« first day (3357 days earlier)      last day (40 days later) » 
01:00 - 19:0019:00 - 00:00

1:00 AM
7
Q: Simulating these special dice on more regular dice

ErikSo I've got a game that uses special dice for its resolution. Basically when making an opposed check, each side rolls a bunch of them based on the relevant trait, and whoever rolls most points wins. The margin by which you win matters for resolution, usually. But I'd like to simulate the resolut...

 
1:39 AM
No Rolemaster tomorrow :( Gm is on late-shifts
I don't suppose any one has a Big List of Rolemaster Herbs, just lying about, in easy-to-add-to-database format? Trying to assist my GM in handing out useful stuff for my PC :)
 
2:34 AM
@Ben that Diablo IV site now has a little more meat, but not a lot more. I think you said something about that guy in the trailer video, whose hand Lilith grasped as she descended, is Rathma? (I guess he's a deathless Nephelim?)
 
2
Q: What spells could cure a stroke?

user55434Last session an NPC suffered a significant stroke, with the typical symptoms of partial paralysis of one side of the body, drooping face on that side, slurred speech, and so on. However, a stroke doesn't inflict a mechanical condition that could be cured by lesser restoration. Because it isn't ne...

 
Ben
2:49 AM
@KorvinStarmast Rathma was "the first" necromancer. The key thing about him was that he was all about "the balance", between heaven and hell. Maintaining the balance, and never letting one side gain vantage over the other.
The other fundamental thing was that he saw Lilith as a threat to Sanctuary, due to her cunning and instability.
> During the events of the Sin War, Rathma sensed the return of his mother Lilith, so he started searching for a way to stop her.
So the behaviour he is exhibiting in the trailer is extremely contrary to all of that.
 
3:12 AM
@Ben So maybe that isn't Rathma?
 
Ben
I'm inclined to believe that. However, the rumour is that it is Rathma, and Blizzard has come up with some reason why he's behaving in this way, as someone went "datamining", to find that one of the shots in the trailer refers to the character as "Rathma"
 
3:26 AM
@Ben Well, "blessed mother" is a hint, or it is mis-direction - he greets Lilith at the end of the trailer that way. She is was Rathma's mother. There is the problem that an Angel, albeit renegade, was the root cause of the latest threat to humanity in Sanctuary. (Malthael). So perhaps, lore wise, Rathma awakens from his slumber/hibernation/cave and calls upon Lilith to be brought home to protect her creations.
That is one of her characteristics in the lore, so far: she is very attached to Sanctuary and those descended from her who live there, right?
 
Ben
@KorvinStarmast She is the "mother" of all humanity. This could simply be a "title".
 
@Ben Also true. I'd hope that isn't Rathma, but a follower of some kind or a cult leader ...
 
Ben
And since Rathma was the one that banished her to the Void the first time, I don't think he'd be quite so... grateful that she has returned.
 
@Ben Or he has an oedipus complex ...
 
Ben
Probably more like "you're only here cos I need you"
 
3:30 AM
@Ben Or that
"Mom, the other kids are ruining everything!"
 
Ben
I'm using a lot of "quotation" aren't I? Haha
 
I like the use of that trident, which is the same symbol as the Crusader, that is in the trailer on the various walls and symbols. Something to do with the triune ... back to lore ...
 
Ben
I think they were hinting at this in the DLC; the adventure mode opens up a sub-plot based around the "blood cult". Which the ritual uses to summon lilith
 
3:52 AM
@Ben Yeah, and there we find Veridian ... I ran act II a few times the other day to reacquaint myself with that.
 
 
2 hours later…
5:50 AM
6
Q: Has there been clarification of the Random Weight Table in the Player's Handbook?

SeraphsWrathI was reading through the Player's Handbook today to make a character when I saw the Random Height and Weight tables. Looking at that, I saw that the weight, for a Tiefling, was 110 lbs * (2d4). Surely, I thought, a 220-880 lb tiefling is a little bit much compared to their 4'11" - 6'1" height, s...

 
 
1 hour later…
6:52 AM
2
Q: What are the ramifications of Aasimar PCs being Outsider (Native)?

JoshuaDI'm playing an Aasimar. They are the type Outsider (Native). I wanted to find out what impact that has on the game. So I looked up outsiders, and I saw this: Proficient with all simple and martial weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry. Skill points equal to 6 + Int modifier (...

 
Ben
 
 
2 hours later…
8:36 AM
Morning all
 
 
1 hour later…
9:56 AM
@Ben lmao, that's fantastic
 
10:39 AM
3
Q: Do I add damage bonuses when casting a spell from a magic weapon?

AzazelIn 5e, if a spell is only learned as a part of having a weapon with the ability to cast it, because it is technically an attack with the weapon and not me directly casting the spell, would I add the damage bonus to the damage roll? I have a great axe that allows me to cast call lightning 3 times...

 
 
4 hours later…
2:21 PM
Hmm... didn't questions being bumped by the community user use to show a banner to that effect on it?
(This was recently bumped and it's only visible through the edit history, which is less obvious)
 
RE: that question about random height and weight.

Dwarves seem oddly boyant, capping out at 211 pounds.
 
@goodguy5 What volume is a dwarf? Do we have a question on that somewhere?
 
Though, admittedly, that'd be a 4'8" character weighing more than I do at 5'10"
 
@goodguy5 We recently played tunnels and trolls, and we discovered that dwarfs in that world sink. Ther are made partly of stone.
 
According to my calculations, Dwarves are like a 3rd denser than humans. (using my body, and not the table)
 
2:29 PM
@Someone_Evil About 76 decibels unless they get excited.
 
@BESW what about if they're drunk?
 
@Carcer I believe that is the traditional way of exciting a dwarf
 
@PierreCathé morning!
@Carcer Drinking a dwarf is not recommended.
 
2:47 PM
4
Q: Does the patient need to be immobile during the tending action from the Healer feat?

KilrathiSlyCan someone with the Healer feat use a healing kit to provide healing from the second benefit of the feat, even on a patient currently engaged in battle with an opponent? To me, it does not make sense, but nothing in the feat's description mentions that the target creature receiving the healing ...

 
Should this question get a houserules tag?
and howdy everyone!
 
hello
 
[wave]
 
how are you
 
@NautArch I don't think so. They haven't added a house-rule for how strokes happen, they've used it for a story point, and are asking what spells interact with that effect.
 
2:58 PM
@Someone_Evil That's reasonable. Wasn't sure because the stroke effect is a houserule, and how to handle seemed to coincide.
Whether or not they 'officially' added seems a bit irrelevant. It's been added.
also noticing it's from 2015. Not sure I care enough :P
 
/me waves.
 
@NautArch Wait, did you link to the wrong one? (I'm seeing 20 hours ago)
 
@Someone_Evil noe, had another question. open. it's that one. So baack on thinking it is kinda a good tag.
need moar coffee
 
Almost done with preparing for a Genesys one-shot. Characteristics, skills and Talents done, still fiddling with the inventory. Found the Talent pyramid progression mildly interesting, but ultimately resulting in too much filtering through sand in search of pearls.
 
I don't think every instance someone throws in something that isn't directly supported by the system rules warrants the house-rules tag. It will dilute that tag beyond usability
 
3:05 PM
@Someone_Evil I guess I'll post a meta about it. The core of this question is about their stroke houerule and how to resolve it.
and that's the description of the tag
I'm also still clearly unsure as to where the line is between idea generation and not. If this question was not form the DM, the answer would be "ask your DM". But since it is the DM, they seem to be soliciting ideas. /shrug.
 
The list of possible ideas is bounded by published spells and classes though. It's not asking for how to continue this story beat, they're asking which things do a certain thing. It's just that the system doesn't care that much about that thing.
 
@Someone_Evil SO it's only idea generation if you aren't using things found in the books?
 
To me, tagging that question with falls into the area of not necessary, but not necessarily wrong either.
 
IMHO it shouldn't get the tag
 
But my gut is telling me that it doesn't fit really.
 
3:16 PM
I think i'm unclear on when to use the tag. Looking at existing questions, it does seem to fit. But not a big enough to for me to argue it, either.
Maybe a better question would be (although too late now with answers) "Does a stroke count as a disease with regard to healing options?"
 
@NautArch I was trying to say that it 1) has a specific thing it is looking for and 2) a bounded set within which those may exist. If you loose either of those it quickly stops being a stackable.
 
It's just hard because they've created a mechanic (the stroke) and they're asking how to adjudicate it.
@Someone_Evil So we can ask idea generation questions as longas they are well enough bounded?
 
@NautArch but the thing is they haven't created a mechanic
as described in question and comments, they've just had an NPC suffer a stroke
 
@Carcer Okay, so tell me about this stroke mechanic they didn't create and how there are rules for it in-game.
 
> Both of these spells revive a creature into a new body if the old one does not exist (some disassembly would thus be required)
 
3:19 PM
when prompted, they had ideas about what they'd do to mechanically represent that if they had to (in terms of what effect it has on game statistics)
 
Rereading it, y'all are right :)
 
but they haven't actually ruled anything about that.
 
They've specified it's not a disease nor a condition that existing things can resolve.
That really does leave a very specific set of options.
 
@NautArch If you argue questions like this are idea generation questions, then yes.
 
well, "not necessarily a disease"
I see it more as they've explained their reasoning for why they didn't think those would work, but I don't see the question as effectively ruling those out if it can be compellingly argued that the stroke is a disease.
nonetheless
 
3:22 PM
I imagine they're asking because they expect their players to try to cure it and either want explanations they can pass to their players for why certain spells wouldn't work or know if they should make up an plot eventuality for if a certain spell works and is cast by the players.
 
> The rules help describe the effects of the disease and how it can be cured, but the specifics of how a disease works aren't bound by a common set of rules. [...] What matters is the story you want to tell. (DMG p. 256)
 
@Carcer very true. But then we're trying to apply a real-world thing to a game system that isn't so great at simulationism. That's where it's tricky for me. A stroke is classified as a disease.
But that's the real-world medical definition, not the game definition.
If the DM is introducing it, it's also up to them to define it. Once defined, we can provide options. But if they're unsure how to define, I'm not sure that's answerable by us?
but maybe there isn't a real differnce between realw orld medical definition and game definition.
 
If the game doesn't make a specific definition, the real world one applies
 
the game does not rigorously define diseases as far as I can tell - Someone_Evil's quote there is quite telling
 
There's also the issue that a stroke is a disease, but it's effects are acute events. CUring a stroke doesn't undo the damage done by the events.
But now we're also trying to argue real-world simulationsim into 5e. And that does get tricky.
 
3:27 PM
indeed
it seems like if you got to someone who was having a stroke then an effect which cured disease on them immediately should prevent long-term symptoms
but a stroke survivor maybe needs something more powerful (like regeneration) to undo the damage
tbh I'd let greater restoration do all of it
 
I'm not actually sure that you if the physical damage has been done, it can be undone medically.
 
healing the kinds of ill-health that aren't just pure hit point damage is GR's whole point
 
I don't think GR would do it. GR is very specific in the things it does. And the lingering injuries table stuff doesn't have GR fix any of it.
 
@NautArch well, we know there isn't really an effective treatment for stroke damage after the fact
 
@Carcer Right, so if the creature is showing signs of damage, the damage is done.
If they're having a stroke, but not showing any of the effects, then I guess stabilization would be possible.
 
3:33 PM
@NautArch but it is mitigated by prevent further damage which makes recovery much harder
cause people do get better, after strokes, neuroplasticity and all that
and the less damage done the faster and better that recovery is
 
@Carcer that depends on how the DM is treating it (which we don't know.) Are there stages that have untreated stroke getting worse? If so, then yes, stabilizing before reaching next gate would be an option.
 
@NautArch I mean, I was just talking factually
 
@NautArch As my various friends and relatives who have suffered strokes can attest, a stroke is an event, and the afflictions that follow (which vary with the stroke's severity) are indeed impairments of function. That's the point that Martin made with reference to that definition, and I think it's a fair point.
Some of them have recovered fully (my uncle was one such) and most of the others are at varying levels of "ongoing impariment of function"
 
I'm going to change the last sentence of the questin about "asking for advice".
@KorvinStarmast Absolutely. But it's not the curing of the disease (stroke) that helps recovery. The physical damage to the body is separate at that point.
 
@Someone_Evil it did! I guess that went away with the post notices update
 
3:38 PM
@NautArch I think it's about rulings, not house rules. My two cents.
@NautArch Lesser Restoration removes full paralysis. Partial paralysis would seem to be well below LR's power level. ;-)
 
@doppelgreener I figured, I just haven't found it mentioned anywhere on MSE (didn't spend too much time looking)
 
@KorvinStarmast /shrug. TO me, rulings are about how to address odd situations in existing rules. The stroke isn't an existing rule.
@KorvinStarmast and that's a really good point!
 
@NautArch agree.
 
@Someone_Evil I found one report mentioning a translation issue with the old banner, which was enough to convince me it wasn't just my memory playing tricks. :)
 
But you could also say removes paralysis/LR should then be powerful enough for some lingering injuries, which it ain't.
 
3:43 PM
@NautArch I have added the DMG citation to my answer, since it fits where I was going and Someone_Evil kindly found the page ref for me. 8^D
@NautArch Since lingering injuries are an optional rule, what removes them is also the DM's option.
And I am the only one who pointed to Cleric Divine Intervention as a potential option. Yay cleric ability that is rarely used ...
 
@KorvinStarmast Very true, but when all of them require pretty powerful healing,it seems offering a lower one doesn't really fit the system.
Yeah, divine intervention seems reasonable :P
A question I may put in comments is "Why did you introduce the stroke effect? What was the purpose and what was your goal in the mechanic?"
 
@NautArch I challenge that assumption that a stroke needs such powerful magic to heal. For goodness sake, *Character Death is solved by Revivify, a third level spell if you get there in time. Seems that a second level spell or LoH fits partial paralysis just fine.
 
@KorvinStarmast Sure, but why not have the other lingering injuries resolvable by lower level magic? And revivify is only option if you get to them in 1 minute.
 
And with all that said, I love Pyrotechnical's answer, even though it calls for a 7th level spell. I think the reasoning is air tight.
 
that's the trade-off with that spell. Having the material component and doing it in time.
It's basically a defib device :P
 
3:47 PM
 
@NautArch Gentle repose first ... right?
(By the way, I have used that a total of once: Gentle Repose/Revivify. A few years ago).
 
huh. does gentle repose work for revivify?
 
@KorvinStarmast You're welcome I guess
 
Yes. We had quite a discussion about it at GiTP.
 
34
Q: Does Gentle Repose extend the time limit for casting Revivify?

eyecosahedronThe spell revivify returns a creature to life "that has died within the last minute." [PHB 272] The spell gentle repose "effectively extends the time limit on raising the target from the dead, since days spent under the influence of this spell don't count against the time limit of spells such as...

thats situational. But HUGELY situational.
 
3:49 PM
@Someone_Evil That makes sense. I agree with the reasoning.
 
@NautArch Crawfod said Yes, FWIW.
And I think my answer is well enough supported.
 
This information would only be relevant and meaningful to a fairly small crowd of power users like you and I.
 
I think urho's limitation is a good one: The one caveat I'd impose is the corpse needs to be Gentle Repose'd within the minute in order to still be viable. After that minute elapses (so long as you're using Revivify as your resurrection technique) you're essentially trying to preserve already-spoiled goods
 
@doppelgreener Yeah, I guess we'll just have to learn to check the questions edit history for a bump when something has been "edited by community"
 
that is descriptively wonderful.
 
3:52 PM
@doppelgreener heh, as this comment observes
 
@Someone_Evil as before! i think there was a point "bumped by community" didn't even get a post history entry so we just had to infer it.
@KorvinStarmast that is the very comment, apparently i forgot it said that within seconds lol
 
@doppelgreener That sounds unhelpful
 
@Gwideon So I played Halo over the weekend because the MCC released on PC/Steam and that reminded of my eternal gripe that the post-3 Halo games adopted this characterization of Halsey which in return reminded me of this.
 
@Someone_Evil Yaakov's comment?
 
oh boy! Hat season!
 
3:54 PM
@KorvinStarmast No, but had time to edit in the reply pointer
 
@Yuuki I think i'm getting close to the end of Mass Effect 2(maybe? finishing up squad and about to take the omega relay). Debating about the new SW game, Red Dead 2, or start Halo.
 
@NautArch New SW game is fun if slightly linear (if that's an issue for you). I've heard Red Dead has some optimization problems. And Halo is currently Reach-only and the input feels a bit slow.
 
@NautArch The SW game is OK; I've played it a bunch.
It feels like a game where everything got 50-75% complete before it was pushed out the door.
 
Also, if you've played other Soulsborne games, you might need some time to adjust to the new SW's parrying system.
 
@Yuuki have not.
 
3:57 PM
@doppelgreener That feels like a good 10-15% more progress than EA's normal fare.
 
@Yuuki Also, no lootboxes!
 
@doppelgreener Hmm, maybe i'll wait for updates and do Red Dead or Halo.
 
I might need to mess with my sensitivities on Halo. I'm having some difficulty on Normal when I used to be able to solo Legendary.
Or maybe it's just been awhile.
 
It's a game where they obviously lacked budget in a handful of nonvital places and needed to go back for a second pass (e.g. you collect lore around the world, but all the lore entries you get resembles placeholder text more than it resembles something someone put thought and love into), and virtually every system or subsystem in the game shows signs of needing a second pass for polish or feature improvement.
But every single part of the game is pretty decent and probably would have been absolutely excellent if it had been given that second pass and/or budget.
 
@NautArch My son wanted me to enjoy Mass Effect as much as he did, so we put the first two on my PC. And as I got into it, I remembered why I hate First Person Shooters. I just don't like them; and they give me headaches. Which is a shame since so many people have gotten so much enjoyment out of that game apparently.
 
4:00 PM
Yeah, and it's pretty obvious why they lacked budget. EA has been on record for saying that they don't think singleplayer games are viable anymore.
 
@KorvinStarmast Ah, i very much enjoy the first person/third person shooter (single player.) and I"m a big fan of cover-mechanic games, too.
 
And the game doesn't have microtransactions so EA would probably care even less about it.
 
Really enjoying ME2, though.
 
So it is a game that is Pretty Good, Not Great, and shows a lot of potential and missed opportunity. Which makes it above average for a licensed game, and above average for an EA game, and kinda average-to-above-average in general for games... but when you're buying a new game there's no reason to settle for merely "above average".
 
@NautArch he liked all 3, though he did say that the controversey over the ending to 3 was sorta understandable ... but I asked him to not spoil it for me. In case I ever get over my aversion to FPS
 
4:03 PM
@KorvinStarmast Some games give me headaches too, or even motion sickness. I've been trying to figure it out. Some things I've noticed help: turn off motion blur, turn off film grain, turn off head-bobbing. Also, the central reticle in the center can be absolutely critical for avoiding motion sickness apparently, so if a first-person or over-the-shoulder game lacks a reticle that can be a factor.
(motion blur and film grain are pretty weird trends to include anyway; they're basically "let's make the software do extra work to make the visual quality worse to simulate cinematic shortcomings of real-life cameras that we're not even using!")
 
@doppelgreener even bigger reason for me to wait until price drops, too :P
@doppelgreener The half-life 2 scene where you're piloting the boat gave me motion sickness.
 
@doppelgreener I occasionally suffered from simulator sickness when the display moved but the simulator motion emulators did not. I suspect that is related to my headaches for FPS games.
 
just to be clear this is Star Wars: Fallen Order
@KorvinStarmast That makes sense. You would probably have an absolutely terrible time in VR.
 
Is this going to be opinion-based? I don't know enough about FR to say, but the question seems like it could be different for any individual answering.
 
@NautArch right now it's just unclear, so i'm closing
 
4:11 PM
@doppelgreener that works, too :P
 
@doppelgreener Yeah, never gonna buy that.
 
Really it's because games play at 60 fps and as we know from movies and TV, the human eye operates at 24 fps. Those extra 36 fps is too much information for your brain to process, causing headaches. /s
 
Any recs for a PC bluetooth headset? My 7 year old is asking for one when he plays rocket league. I'm going to limit his use with it for only when he's playing with his friends (at least until I can hear the chatter and whether or not it's appropriate.)
Heh, SSD should be frustrated as the e6 answer gets updated again :P
 
@KorvinStarmast There's something called Sensory Conflict Theory: if your eyes say your head is moving, but your inner ear says you're not moving at all, that can make a person feel pretty sick.
Some people get nauseous; one of the leading theories being your brain concludes that the only possible explanation is you must have eaten poison berries so it's time to get rid of them before they do more damage.
@NautArch Are you on Windows? If so, avoid bluetooth headsets entirely.
 
@doppelgreener I am. Different rec?
WIndows 10
 
4:19 PM
Or at least, if you do, pick ones that have a USB antenna rather than directly using the bluetooth interface.
The bluetooth interface on Windows is shockingly bad and makes input and output (i.e. microphone vs audio) fight for bandwidth.
 
@doppelgreener I do need wireless of some variety, though. We play on the TV, so there's a big distance between the couch and the PC.
 
@doppelgreener I get that in Halo, but not in Mass Effect, Darksiders or any of the Dragon Age series. Unless I take a long break, then they give me mild disorientation if I go too long at first.
 
@doppelgreener yeah, that is a contributor to sim sickness. learned that when I was in the Navy and was doing flight training stuff ...
... and I think it also contributes to sea sickness
 
@NautArch looks like it's relatively common for PC headsets to come with a USB antenna though for the reasons stated :)
 
@doppelgreener Feeling old, is Tom's Hardware still a legit site for reviews?
 
4:29 PM
@NautArch Absolutely
 
@doppelgreener cool. never know when a site that was once trusted becomes co-opted.
i also don't want to spend a lot, but that seems to be tough if you want wireless.
Like $80 seems the price.
 
yeah $80-100
 
@JohnP Halo is first-person, but Mass Effect and Dragon Age are third-person.
 
That ouija board question sent me down a rabbit hole
 
I haven't played Darksiders so I don't know about that.
 
4:37 PM
@Yuuki Third person as well. That actually did not occur to me.
I'm horrible at FPS anyway, so I rarely play them.
 
I play a bunch, partly because my friend group enjoys them.
 
@JohnP I often flip back and forth in the fallout games between first and third.
 
@JohnP Darksiders? FPS?
 
FPS - First Person Shooter.
 
yep, I meant why you define Darksiders an FPS.
Doesn't seem the most fitting genre
 
4:39 PM
Uh...I don't.
 
oh, then I misunderstood. Sorry
 
no worries. I had 3 midnight shifts last week and a long laborious weekend, so I'm a bit muddled at the moment.
 
Game genres are a mess in general. It's a mix-up of technical descriptions (first/third-person -> camera view), gameplay (shooter, beat-em-up, simulators), and thematic elements (fantasy, sci-fi, romance, adventure).
 
wow, outta votes already. later gators ...
 
@KorvinStarmast We're only worth talking to if you have votes left?
 
4:43 PM
@KorvinStarmast You're the only person I talk to about LoL on this channel but that new Soraka skin looks ridiculously good.
 
@Yuuki yeah that is true
so i got elite dangerous
 
@Gwideon I know the Fall of Reach book is non-canon now, but it was canon for several years and the opening chapters have Halsey questioning the morality of her project essentially creating child soldiers.
IIRC.
 
@Yuuki Ok, so now I have to check it out. My son has been bugging me to play LoL with him, so I guess I need to log back in.
 
It's not live yet but here's a video preview.
 
@Yuuki yeah
 
4:46 PM
@JohnP If I can't vote for anything, and I have edited about what I think I need to, maybe another SE site needs my attention.
@Gwideon I have a bunch of Riot Points, I ought to get that. Nice one. (I don't play her very often)
 
5:03 PM
@Yuuki Somehow I misread that as "looks ridiculously bad" when that is literally the opposite of what you said...
 
5:15 PM
@Gwideon Ooo, I haven't played that in a long time.
 
5:35 PM
@Yuuki i've been having alot of fun. trying to get to an imperial system so I can get the imperial courier
 
@Gwideon The Diamondback Explorer is my favorite ship because it's relatively cheap, does everything passably well, and looks good to boot.
 
6:03 PM
huh. So The Bandit Captain is on page 344 of the monster manual for 5e. the Dndbeyond entry says page 397 f the basic rules. That's...frustrating.
 
Anyone have a general guideline for how long a passive check takes in game to proc?
 
@kent what do you mean? Can you give the situation?
 
@kent D&D 5e presumably?
 
For instance PP is always on and I've interpreted that's because repeated sense usage is very quick and uncontrollable
But if someone was using a non alway on skill. 5e. How many seconds in game is that
 
@kent It's immediate.
But again, an example of your specific circumstance would really help
 
6:06 PM
Okay. Passive arcana to recall lore.
Someone musing over in their mind stuff about magic.
 
@kent I'm not sure i'd do that passively, but you're you :) If that's the question, then if you've got lore about osmething and have the set the DC for it, then you'd just look at their passive score to see if they'd immediately know it.
 
Immediate implies it wasn't a passive check. Cause shouldnt thinking repeatedly take a while?
 
But in that case, why not give them an oppportunity to roll?
@kent no, passive is just they already know/are already doing. THey're not thinking about it. Actively thinking about it would more likely be an active check.
 
I thought passive checks were those done repeatedly
 
Passive is for when you don't want your players to know about something (or that's how i've seen it) because asking for a roll suggests something is going on that you don't necessarily want them to know about.
 
6:08 PM
@NautArch Yeah that's what I'm thinking as well.
 
@kent No repetitive checks aren't really a thing. If there's no fail state, then there's no need to do a check at all. They'll eventually get it :)
 
To me, a passive knowledge check would be for something that the character should know so well there's no chance of failure (or knows so little that there's no chance they would know).
 
@Rubiksmoose If there's no chance of failure, why do a check at all (passive or active)?
 
@NautArch To determine if they do or not.
 
@Rubiksmoose Then...there's a chance of failure?
 
6:11 PM
Okay so "Such a check can represent the average result for a task done repeatedly, such as searching for Secret doors over and over again" has no in game time representation.
 
@NautArch yeah but it will be binary and won't change.
Some characters will make it, others won't.
 
@Rubiksmoose i'm still unclear as to why you wouldn't do that as active (unless it's to conceal the knowledge entirely).
@kent I think you're misinterpreting that. It's more that we are passively doing X all the time because we're alive. It's not actually doing it more than once at any given time. It's like i'm passively aware of thing around me because i've been doing it for a long time over my lifetime"
 
@NautArch I generally use the passive mechanic for int as a way to determine if the character needs to roll at all.
 
@Rubiksmoose So sort of "Let's see if you'r even aware of X". Okay, you are, now give me an ability check to see what you actually know?
 
Okay but for something like investigation and the searching for Secret doors over and over. That requires no time?
In other words
 
6:14 PM
Just also seems kinda silly to develop info about something to then passively discover they'll never know it :P
 
Passive checks are the immediate average result. Not that the player is actually repeating the task
 
@kent correct. Just like I can look at a building and see a window-shape of newer bricks and know that there used to be an actual window there.
 
@NautArch Nah, more like people with a passive int [specific area] above X just know this.
 
This seems like you subscribe then to Crawfords floor
 
@kent nope, i don't. It's circumstantial. WHich is why I asked about your specific situation.
 
6:17 PM
For if the result of something done repeated occurs instantly. Then it becomes the floor to active checks.
 
@Rubiksmoose Gotcha. I think I'd still prefer either to have info available at varying check levels and give it to them. But I get what you're putting down.
 
I don't allow repeated attempts in the same way you're talking about, I think.
 
@kent No, you're reading too much into this. It is very dependent on the situation for me.
 
Okay. Then in what instance @NautArch would a passive check take longer than an active one
 
If you take five minutes to search a hallway for secret doors and fail the check for them, you don't get to just say "I'll do it again."
 
6:18 PM
I also don't generally use passive skills very much.
 
We already know the result of you searching that hallway in that manner.
(Rather, you can say "I'll do it again" and I just say "you get the same result" without needing to roll.)
 
@kent It wouldn't. It' sjust whether or not you're actively doing something or passively. And depends on the task. A survival check to butcher an animal is going to take longer than an history check to remember something.
 
@NautArch Sure. Generally this would be pretty basic stuff. I generally only use it when I'm in doubt as to what is "common knowledge" for a character intuitively. Many times knowing a character and their background is enough to just give them at least a bit of information because they already know this thing. I just see this as a handwavy passive check and when I'm unsure I just make it less handwavy.
 
That isn't what I'm asking.
 
@kent Talking in generalities is hurting this discussion, I think. Can you give us an example of the scenario you're considering and trying to figure out how to apply checks to?
 
6:20 PM
@NautArch okay I see. You don't set passive as taking longer. You base it on the task
 
@kent Ability checks are very DM dependent in my opinion.
And they're dependent on the situation, the characters, and the action.
 
So passive history to recall the Raven might take longer than passive history to recall the name of a town. Since one action is longer?
 
@kent No, i'd probably say those are basically the same. You're just recalling info. Either you know it or you don't.
 
Yeah I'm not sure I'd put a clock on basic info recall.
 
I meant like recall he actual lines since the Raven is several stanza
 
6:23 PM
Maybe let's step back a minute. Is there a reason why precise timing matters here? Maybe are these people in combat?
 
@kent If he wasn't just remembering but actually reciting it, yeah, it's gonna take longer to recite. But simply remembering it? Yeah, he'll know he knows it as soon as he successfully rolls the check.
 
@Rubiksmoose it's for describing stuff. But then again the players don't know in game seconds out of combat to begin with.
 
Like, I know the pythagorean theorem, that is instant. But explaining it or telling it to someone takes time. The knowing part is the only thing that the check (active or passive) would cover.
 
So I couldn't have just said you search the room. Not you look around for 6 seconds
I could*
 
@kent It depends. Is there ar eason why you need to track time in 6 second increments?
 
6:27 PM
Okay this is help. Action dependent but don't need to describe it being 1 v 6 seconds when you say you search the room.
 
If so (and this has happened), we don't live initiative order and we ask "where are you searching". You don't get the whole room.
 
Realism mainly.
 
But if they have all the time in the world? Yeah, roll your investigation. Unless you specifically want hem to investigate specific areas.
realism and 5e don't always go together like chocolate and peanut butter.
 
But it seems like bothering with precise time is tmi from your comments.
 
@Rubiksmoose Pythagorean Theorem: If you're talking about Pythagoras, then it's probably got something to do with triangles.
^^ One of the first examples of fuzzy logic in antiquity that we have. =)
 
6:31 PM
Or beans
 
Or music =)
 
Didn't he die because he wouldn't step in some plants?
 
(Hence the "fuzzy" part.)
Pythagoras lives! (In my students' pain.)
 
@nitsua60 And in the hearts of kids who hate eating beans.
 
"He noted their resemblance to human fetuses, thus convincing himself of the intimate relationship between beans and humans. To eat a bean would therefore be akin to eating human flesh. Equally, to crush, smash, or dirty a bean would be to harm a human. Thus the very strict rule to abstain from beans."
 
6:35 PM
^an example of a failed intelligence check :P
 
But wow my passive history was quick
 
@nitsua60 hahaha
@kent It usually is in my experience
 
This is another question entirely. But what do you do about animal handling not working on wild animals so druids are at a disadvantage.
 
@kent There are spells that druids have to enable them to discourse with wild animals prior to attempting handle animal.
 
@kent Hm? Animal handling works on wild animals, it just doesn't serve as a "tame" card like some people try to think it is. It can be used to calm animals down, or intuit their intentions, for example
 
6:38 PM
ANd that ^
 
I thought it can't calm wild animals down just domestic
 
> When there is any question whether you can calm down a domesticated animal, keep a mount from getting spooked, or intuit an animal’s intentions, the DM might call for a Wisdom (Animal Handling) check. You also make a Wisdom (Animal Handling) check to control your mount when you attempt a risky maneuve
 
That does seem to suggest it's for domesticated animals in terms of calming them @DavidCoffron
 
Sure, that is among the specific examples it lists, but I have no idea why it wouldn't work (perhaps on a higher DC) on wild animals
 
It's probably written so that you cant handle animal out of Beast encounters.
 
6:39 PM
@NautArch Likely
 
rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/160993/… asks different questions in the title and the body -- if the answer to one of them is "yes", the answer to the other is "no". This briefly confused me because the accepted answer starts with "No" without indicating which question it refers to. What, if anything, should be done about this?
 
@kent Interesting. I checked and every example I can find in adventure modules involve domesticated animals
 
@Kevin You can edit the title/body to fit the answers provided. Win-win.
I'd probably change the last question in the body to match that of the title.
 
@DavidCoffron I know they get charisma adv from stuff. But it's like a tertiary stat. Weird.
 
and i just did :)
 
6:47 PM
@DavidCoffron "intuit an animal’s intentions" at least seems to leave it open for wild animals even if you take the list as indicative of all the options available.
 
@NautArch your free item interaction was too swift. Really ruining my immersion
Gonna need you to edit slower.
 
Hmm, not sure that edit fully clarifies things, since there's still one "yes" and two "nos"
 
hehehe
 
Title: Does the patient need to be immobile?" - No
Body Q1: "[Can you use Healer on] a patient currently engaged in battle?" - Yes
Body Q2 original: "Is anything written to that effect anywhere in the rules on tending that I missed?" - No
Body Q2 edited: "Does a patient need to be immobilized before attempting the 2nd bullet point healing from the Healer feat?" - No
 
@Kevin you're right, they're just asking the same thing two ways. I took away the one that's different from the others.
 
6:50 PM
@kent Casts slow
 
That's one effective way of cutting out ambiguity -- remove the paragraph :-)
 
@Kevin It was pretty unnecessary.
 
So can I get some feedback on my warlock patron idea for one of my backup characters for our Tomb of Annihilation campaign? (it's an official patron type but I'm curious if you guys think the actual patron could potentially work)
It's Acererak
 
@kent and thus the expression 'human beans' that got a mis translation into 'human beings' years later ...
2
 
I can't figure out that whip feat question.

My gut says mildy underpowered.
Like, tack on one more pseudo ability and re-jigger the wording on the "grapple" effect...
 
6:55 PM
I know that thorn whip question has a very related question similar to it (maybe grasp of hadar/eldritch blast) but can't find it!
 
@Himitsu_no_Yami I've done similar things in Curse of Strahd (where a major NPC in the storyline is a patron). It can work, but definitely need to work with the DM
 
@goodguy5 Yeah, it's definitely underpowered.
 
@DavidCoffron Do you think it can work given that one of the goals is to kill him?
 
@goodguy5 It's basically just extended reach with a 'fear' type of effect can't move closer.
 
@Himitsu_no_Yami Like I said, it's possible but will depend on table dynamics (and the specifics of the pact)
 
6:56 PM
@NautArch can't move further
 
@goodguy5 whoops, opposite of fear. Can't move away. either way, definitely underpowered.
and weird to introduce a different mechanic that's similar but not identical to grapple
 
whips aren't light
 
@goodguy5 nope. I was also thinking of making it dual-wieldable.
:D
 
@DavidCoffron Got anything in particular I ought to bring up to the DM or think about? We haven't really done anything about pact specifics beyond "they exist and these are the perks you get as noted on the warlock page"
 
Maybe increase the damage die to a d6?
 
6:59 PM
@goodguy5 That also seems good. I like the idea of the grapple effect, though, too.
I'd consider d6 damage, and can grapple with it (and grab stuff.)
 
@Himitsu_no_Yami Idk. Basically the question is what happens if Acererak decides that the pact is no longer to his benefit; can he revoke your power or is already signed over to you. If he dies, do you lose the power he's granting you; and if so, is your character going to be motivated to actually finish the deal (and is your table okay with those kind of inter-party tensions)
 
01:00 - 19:0019:00 - 00:00

« first day (3357 days earlier)      last day (40 days later) »