« first day (2428 days earlier)   
00:00 - 13:0013:00 - 16:00

1:21 PM
I suppose in the category of "nearest object of a particular kind, such as a certain kind of ...tool," the nearest sheet of lead would probably count.
Exception-based rulesets are "fun."
@BESW That could however be the sheet of metal at a blacksmith's shop or serving as the base of someone's oven, so it might not be the one blocking your view to the object you really want to locate.
@BESW "Fun" is fun.
You're also assuming that is a sheet of lead, and not a block, misshapen lump, or seahorse.
Also, D&D seems to be historically bad about the role of intent and context in determining objective criteria.
I thoroughly enjoy playing exception-based systems with people as long as there is a firm understanding that we're trying to deconstruct and hack the system and everyone is on board
1:24 PM
this seems fairly clear-cut, though. There is a limitation to the spell. If you try really hard and use the "it doesn't say I can't" as a way to get around it, then it probably isn't meant to be a workaround.
(See: permitted delayed-action spell triggers.)
1:47 PM
@NautArch There is, after all, no rule that says dogs can't play pro football.
@Yuuki Are you invoking the Air Bud Rule?
"It doesn't say I can't" is basically the generalized Air Bud Rule after all.
I'd say it's hard to decide when someone is using that style to do something cool or to nerf. But in this case, it's a nerf.
2:18 PM
Re: the Detect Object Q, I think folks are missing the point a bit and talking past each other. The description section shows that visual description is the metric, as you have to have seen the object within 30' for a specific object. However, worded correctly "Find lead used to hide an object from detection" could lead to fun stuff. That's a specific tool akin to "find a lock used to hold a prison door shut" and may be within purview of the spell.
@Chemus what about Talos? (In re: this question.) I'm by no means a FR-lore expert--my 2e FR campaign box is still unopened!
My brain doesn't work today
@Chemus I disagree. Locate Object has a very specific set of criteria and a specific way to stop it from working. I do not think that a description of possible location (that is still unknown) would be acceptable. As someone else said, would you accept "locate the cloak of the assassin in the crowd" when you don't actually know what that cloak looks like?
@Chemus It depends on the context. If somebody is trying to do something cool or creative with it, I'm more inclined to play along. If they start trying to fiddle with wording and interpretation to get around the limitation of the spell, so that they can find a specific object hidden by lead shielding, I'm disinclined to play along
2:24 PM
@NautArch No, the assassin's cloak is not a specific tool. But a mask is, or disguise paint is, or a poison dagger is, etc. A chest designed to obscure its contents from divination is a particular type of tool.
the Q is poorly worded, and it's an XY problem, IMO
@Chemus what does specific tool have to do with it? A piece of lead is not a tool either. Are you saying there is a difference between one unknown object in an unknown location and another? I mean, if the difference is utility, then it's the cloak being worn.
but you still don't know what it looks like OR where it is. It fails both tests for locate object.
neither a familiar object nor a general one.
And you're still making the assumption that you know what that piece of lead looks like. You do not. THe player is having to make a decision if the object simply isn't there (form the original null result on the locate object) or if it's blocked by lead.
@Chemus I sure hope that chest itself is masked from divination magic :p
@Chemus So Locate Object only finds things in the PHB?
Or DMG maybe?
@NautArch That's where XY comes in. Markovchain wants to find lead used ti hide his described object and that isn't supported. However finding a particular type of pbject, say a lead lined box or something is supported by the spell. You may not like how it metagames, but it's a particular type of object.
@Yuuki Those's be houserules as far as I can see.
@Chemus But outside of the PHB, what makes Locate Object able to detect a mask but not an assassin's cloak?
2:34 PM
@Chemus I agree - the problem is that there still remains two issues: 1)knowledge of the general type of object (lead box/sheet/block/etc) AND 2)that it actually exists. EVen then, the closest of that type of object will be found. And if it's general enough, there's very likely a closer object than the thingyou're looking for.
@Yuuki I'd say LO can locate the closest "cloak" or "mask". BUt not an "assassin's cloak" or "assassin's mask".
Tangent: how do you guys do critical hits? Roll additional dice or double result dice?
@Yuuki Unless you've seen the assassin's cloak, you would have to ask for a cloak and get the nearest one. If you knew it was a blue cloak, or a reversible one, then you could ask for that. Who's wearing it is not part of the spell, since the spell uses physical makeup to ID a known object, it should use the same to ID a general one.
Not looking for a canonical answer, just what you guys do and why.
@Yuuki we double damage dice for 5e
@Yuuki I usually double, but rolling twice is fairer
2:36 PM
mostly because that's the rule
@Yuuki Roll extra dice usually. We like hearing more things go click on the table.
personally, I"d prefer double max damage :)
@NautArch over double min damage, ofc?
@Chemus of course!
we also do critical fumbles. Mainly becuase of that I think critical hits should be worth more.
@Adam I do like hearing more dice roll. But I might try double result when playing OIP and rolling additional when playing IRL.
Double result seems to feel more like a critical hit when you're not actually rolling more dice and instead are clicking buttons.
Since rolling 5 for base damage and then rolling 1 on your critical damage kinda sucks.
2:39 PM
@Chemus And that's the thing. The Q argues that the description of the object doesn't need to be physical. That is, location should be just as valid a descriptor as, say, color or material makeup. And I don't agree with that assessment.
@NautArch I'm thinking about coming up with minor crit fumble/hit effect tables.
Or alternately adding crit hit effects depending on how the player describes their attack.
@Yuuki rolling 1 on your main hit dice and doubling that to two still kind of sucks
@Adam Personally doesn't feel as bad as rolling 5 and then rolling a 1 though.
But that's just me.
@Yuuki I think that's a neat idea. I think minor effects can make it fun. We do major and it's frightening. Especially for my paladin on Haste that can get 3-5 attack rolls.
@Yuuki And I would rather have the extra dice, because odds are it would roll higher than the 1 that the first die got
I'm sure it averages out to the same thing in the end, so it really doesn't matter. I just really like rolling more dice :p
2:43 PM
> "I lunge with my sword and slash the goblin across the chest!"
> *critical hit*
> "Your blade sings a deadly song of steel and rends the goblin from shoulder to hip. Grievously wounded, the goblin seems to loosen its grip on its club."
> *goblin takes -1 on next attack*
@Adam yeah - our table loves rolling dice. It's why we also have allowed GWF rerolls of 1s and 2s on smites, etc.
@Adam Same, but I feel like the effect is lost when playing OIP so I'll keep additional rolls to IRL play.
@Adam So my earlier assertion of "Box used to prevent detection" is not correct by my own metric of physical description. Thus it's have to be "diamond necklace" or "a lead lined box" or even "lead sheeting". The generic object still needs to be identified, and the spell starts with phys descr.
@Yuuki Yuuki, 2 dice is more likely to roll average, and 1 die doubled is swingier. Usually, swinginess favors the Opposition, and consistency favors the players.
I know this. More dice is pretty much always more consistent than less dice. But from a purely emotional standpoint, I've always felt worse rolling 5 and then 1 on the crit rather than rolling a 1 or 2 and doubling that.
made an anydice for it. Assumes 20 str, 1 attack, greatsword and no fighting styles
2:48 PM
@Adam And if the players get that second one, so d othe monsters...thwack
@Chemus Yup. And knowing what type/shape of lead is being used to hide the true object from LO is still an unknown. Making guessing it pretty darn hard. ANd harder still to have that particular object be the closest to you.
@NautArch How much lead sheeting is within 1000' of the wiz?
@Chemus Who knows? How do you know it's a lead sheet obstructing the object?
All you know is that your original LO for the object came up Null.
So it takes a good 20 questions player to cast LO a few times, and they can possibly get what was supposed to be occluded.
Again I'm not arguing that 'lead occluding me and this specific object' is valid, but if my LO fails, I'll look for lead on the second one, if I'm sure that it should be here.
(the object I'm lookin for)
@Chemus And that's not a bad idea. However I don't think "lead" is enough. THat's not an object. And then 20 questions begins with your available spell slots.
2:56 PM
- "I cast Locate Object as a 9th level Spell"
- "Dude, why? You could just use Wish at that point..."
- "You're right! I cast Wish and use its power to replicate the effect of the spell Locate Object."
Then I guess it's up to the DM as to what the prevalence of Lead is in their world.
@NautArch True enough. However I'd start with a lead-lined box, or a box made of lead, or a lead pipe (which likely exists in an urban env, and probably in a dungeon, or even a farm). After that it'd be kinda hard to find.
@Chemus I'm guessing that IF there is any sort of plumbing in D&D, that the pipes would be lead. If you're in a town, I'd think that'd be a problem. Other than that - I don't know how common lead-lined boxes would be.
@NautArch Re: the boxes, exactly! So if LO fails, a savvy wizard who needs to find that object might burn one more slot looking for taht box.
But I'd also look at it like a means to protect your goods. We put stuff in safes. I'm guessing that (because of Locate Objects) people hide things in lead boxes.
or they would in my world. Known way to get around people getitng my stuff? Yeah, i'm using that.
3:04 PM
@NautArch So a magical thief would use LO to find safes, then loot them, destroy them and look for more. I understand. That's not RAW, though, that's setting.
@Chemus Yeah - that'd be fine. I'd have no problems with that. THat seems RAW though?
How much lead is lying around is setting, unless the books say how common lead is.
Yeah, although Lead is a pretty common metal. But I could see that as setting dependent. My gut is to say it is common mainly so as not to create an 'easy button' for locate objects. It's already just a 2nd level spell. Don't nerf it's one minor limitation.
RAW is "The LO spell says I can look for a particular type of object. I want to find an object that hides another object; how would I do that?"
I'ma put taht as a comment in the Q, and see how that flies.
@Chemus that isn't' quite the RAW. Possible objects are: 1)An object that is familiar to you or 2)a particular TYPE of object (such as a certain type of jewelry, weapon, furniture, jewelry, tool or weapon.) A box that hides another is not a particular type. That is a function. I wouldn't rule a weapon that cuts things as a possible type. I'd say you need to decide sword, rapier, etc. Hiding isn't a type of object, it's a use FOR a type of object. THe type of object would be "lead box".
3:12 PM
@NautArch Which is why I tried to generalize the Q: I want to get around this limitation, how can I use the rules to do so?
@Chemus That may actually be the better way to ask that. It takes out the "I think there's a workaround" and instead provides ideas on what you can do within the rules rather than trying to bend/break them.
Not that I want a third question on this, but I think it's a good idea to post it.
No, I'm not gonna steal Markovchain's thunder; I just posted a comment in his Q. Perhaps it'll work for him.
I hope it does, but based on his questions/answers I don't think he wants that :(
he's looking for the easy button
I often get blinders on myself when I have a bone in my mouth (hmm what other metaphors can I jam in there?)\
@Chemus "bit" may be the more appropriate thing to go with the Blinders.
but I don't judge
3:20 PM
I was hoping to find more different metaphors for my metaphorical cocktail...
00:00 - 13:0013:00 - 16:00

« first day (2428 days earlier)