I was thinking about playing a Runechild sorcerer in my next campaign but I’m slightly confused about the charging of runes from converting sorcery points and spell slots. Couldn’t I just keep going back and forth with them until I charge them all? That’s not as intended. I would say such abuses wouldn’t charge any additional runes.

— Matthew Mercer (@matthewmercer) September 20, 2018

#dnd tip: DMs, occasionally add fantastical events or monsters to the background of a session. It keeps the players wondering and makes the game world come alive. Artist: Bjarke Pedersen In Everquest they called these guys “zone sweepers”. They were monsters way higher level than the rest of the zone around it and were there to keep players on their toes. Having a death knight wander through a forest on her nightmare just to freak out level 3 PCs is awesome. pic.twitter.com/Oo7tjki6eO

— Grand DM (@Grand_DM) October 16, 2018

One of my fave moments from an AD&D game I ran – 1st level PCs hiding in the forest as a hill giant war band passed them by.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 17, 2018

how do the drow view and treat Wild Magic sorcerers? If their wild side manifested while in training at sorcere in Menzoberranzan? Cheers and thanks. If they're Lolth/Lloth worshippers, as Menzo is, wild magic is a threat to order/the status quo. If manifested by a male training in magic, probably extermination for the male…unless manifestation was "fairly" private, and someone wants to spirit him away (imprison him) to…

— Ed Greenwood (@TheEdVerse) October 5, 2018

…be their future "secret weapon." ;}
But that's just my take on it; Bob created Menzo and has shown us its rich history, and is THE authority on that drow city.

— Ed Greenwood (@TheEdVerse) October 5, 2018

So here’s the first part of my two-weapon fighting house rule. Note that at this stage I’m ignoring the effect of feats, will get to those later:

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

If you wield two light weapons you gain +1 AC and you can make one extra attack. All your attacks on your turn take a -4 penalty. Penalty drops to -2 if you have the Extra Attack feature, -1 if that feature gives you 2 more attacks, 0 if it gives you 3.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

You can forgo the extra attack to increase the AC bonus to +2 and ignore the attack penalty.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

I feel like dual wielding aims for flexibility, and that’s what I’m aiming at here. It’s a little more complex but lets the player feel like they have a lot of options.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

Hmm… doesn’t the +2 AC make (non magic) shields obsolete since shields get the same AC but none of the additional flexibility? It’s at the cost of a light weapon, so you’re dealing less damage than if you went longsword and shield

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

Could I ask what the reasoning behind -4 to hit with all attacks is? Seems like TWF in the past favored main hand w/ off-hand as the weaker hit, -4 seems a bit harsh to impose on main hand as well in this instance. TWF is *super* good at low levels, setting aside feats and class features. Since levels 1 – 4 are all about single attacks, it turns you into two characters.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

So it’s a light weapon + shield if you want, or an extra attack that’s only worthwhile against extremely high or low ACs? Essentially, though as I think about it might be interesting to allow choice after first attack. That opens up possibilities a lot more.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

Quickly calculated that it’s worth doing two attacks at -4 if you have >50% chance to hit with one attack. That’s not so bad given current game math, I concede. But I would go even simpler. Use your offhand for defence and get +1 AC, use it for attack and get a second chance to hit iff your first attempt misses.

— Chris Field (@chrisnightwing) October 24, 2018

It’s tricky – while things might have changed, during 5e design testers consistently hated any implementation of TWF that didn’t give +1 attack. Fun design constraint.

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

I see, in the house ruling do you allow the off-hand to have a full damage bonus or is it just the damage die as per PHB ruling? Full damage bonus

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

Does your ability mod to damage get added to all attacks or just the first? All

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018

Why not treat it as one attack w/ bonus dmg for the off hand weapon?

E.g. TWF attack w/ rapier & dagger does 1d8+1d4+Dex bonus. Use the ability bonus for the primary weapon for attack & damage.

Alternatively TWF parry gives +1 AC vs melee while foregoing extra damage Tested poorly when we tried it – people like getting that extra attack

— Mike Mearls, but Spooky (@mikemearls) October 24, 2018