a case where being covert (in movement / positioning (Stealth), or in behavior (Deception)) is better than a target’s awareness (spotting someone (Perception), or being aware of their motivation (Insight); this is likely a Passive check, since you only Actively try to perceive such things when you are already aware of the risk/threat of the situation, and so aren’t prone to Surprise because of the first condition).

That second condition is mechanical — dueling skills of various sorts. The first is a bit more subjective and narrative, and requires some adjudication. Can a guard who is watching for an attack be caught unawares? If you’re creeping down a dungeon corridor, looking for an ambush, are you aware that there is a threat (even if you don’t know it specifically)?  How long can you be actively alert for such stuff (that guard might be flagging by the end of the third watch)?  What if the type of combat or threat is itself unexpected (the goblins drop down through the illusory ceiling)?

That’s all why they pay DMs the big bucks.

Something that may tie into both of these aspects is Travel Pace[7].  This often comes up in overland travel from Point A to Point B, but can be applicable within a dungeon — and both affects some of the rolls above as well as the attitude:  e.g., if the players say they are walking at a fast pace to get to the dungeon ahead, there are mechanical effect on their senses, but it’s also an implication they aren’t expecting an attack.

Surprise is also individual — the Surprise status of each creature on one side or the other can vary depending on the above factors.

Our focus here is mostly on the Surprise that comes from an Attacker being physically Hidden, but bear in mind that it can be broader than that is useful.

Hiding = Invisibility

A potential Attacker can use the Hide action, making DC 15 Stealth check while out of the Opponent’s line of sight, and while[2] …

• Heavily Obscured
• behind Three-Quarter Cover
• behind Total Cover

… to effectively become Invisible.[2] (The D20 check rolled by the person Hiding is the DC for someone to Perceive them[2]).

This can be for teeing up an ambush, or mid-battle sneaking about. To get all the advantages of being Hidden, though, you have to have explicitly taken the Hide action; otherwise you’re just getting protection from cover.

Rolling Initiative

First off, Initiative is rolled when combat starts.[4]  Not after someone gets in the first blow or their sneaky alpha strike from cover, but when attack dice are about to be rolled.

• If an Attacker is initiating the combat (“Okay, team, I’m going to be in front and cast Fireball!”), the Attacker gets (DM’s discretion) Advantage on their Initiative roll.[6] (This one is hidden in the DMG as an option, and is the sop to the “But nobody is supposed to move until I cast my spell” issue.) This rule holds regardless of being Hidden or Surprised or not (yes, the guy who throws the first punch in the bar brawl rolls Initiative on Advantage to do it), but often comes up in context of an ambush or bursting into the enemy’s room.
• If an Attacker is Invisible (Hidden and unknown to be there by the target), the Attacker gets Advantage on their Initiative roll.[1]
• If the Opponents are Surprised (they didn’t know the Attacker was there and weren’t in “expecting combat” mode), they roll Initiative with Disadvantage.[3,4]

So let’s say Bob wants to get the drop on an Orc heading off to sleep. He positions himself around a corner (in Total Cover), and explicitly Hides himself (makes sure nothing is showing, tries to stay quiet, etc.).  The Orc figures the hallways is safe and isn’t expecting any surprises, and their Passive Perception isn’t enough to meet the Stealth roll Bob made when he Hid.

Bob gets Advantage on Initiative for starting things, and would also get Advantage on Initiative because he is (until he attacks) Invisible. Advantage only adds once, of course.

The Orc doesn’t know Bob is there, and has no reason to be worried, so they get Disadvantage on Initiative. If the Orc knew that Bob had run away in this direction, and were watching out for him, they would roll Initiative normally.  Ditto if they heard a noise from ahead and advanced cautiously.

Results of Initiative

If, after Initiative is rolled, there are allies who go before the Attacker initiating combat, then if they want the Attacker to get that first strike off, they need to Dodge or Help (if that applies) or, more likely, Ready an action.  (This seems counter-intuitive, as it seems to penalize quick-reflexes folks; a Readied action isn’t as robust or useful as one normally taken. But that’s how it goes; the alternative is to blow the plan for that initiating Attacker to actually initiate the attack.)

If, after Initiative is rolled, any of the Opponents (even Surprised ones) still get a better Initiative than the hidden Attacker, they are (on the honor system) aware something is about to happen and can, within limits, respond first.  Effectively, they are reacting to the Attacker popping out of hiding, even if they can’t directly do anything about it this turn. Faster Opponents can Dodge, try to Perceive the hidden attackers, warn their fellows, throw up magical defenses, etc.

In other words, those Opponents are still reacting faster than the Attacker, even if they can’t see them or directly attack them (yet).

The faster Opponents could, theoretically, Ready an action to shoot anyone who shows up “where I heard that noise.” If the Attacker is effectively Hidden / “Invisible,” that Readied action would not go off until after the Attacker did their thing, because that attack (see below) is what technically drops the “Invisibility” they have.[2]

Okay, so that handles Initiative … how about actual attacks (and counter-attacks)?

Attacks from Hiding

If the Attacker is Invisible (Hidden and unknown to be there by the Opponent):

• the Attacker gets Advantage on their Attack (this can be any time in the battle, not just on the first round)[1]
• their Opponent attacks a still-Invisible target with (at best) Disadvantage.[1,5] If where the Opponent says they are attacking is not where their target is, the attack automatically misses.[5]

Note that if the “Invisibility” only comes from being behind Total Cover  (the Attacker has not taken a Hide action, too):

• the Attacker will not get Advantage for their attack
• the Opponent can’t see them to target them in turn

The Attacker’s “Invisible” condition from Hiding ends immediately after an Attack roll (or a Verbal spell, or making a sound, or if the Opponent finds them).[2] (In other places it says after an “attack hits or misses,” but I think that’s effectively the same thing.[5])

• Which, as written, implies that an Attacker with multiple attacks (e.g., Fighters at 5th Level) only get that Advantage to hit on their first attack roll, not on subsequent ones. The condition ends after an Attack roll, not an Attack action.
• If the Attacker wants to get “Invisible” again, they must duck behind cover and do another Hide to regain that “Invisible” condition.[2]  Just moving back behind Total Cover would give them physical protection, but the Opponent still knows they are there, so the Attacker won’t get Advantage on their next attack (“I know he’s behind that tree so I’m keeping an eye on that”).

Certain spell effects, like Greater Invisibility, can cause the Invisible condition to be instantly restored, or never actually lost, without having to Hide; these are a really annoying complications, just saying.

Net-Net

Is all this complex? Yeah, especially given player and DM cleverness and the wide variety of spaces and situations to which it could apply.  Could it be simplified?  Maybe, but only by handwaving more and more things that “should” be considered important in a combat.

I’ve tried to tie the material above to actual rules, but there is some DM interpretation going on.  If you aren’t sure, discuss it with your DM first; they may have different interpretations than I do.

Would you like to know more?

Here are the rule links for the [footnotes] above.

1. The Invisible Condition
2. The Hide Action
3. Surprise
4. Initiative
5. Cover: Unseen Attackers and Targets
6. DM’s Toolbox: Initiative
7. Travel Pace

This one is mostly written from a 5.5e (2024) perspective,  as I needed to clarify all of this for a 5.5e game I was running. Plus, it seems like 5.5e does a bit better job of defining all this stuff, vs. an array of official and unofficial rules around how these things all work. If you’re not sure how it all works in 5e, you could do worse than adopting some of the (backwards-compatible!) 5.5e approaches.

What if I want to break a door?

If a door is barred or locked (always check first!), here’s how you can get through it by brute force. There are two options, one using magic, one using your bodily strength in some fashion.

• Use the AC / HP for an Attack or (damaging) Magic action against a Medium door. (In theory, you could also use a physical attack against it, though as a DM I’d probably prefer you try with an axe, rather than with arrows.) And, no, the damage type is not spelled out — you can use Psychic as easily as Bludgeoning damages.
• Use the DC for a Utilize action against a Medium door with a STR (Athletics) check.

* for larger doors of this type, HP x2 or x3, DC + 5.

What if the door is locked?

Time to try and Pick That Lock!

• Simple locks take 1 Action to try to pick
• Complex locks take 1 Minute to try to pick

The DC against picking is based on the quality of the lock:

• Inferior lock is DC 10
• Good lock is DC 15
• Superior lock is 20.

Locks can only be picked by someone using Thieves Tools. The basic roll is a DEX (Sleight of Hand) check against the quality DC.

Note that this follows the 5.5e general rule pattern about tools and the skills using them. Note also that under those rules that it is possible to get Expertise (double Proficiency) in a skill, but not on a tool set.

What about a portcullis?

If you can’t get to the winch, then the DC is what you need with a Utilize action for a STR (Athletics) check.

If you want to destroy the portcullis, use the AC and HP of a large Metal or Wooden door (above).

Note that targets within 5 feet of a portcullis have 3/4 cover (+5 AC) from attacks from the other side; if further away, they have Total Cover.

Secret Doors!

Difficulty to find:

• Barely hidden secret doors are DC 10
• Standard secret doors are DC 15
• Well-hidden secret doors are DC 20.

A Search action will let you search a 10-foot square section of wall with a WIS (Perception) check against the door’s DC; success means you spotted the door and know the means to open it.

You can also use an INT (Investigation) check if the clues are visible (scrapes on the floor where the door has rubbed it, for example) but need to deduced from or understood.

Something I often joke about here is how D&D is not a physics simulator, and, in fact, is a very mediocre tactical combat simulator.  All games, more or less, are, both because drama is more exciting than reality, and because reality is really hard to simulate

One of the things that D&D 5e (2014) brought to the mix was the KISS principle. Gone was to be the crunchity-crunch-crunch of multiple bonuses and penalties on rolls from the 3.5e period.  Gone was the slick but somewhat joyless tactical detail of 4e. Instead,  5e tried to keep it simple while at the same time making it fun.

By and large, not a bad job. Lots of abstractions, lots of handwaving about Advantage and Disadvantage, pretty good show.

5.5e (2024) for all its plusses and minuses, added a new element to combats by somewhat-popular demand — and which has turned out to be a lot more controversial than I would have expected.

Weapon Mastery!

A Longsword does 1d8 slashing damage.

A Flail does 1d8 bludgeoning damage.

A Morning Star does 1d8 piercing damage.

Are these the same?

Well, obviously not. A flail slams weights against its target.  A longsword slices and dices (and pierces, but we’ll ignore that for D&D). A morning star pokes little pokey bits backed by weight into its victim. The damage type is different — bludgeoning vs slashing vs piercing — but there is very, very little in the rules were that actually means anything (skeletons being vulnerable to bludgeoning weapons is the only thing that comes to mind).

Abstraction is useful, even necessary, to deal with real-world details that could easily overwhelm.  But too much abstraction is equally problematic. I once abandoned a super-heroes gaming system because there was no mechanical, in-game difference between someone attacking with a telekinetic blast, jet of flame, or lightning bolt. The same, to an extent, is true for weapons and their use.  If a flail = a longsword = a morning star in every way that counts except for your character picture — is that too much abstraction?

5.5e says, “Yeah, let’s see what we can do about that.”

Weapon Mastery?

The Weapon Mastery rules consist of two parts: What It Is and How To Get It

What Is Weapon Mastery?

Weapon Mastery is an additional aspect to weapons that certain characters can get by becoming “masters” of that particular weapon and learning to use its more interesting features.

If you look at the Weapons table, you can see the Mastery column that indicates how a trained user of the weapon can do something extra. That something extra, as spelled out by the rules, includes (with some weapon examples):

• Cleave: Once a turn, on a hit, the attacker does a follow-on attack on another target within 5 feet of the first and within reach. Damage on that second attack does not include the Ability modifier (unless negative). [Greataxe, Halberd]
• Graze:  If the attack misses, it still does damage equal to the attacker’s Ability modifier. [Glaive, Greatsword]
• Nick: When the attacker make an extra attack because the weapon is Light, they can do it as part of your Attack action, not using up their Bonus Action. [Scimitar, Dagger]
• Push:  On a hit, the attacker can push the target 10 feet away if size Large or smaller. [War Hammer, Heavy Crossbow]
• Sap: On a hit, the target has Disadvantage on its next attack roll. [Longsword, Morning Star]
• Slow:  On a hit with damage, the target’s Speed is reduced by 10 feet until your next turn (no stacking). [Club, Light Crossbow, Longbow]
• Topple:  On a hit, the target makes a CON Save vs DC (8 + attacker’s Ability Modifier + attacker’s Proficiency Bonus) or go Prone. [Maul, Quarterstaff]
• Vex: On a hit with damage, the attacker has Advantage on the next roll against that creature before the end of their next turn. [Short Bow, Rapier]

How Do I Get Weapon Mastery?

1. Various martial classes (Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue) automatically get at a Level 1 the Weapon Mastery class feature. This lets you use the Mastery feature of some (the number varies by class) simple or martial weapons of your choice. You can swap out for another one of these each Long Rest.  For some classes, the number of Weapon Masteries increases as levels go up.
2. The Weapon Master feat gives you an ASI and (to the point) lets you use the Mastery of one simple or martial weapon of your choice (which can be swapped around after any Long Rest) if you have Proficiency for it. This basically opens up the ability to non-martials.

Pros and Cons

The plus and minus of Weapon Mastery as a game rule is the same: It’s one more thing to do stuff with.

As a plus? It sets apart martials a bit more; it allows additional tactical elements in combat; it improves flavor by keeping flails and longswords and morning stars from all being the same.

As a minus? It slows down combat while tactical decisions are made (do I want to use the push-back? what path? does that mean it would be better to attack this other opponent? etc.); the mapping between the Masteries and the actual weapon is a bit sketchy, so the verisimilitude is strained.

I don’t have a net-net here, until I see how it works in actual gameplay.  To the extent that it adds some additional flavor to folks like Fighters (beyond “I hit him with my sword. And again. And again.”) it seems like it would be a good thing, but it’s easy to understand why some folk think it represents a creeping re-complexity for D&D combat.

Everyone hates Encumbrance rules

That’s a generalization, so suspect, but in my multiple decades of playing and DMing D&D and other FRPG / TTRPGs, I have yet to find anyone who wants to keep track of all the things they are carrying and their weight and have that impact how their character performs.  Conan and Legolas and [insert fantasy hero here] never worries about Encumbrance — why should I?

The only people who have any use for Encumbrance are GMs, as a check against player characters carrying around golf bags full of specialized magic swords (“Hmmm, a Flametongue for this encounter, I think”) and, more importantly, on player characters stripping the Temple of the Really Rich Lich of its 500,000 gold pieces and its diamond altar and the three giant jade statues with gems the size of toaster ovens for eyes.

In other words, Encumbrance is a tool for managing edge cases and, in some cases, exploits, and, frankly, can be skipped unless those come to pass.

Indeed, the D&D Rules themselves actually make that case. For 5.5e (2024), the PHB says on p. 20:

Carrying Objects: You can usually carry your gear and treasure without worrying about the weight of those objects. If you try to haul an unusually heavy object or a massive number of lighter objects, the DM might require you to abide by the rules for carrying capacity in the rules glossary.

The game should be fun. If a mechanic stops it from being fun, ignore the mechanic. But if lack of a mechanic stops it from being fun, be ready to use it when you need to.

So how about the rules?

The basic rules for Encumbrance are the same between 5e (2014) and 5.5e.  The only difference in significance is that 5e calls it Encumbrance and 5.5e calls it Carrying Capacity.

The underlying numbers, though, are the same, just differing i how they are presented.  5e gives some formulae and then a series of exceptions and extrapolations. 5.5e presents a table, which is a much clearer way of doing it, so that’s what I’ll use here.

^{*If you are dragging / lifting / pushing a weight greater than you can carry, your Speed drops down to 5 feet. If the weight is beyond the D/L/P level, you cannot move it.}

That’s pretty much it:  Size (basically your ability to balance a heavy load) and STRength (your ability to overcome inertia and gravity).

The numbers calculate the same between both 5e and 5.5e, so easy peasey.

(The variant rule in 5e, PHB 176, abut encumbering and heavy encumbering and their effects on your die rolls and speed, are not carried over in 5.5e, which is probably a good thing.)

The rules don’t explicitly state it, but presumably burdens can be shared. The math probably gets a bit dodgy, but I would let STRength be additive here, with some sort of proportion around the creature sizes of the folk sharing in the carrying.

Don’t ask me to factor in how having a wheeled setup (e.g., a cart, rollers, etc.) affects all of this if it’s the players pushing/pulling it.

A bit of science (maybe)

In real life, based on military studies:

• Humans can carry around up to 20-25% of their body mass without incurring  significant additional fatigue in combat.
• Outside of combat, it can go up to 30%.

I’m not suggesting using that to craft your own Encumbrance rules, though — because everyone hates Encumbrance rules.

Exhaustion is a special set of escalating conditions that occur when rest or nutritional intake are inadequate, or when environmental conditions (heat, cold) are life-threatening.

Exhaustion consists of 6 levels:

Yeah, not fun. The term “death spiral” literally fits here, since each level of Exhaustion can make it more difficult to remove oneself from the causes of the Exhaustion.

These effects are cumulative, e.g., a creature at Exhaustion level 2 has its Speed halved and a DISADvantage on Ability Checks.

If a creature that already has a level of Exhaustion suffers another effect that causes Exhaustion, its current level goes up by the number described.

A creature suffers the effect of its current level of exhaustion as well as all lower levels. For example, a creature suffering level 2 exhaustion has its speed halved and has disadvantage on ability checks.

Effects that remove Exhaustion reduce the level as they describe. When Exhaustion drops below 1, the creature is no longer exhausted.

A Long Rest will reduce Exhaustion by 1 level, as long as the resting creature has been able to eat and drink. Being raised from the dead also reduces Exhaustion by 1, though that’s kind of the hard way to do it.

Okay, how does this change in 5.5e?

Though the 5e (2014) rules are pretty simple, 5.5e (2024) makes them even simpler. 

Exhaustion is cumulative / stackable. You still die if your Exhaustion level is 6. When you have any level of Exhaustion:

• Your D20 Test rolls are reduced by (2 x elevel).
• Your Speed is reduced by (5′ x elevel).

So, if you are at Exhaustion Level 3, your D20 rolls (attacks, saves, ability checks) are all reduced by 6, and your Speed is reduced by 15 feet per turn.

Exhaustion can be alleviated by finishing a Long Rest, which removes 1 level. When you reach level 0, you are no longer Exhausted.

D&D 5e uses common Conditions as a modular way of showing the results of various attacks, spells, environmental issues, etc.  By defining what it means to be “Blinded,” the rules can say that Condition is applied to someone without explaining what it means.

5.5e (2024) continues this, but modifies some of the Condition meanings, as well as adding a few new ones. See here and here.

In the table below, 5e (only) notes are in black, 5.5e (only) notes are in red, and notes common in both editions are in blue.

Note that for the Incapacitated-related action restrictions, while 5e did not specify “no Bonus Actions” in the Condition descriptions, elsewhere in the rules it did note that if Actions were not allowed, it was the same for Bonus Actions. The notes of this sort in italics are inheriting it from the Incapacitated Condition.

Note also that Exhausted is another type of Condition, and is the only one with effect that can stack.

This is one that the tables of our gaming group generally do wrong — or, at least, not Rules as Written (PHB 190) for quite some time:  what it takes, action-wise, to change from one weapon to another.

When describing what you can do on your turn, the rules say:

You can also interact with one object or feature of the environment for free, during either your move or your action. For example […] you could draw your weapon as part of the same action you use to attack. If you want to interact with a second object, you need to use your action.

And, under the rule on interacting with objects around you, it says:

draw or sheathe a sword

In other words, you can on any given turn, for free, (a) draw a weapon, or (b) sheathe/put away a weapon … but not both. This means the (very common) “Hmmm, with which of my array of weapons am I attacking with on this turn?” maneuver doesn’t work (RAW).

Round 1 – I plonk the bad guys with my bow.
Round 2 – Ooh, a bad guy is in my face, I stab him with my sword.
Round 3 – I shoot the guy across the room with my bow.
Round 4 – I charge in and stab that guy with my sword.

Nope. Essentially, switching weapons takes a full Action (putting away one weapon for free, Use an Object for your Action to draw the other one), meaning no attack that round.

This also complicates life for thrown weapon players. If drawing one of your throwing daggers takes up your free object interaction, then even if you have multiple attacks for your Attack action, you won’t have a way to draw additional daggers / shuriken / etc.

A couple of ways around this if you want a quick weapon change (one-way):

1. Don’t put your weapon away. Just drop it (as you would a torch), which takes no time, and then lets you use your free interaction to draw your new weapon. Except in exceptional circumstances, there’s no call to worry about damage to the weapon. Dropping something takes no no time, and then you can draw your other weapon.
   Getting that weapon back to use again in the battle seems like it would be dodgy, but the rules do let you pick something up just as easily as drawing from a sheathe, for that free object interaction. Of course, if you have to flee the battle, the weapon might be left behind. Or, more seriously, the bad guys could grab the weapon you dropped, too.
2. You can also, if you really don’t want to lose your weapon and maintain maximum flexibility, do something along the lines of (Turn 1) Attack-Sheathe then (Turn 2) Draw-Attack as a way of switching weapons, but it’s not something you can do every turn, and it does leave you empty-handed (for Opportunity Attacks) elsewhere in that turn.
3. Rogues (Thieves) can use Fast Hands on their Bonus Action to Use An Object. That totally works for this (free action to put away a weapon, FH>UAO to draw a new one, then Attack). That’s doubtless why Legolas took a couple of levels of Rogue at one point.

Frankly, all of this strikes me as Not Fun. Which is why we’ve tended to drop this from our games, as DMs are allowed to do. But that has some consequences.  The design idea behind this restriction, among other factors, seems to be

• Drawing that distinction between archery fighters and melee fighters, and balancing between them (archery fighting is generally considered a bit OP in 5e; this means archery fighters dealing with guys getting in their faces have to decide between retaining their bow and being at a Disadvantage for shooting at folk at 5 feet, or switching weapons and being slowed down after their attackers are gone before resuming plonking at range). It reduces the homogeneity of folk swapping instantly between being ranged fighters and melee fighters.
• It also breaks the “video game weapon-swap” meme a bit.
• And it addresses the RL aspect that sheathing a sword and unlimbering a bow and drawing and shooting really does take more than six seconds (though, of course, RL considerations only go so far).

Lastly, of course, there are Feats and Sub-Class Features that explicitly allow faster drawing / sheathing of weapons; playing without that restriction renders them less useful. (I.e., the game is already built around the restriction, so removing the restriction theoretically unbalances things.)

Would you like to know more?

• dnd 5e 2014 – Drawing and sheathing a weapon in 5e, and the actions required – Role-playing Games Stack Exchange

Weapon jugging in 5.5e

5.5e (2024) shakes things up a bit here, by explicitly (PHB Appendix C, p. 361, and the Free Rules) allowing a draw or sheathe/stowing of a weapon as part of an attack within the Attack action, either before or after an attack, and not necessarily with the same weapon.

Equipping and Unequipping Weapons. You can either equip or unequip one weapon when you make an attack as part of this action. You do so either before or after the attack. If you equip a weapon before an attack, you don’t need to use it for that attack. Equipping a weapon includes drawing it from a sheath or picking it up. Unequipping a weapon includes sheathing, stowing, or dropping it.

This lets you juggle weapons much more easily, especially as you get, e.g., Extra Attack, coming along.

It also appears that this Equipping / Unequipping rule is distinct from the Thrown property on weapons in 5.5e, which separately notes you can draw-and-throw as part of the attack. That means you could (if you can attack twice during your Attack action:

• Attack 1:
  • Attack with my sword.
  • Sheathe my sword (Unequipping) for free after that first attack.
• Attack 2:
  • Draw-and-throw a dagger
  • Draw my sword again.

Note that the previous free “interaction” from 5e has been, if not dropped, then scattered a bit. There is now an explicit Utilize Action for when an object requires an action to use it. If you are doing something with an object as part of a different Action, that interaction should be free, as with the Equipping / Unequpping text above.

That said, it does still exist, noted under Interacting with Things in combat:

You can interact with one object or feature of the environment for free, during either your move or action.  For example, you could open a door during your move as you stride toward a foe.
   If you want to interact with a second object, you need to take the Utilize action. Some magic items and other special objects always require an action to use, as stated in their descriptions.
   The DM might require you to use an action for any of these activities when it needs special care or when it presents an unusual obstacle. For instance, the DM might require you to take the Utilize action to open a stuck door or turn a crank to lower a drawbridge.

It’s unclear to me if you can do that free Interaction for an initial draw/sheathe of a weapon, which would make things even more flexible.

Use of a wand in combat is not an Attack, or a Weapon Attack, or anything you could put into the chain of attack actions that a higher level martial character (like a Fighter) can use.

The Magic Missile wand, for example (and other wands use similar language), says:

While holding it, you can use an action to expend 1 or more of its charges to cast the magic missile spell from it.

Using a wand is an Action (more specifically, a Use an Item Action).  You get one Action per turn (and one Bonus Action and one Reaction), with very few exceptions.

This doesn’t come into play with the Fighter’s Extra Attack feature at higher levels. While the nomenclature is confusing, that lets a fighter do multiple attacks within a single Attack Action (it isn’t adding to the number of Actions, it’s adding to the, if I can coin the phrase, sub-actions under the Attack sort of Action).

I.e., a higher level Fighter may be able to swing a sword at an opponent three times in a round, but they can still only fire off a wand a single time.

Using a wand also not casting a spell. That is a particular type of action (quite literally, the Casting a Spell Action). If it were, then it would affect the limitations of only one leveled spell cast per turn. If a magic user uses a wand, they can still cast any level spell is cast as a Bonus Action.

The edge case exception here is that Action Surge gives a Fighter an extra Action — which Action could, in fact, be used for Using a [Magic] Item. I.e., getting two shots off the Magic Missile wand.

Wands and 5.5e

Things are mostly the same under the 5.5e (2024) rules, though with slightly different nomenclature. 

Using a wand (or any magic item) is done as the newly named Magic Action, as is spellcasting and the like. Unfortunately, the new rules also are quite clear that you cannot use Action Surge to take an extra Magic Action, so we’re back down to a single use of the wand per turn.

On the other hand, allowing use of a wand as a Magic Action still doesn’t forestall using a leveled spell via a Bonus Action or Reaction (5.5e calls them “slotted spells”).

Since it comes up periodically and I Here are my notes on how Surprise works in D&D 5e — at our table, at least, given the complexities of Active vs. Passive skills and variations under different DMs.

When Does Surprise Happen?

Surprise occurs when two parties (1+) meet and one of them is unaware of the other until action has begun.

Two thoughts on this:

1. A situation where there is obvious risk can’t engender surprise unless an attack comes from a completely unexpected direction.  If are aware of danger, and are taking normal precautions for it, you cannot easily be surprised (you can be ambushed, but you won’t suffer the consequences of surprise).
2. Trying to be and stay aware has limitations. Even if you know you are in a combat zone, you can only spend so much time and energy watching for bad guys above, below, and in all directions.

Note that “action” usually means “combat,” given D&D’s proclivities, but it doesn’t have to.

The basics are encapsulated thus (broken into points for clarity):

So what happens when the parties meet?

The PHB says (broken into points):

The DM determines who might be surprised.

(Though he’ll try to be fair about it and as impartial as possible.)

If neither side is trying to be stealthy, they automatically notice each other.

E.g., “You round the corner and there is a party of dwarves walking toward you. Both sides stare at each other for a moment … but after that joint moment of, yes, startlement, each party remains on an even footing with each other.”

Or it’s even, both sides are approaching the corner, chatting with each other, hobnailed boots clattering, and they become aware of something around the corner at about the same time. In either case, surprise is moot.

Otherwise, the DM compares the Dexterity (Stealth) checks of anyone hiding [or otherwise trying to be stealthy] with the Passive Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the opposing side.

The caveat I added is important; the rules (and a lot of discussion) has to do with one party laying in wait for the other, but it could as easily be trying to creep up on another group. There’s also sort of an arbitrariness here — it’s easy to think of a situation where both sides are trying to be stealthy while listening for trouble … the thief sneaking up on a corner while a guard is waiting for someone to step around the corner, but is unaware of when it will happen. Who gets to make the Stealth check vs the Perception check? Hmmmmm …

Also, note that comment on Passive Perception. We’ll get back to that.

Any character or monster that doesn’t notice a threat is surprised at the start of the encounter. […] A member of a group can be surprised even if the other members aren’t.

There’s a bit of artifice here. While there is a remarkable amount of argument about “a threat,” essentially it means that if you hear any of the orcs who are laying in wait ahead, sufficient to put you on your guard, you will not be surprised by any of them — even, arguably, by the orcish assassin coming up from behind (because there’s no facing, so your presumed awareness is 360° once you’re on the alert).

This last is is important, and is further clarified in the Sage Advice Compendium :

You can be surprised even if your companions aren’t, and you aren’t surprised if even one of your foes fails to catch you unawares.

Surprise, then, is an individual thing for characters (and, to a more limited degree, for opponents): I, as a character, have to detect any of the other side to not be surprised (if I hear one person’s chain mail jingling, I become alert and won’t be surprised).  But my not being surprised doesn’t affect my fellow players.

That can seem kind of weird, depending on the timing. But if we’re walking into a trap, my detecting someone is deemed a last-second thing; I can’t shout out, “Hey, it’s goblins! Don’t be surprised!” (Though circumstances can allow that — I’m trying to spot something on the trail ahead, and there’s a glint of metal three switchbacks up the hill … I am allowed to warn my friends in that case.

How Does Surprise Get Determined?

This starts getting into that whole Active and Passive Skill thing.

• Active Skills are when you roll 1d20 and add your Ability and Skill Proficiency scores.  They represent an active effort on your part (“I’m trying to do X”).
• Passive Skills are just “what you do most of the time,” and they are served by basically replacing that d20 roll with a 10 (i.e., making it a perpetual average role).

Some DMs out there argue that it also represents the minimum you can get on an Active Skill  roll, but I disagree; actively looking for things can allow someone to get distracted (while I’m focusing on telling whether that glint ahead on the trail is steel or a shiny rock, I miss the tripwire across the path I might otherwise have seen).

(See more on Passive Perception here.)

The problem with Passive Skills is that they are meant to represent two things: (1) the “average” background ability and (2) a way for the DM to save time. Rather than have everyone roll Perception (or the roll it themself behind the screen), it’s far easier (and less alerting to the players) for the DM to know that Bob’s Passive Perception is 12, so they will always see a hidden thing with DC10, and always miss one with DC15, unless they are actively searching.

Easier, but kind of dull. “Oh, this floor of the dungeon appears to be populated by DC10 traps. Bob strolls through it with no chance of being caught by any of them.”

And the “easy” aspect is dubious in  Roll20 (or any VTT): I can click on a pre-set macro and roll everyone’s Active Perception any time I want. Not only is it hidden from the players, but it allows for variation — someone other than the highly perceptive Rogue can spot the trap once in a while (though, on average, it’ll still be the highly perceptive Rogue), and it means that if the highest Passive Perception is 15, DC20 traps aren’t automatic hits.

As a general rule, and for DM convenience, the “who rolls this, the Players or the Monsters” is usually focused on the Players (which is more fun for them, but also a lot easier for the DM). So a way to do this is that the Orcs, as they lay in wait, all use their Passive Stealth (effectively the DC number), while the Players all roll their Active Perception (or the DM rolls it for them) — or, if the ambush is on the other foot, the Orcs all use their Passive Perception and the Players all roll their Active Stealth. While the bad guys relying on Passives is kind if dull, it’s much simpler.

Two examples:

Characters Surprising Monsters

E.g., “Hey, here come some monsters, lets ambush them!” (Or perhaps, “There’s a monster camp up ahead, let’s creep up on them.”)

In its most basic form, the players prepare their ambush, and each rolls a Stealth check. It gets compared to the Passive Perception of the target monsters. The problem here is that the big fighter wearing plate mail is always going to have a crap Stealth roll, meaning the monsters (who all have the same Passive Perception) will always hear them.

An alternative, especially if the party has a chance to collaborate and plan and are aware of what the bad guys are doing, is to roll a Group Check (PHB 175, and more written here):

When a number of individuals are trying to accomplish something as a group, the DM might ask for a group ability check. In such a situation, the characters who are skilled at a particular task help cover those who aren’t.

To make a Group Ability Check, everyone in the group makes an Active Ability Check. If at least half the group succeeds, the whole group succeeds. Otherwise, the group fails. That lets the stealthy Rogue counter the noisy Fighter (“Pssst — watch out for that twig you’re about to step on!”). The success usually has to be against a unitary number/difficulty, though, e.g., the Passive Perception of the opposition.

Group Checks can be used for anything, but they’re really designed for when a single individual failure would mean the whole group fails.

Monsters Surprising Characters

This sounds like it should be the same thing, and, ideally, it is, but pragmatically, it’s usually handled a little differently.

So, for example, rather than the DM rolling (Active) Stealth for each of the monsters (fine for one or two, a real problem with twenty), the suggestion is to use the Passive Stealth (10 + DEX bonus + Stealth bonus).

The only problem with using the Passive Stealth there is that a Player who misses (either Passive Perception or an Active Perception roll) misses against all of them, and someone who makes the needed number succeeds against all of them. Unfortunately, that’s the kind of abstraction that is inevitable in this kind of simulation.

Using Active Perception rolls for the Players is probably better (and, if the DM has a macro set up for it, easy).

What Happens When Someone Is Surprised?

Pre-5e there was the concept of a “surprise round” — a round in which the surprisers get to act, and the surprised don’t.

5e changed this a bit. When the first action of an encounter takes place, Initiative gets rolled by everyone (even folk who are surprised). If you are deemed surprised, it means you:

• cannot Move or take an Action (including a Bonus Action) on your first turn
• cannot React until after your first turn

So the band of goblins gets the drop on all your party. Everyone’s initiative rolled and likely intertwined, but as each party member’s turn comes up in the   first round, they cannot do anything during during that turn. But once each their turns has come up (and been squandered as they recover from surprise) they can React (e.g., take an Opportunity Attack, cast Shield, etc.).

E.g. Susan and Bob surprise Goblins 1 and 2. They all roll Initiative, and it goes in the order Susan, Goblin 1, Bob, Goblin 2.

1. Susan runs past Goblin 1 (who cannot React with an Opportunity Attack because they are surprised) and stabs Goblin 2.
2. Goblin 1’s turn comes up; they cannot take any Move or Action and just stand there, agog with surprise.
3. Bob decides to finish off Goblin 2. He runs past Goblin 1 … but since Goblin 1’s turn this first round has passed, Goblin 1 Reacts, taking an Opportunity Attack to stab Bob.
4. Goblin 2’s first turn comes up; they, too, cannot take any Move or Action … but once their turn is over, if Susan tries to run back to help Bob, Goblin 2 can try an Opportunity Attack, too. And when Goblins 1 and 2 come up in the next round, they will be Moving and Acting as normal.

Would you like to know more?

• Understanding Surprise in D&D 5e: SlyFlourish.com
• Players Abusing Readied Action/Surprise? : r/DMAcademy
• dnd 5e 2014 – Surprise, ready an action and bashing doors – Role-playing Games Stack Exchange

Surprise in 5.5e (2024)

We’ll evaluate at a later time all of the Active/Passive stuff above (the stuff that determines if there is surprise). The meat here is how the effects of surprise 

Surprise in 5.5e has been significantly simplified — maybe a bit too much.

Surprised creatures roll Initiative at Disadvantage.

That’s it.  No special Surprise Round. No differentiating between types of actions. Roll Init at Disadvantage.  Quick characters will (likely) still be pretty high in the Initiative order (but maybe not).

Though it’s worth noting that if the attackers in ambush are successfully (through Hide (with Stealth) or Invisibility) hidden, they get Advantage on the Init roll. Which widens the gap in Init still more.

The upshot of this, though, is that Surprise matters a bit less. Everyone will get to do something Round 1; you won’t have surprisers who effectively get two attacks in, which, in an Action Economy, can be deadly.  This is a Good Thing if it’s your party being surprised; it’s a Bad Thing if you’re doing the surprising.

Arguably, this almost takes too much of the sting out of Surprise. The surprisers will still get the first blows in, but the surprised will spring back quickly.

It will be interesting to see how folk end up in their evaluation of it.

First, some nomenclature. The new semi-edition was originally called “One D&D,” so as to imply that it’s the system we would have forever.  For some reason, that was then changed to calling it “D&D 5th edition (2024),” with the previous version now being referred to as “D&D 5th edition (2014)” (the parentheses indicating the year it first came out).

This is cumbersome, so most references are to just “2024” vs “2014.”

Personally, I think this is still kind of confusing, for two reasons:

1. “2014” and “2024” look very similar. They are the same length, 75% the same characters, and the only difference is in the same place.  Easy for the eye to mistake them, and I find myself doing that almost every time.
2. These are not the same game.

Not that they aren’t very similar, mind you.  And there is a very rough comparability between them.  And you can do some mixing and matching — with work — between the systems. But the implication that these are both “5th edition” is a pleasant fiction design to deflect accusations that WotC just wants to sell more books.

So I’ll be generally using the alternate terminology that a number of sites have adopted of referring to the older semi-version as 5e and the new semi-version as 5.5e (see keen little icon I drew up to the right).

So from what I have read (and which we are now encountering in the Real World), here are the answers to some basic comparability questions.

Some questions

Can I use 5e characters in a 5.5e campaign?

In theory, yes, though there is a sense that 5e characters are a bit less powerful and usable than 5.5e, so doing a character built in 5e as a 5.5e character, without making any other changes, it’s suggested to just give them an extra feat.

But … it’s also clearly stated that if you run a 5e character in a 5.5e campaign, you really need to use as many of the 5.5e rules as possible; a 5e character in a 5.5e campaign must use the 5.5e rules on Surprise and Inspiration, etc.  Just like a running an old 1950s Ford operating on a 2025 freeway, you can do it, but finding leaded fuel and a mechanic that can service it, etc., might be difficult, plus you run risks with not having a third brake light or daytime headlamps, let alone full-blown seat belts front and back (which you might be required to install after the fact). It’s a bit hazy what to do as your 5e character levels up — should they use 5e leveling rules for their class, or 5.5e?

An alternate option is to rebuild your 5e character in 5.5e.  This is probably the cleanest solution, especially if you try to be diligent about keeping a similar growth path and set of options (which hopefully haven’t been annoyingly nerfed in 5.5e).  It’s biggest advantage is that there is no question but that it is a 5.5e character when you are done, and you can easily move on from there.

UPDATE: In revising all of my 5e rules posts to also reflect 5.5e rules, my overall analysis is that while most of the major game subsystems are the same (sometimes a bit simplified), the biggest changes are in the details: Spells, Feats, etc. Any conversion from a 5e character to 5.5e is supposed to use the latter’s rules, which means reviewing all those spells very carefully and seeing what you maybe need to tweak.

Some sites that go into changes between the semi-editions:

• Notable changes in 2024 D&D – Payton.Codes – highlights
• Quick Reference: D&D 2024 Rule Changes – Dice Dungeons – highlights
• DnD 5e to 2024 DnD Transition Guide and Change Log: Everything That’s Different in the New 2024 Player’s Handbook – extensive notes
• Summary of D&D 2024 Rules Issues : r/KibblesTasty – extensive notes, focused on problems in the updated rules (and noting where they have been cleaned up in errata)
• DnD quietly axed a stack of optional rules from its DM’s Guide – a number of optional rules that have vanished in the new DMG.
• [OC] 5e 2014/2024 Conversion Guide – UPDATED! : r/DnD – some clever diagrams of how to convert 5e characters to 5.5e characters.

What if I am bringing over from 5e, or using from 5e, a class or  subclass that 5.5e doesn’t support yet?

One of our players wants to run an Artificer in a new campaign. Artificers haven’t been formally added to the 5.5e rules yet (a play test draft has been released, but with unpleasant, I am told, differences from 5e, and further changes are expected until the new class is published).  The same can be true for certain subclasses.

The guidance is if you are building fresh, you take the manual process of building the character as  5.5e one, with timing of class features as in 5.5e (subclasses always come in at 3rd level), but adding the spells and (sub)class features that 5.5e uses.

If converting over from 5e character, and you don’t want to rebuild the character … the rough guidance is to just give them an extra Feat.  Talk with your DM.

What if I have a 5e character of a race (species) that hasn’t been written up for 5.5e yet?

The guidance here parallels that of class/subclasses that haven’t been converted over yet.  Go ahead and use the 5e race with its features, but build it under 5.5e rules (regarding stat bumps, backgrounds, when species features come in, etc.).  Talk with your DM first, of course.  When WotC sells you a new book down the line with the revised version of the species, decide whether to backfill the new changes, or just stick with “classic.”  It’s not going to break the game.

The exception here is for races that will not be converted, in particular, hybrids or “half-” creatures like half-elves and half-orcs, which WotC has decided are too problematic (not without some justification). The recommendation is to choose one thing or the other (make your half-elf either an elf or a human; make your half-orc either an orc or a human, etc.).  If you need backstory around it, have them be adopted.

Here’s a nicely done guidelines of the “minor” things that have to be done differently to use 5.5e to build 5e characters, or 5e rules to build 5.5e characters.  The author has a different threshold of what’s a significant compatibility problem (and glosses over some major spell changes), but it’s another way of looking at this information.

Can I use a 5e scenario / module in 5.5e?

Yes, but …

The module materials will all be written up with 5e rules and versions of monsters and NPCs and 5e spell lists and 5e mechanics.  You can Just Do It as written, or you might want to take the time and effort to update some or all of the material to take advantage of the new way 5.5e handles things like monsters that cast spells, monster races with multiple “classes”/roles, etc.

What about VTT issues?

This is where we get an added layer of complexity. I can’t speak to VTTs other than Roll20, but here’s what I’ve learned so far about 5.5e and that VTT. This centers on the character sheet system, as that is the only place where the system rules are embedded.

1. Implementation of 5.5e into Roll20 is still dodgy.  Or so I’ve been told by at least one player. Not all species / classes / feats that have been brought into 5.5e have made it into the character sheet and advancement features in Roll20.
2. Working in a mixed campaign — one supporting 5e and 5.5e characters and/or NPCs — causes problems.  This is because Roll20 implemented its 5.5e character sheets with a new tech stack, different from what was used with 5e.  The new tech stack removes a ton of cruft from the old one, and is much more easily modifiable as 5.5e progresses, but it doesn’t have the same hooks and API variable names or exposure that the old 5e character sheet had. Thus, macros you have written for 5e may not work with 5.5e characters or NPCs (and vice-versa)

This last is particularly a problem when you want to run with 5.5e rules and characters, but are using a 5e module, as all of its NPCs will be using the 5e character sheet (for NPCs), which Roll20 will get indigestion over (and, again, some macro issues will crop up).  Converting all the monsters to 5.5e would be a huge lift.

I spent about a week trying to overcome those issues. I didn’t come up with a great answer, most of the macro stuff can be worked around (esp. if the only 5e characters are NPCs, meaning the NPCs run with their own set of macros, which often happens).  The best answer may be to hold off running a 5.5e set of characters until (a) more 5.5e material is published and brought into Roll20, and (b) Roll20 makes their 5.5e implementation more robust.

Net-net

All of the above issues are, fundamentally, compatibility issues. They are very similar to what came up when D&D went from 3.0 to 3.5, which is why it’s frustrating for WotC to pretend that there are no significant compatibility issues.

Mixing and matching 5e/5.5e stuff is going to be something of a pain for the next few years. Ultimately, the 5e stuff will die out or be successfully converted (for VTT purposes, if nothing else).  For our table, at least, we’re just going to stick with 5e for the moment, and see where things are in a few years when the next campaign kicks off.