« first day (3275 days earlier)      last day (84 days later) » 
00:00 - 19:0019:00 - 00:00

12:26 AM
I added some example output. Hopefully that helps
 
Good luck! :)
 
Is there a way on D&D Beyond to search for spells by material component? I feel I must be missing something. The spell interface only seems to have a filter for having "M" or not, and the general site search doesn't seem to be searching the material component fields.
 
Let me try
hum, no. Apparently, you're right and you can't search for material component...
it's odd. IT would not be very difficult for them to allow that
 
12:42 AM
I'm working on writing up an answer for What is the expected way to acquire costly material components?, which means I'm looking for what treasure published adventures give out compared to what spells need, and searching by component seems useful
But perhaps it'll actually be easier to me to look up the material components of the lower-level spells, and then find where they're given out
 
@PeterCooperJr. I don't think so, but I assume that if you search for a unique material component in the Compendium content, it will find the mention of the spell among the search results
Not sure how helpful that is
but yeah, probably easier to look at material components and then find where they appear as treasure in adventures rather than the reverse
 
@V2Blast Thanks for the suggestion. dndbeyond.com/… isn't quite what I had in mind
Yeah, but I still need to find just material components with a cost listed, which is hard to filter on
 
gimme a sec
 
unfortunately you can't filter search results by source book
yeah
 
i remember a spreadsheet with spells and every detail about them
checking my history...
 
12:46 AM
I mean, if it is every detail about them, it probably contains non-SRD content
 
you can filter here by cost
well I dunno if it's every detail, just a manner of speach
 
Thanks, that sheet looks helpful, especially as there's a separate column for costed material components
 
just to clarify, it's not mine! I saw a link the other day and it was in my browser history :P
 
I figured
 
 
1 hour later…
1:54 AM
<phew> made some progress on my Rolemaster Character Gen app ... been struggling with this bit for a week!
 
8
Q: What is the expected way to acquire costly material components?

jwodderIf a spell's material components include any items with an indicated cost (such as the pearl worth at least 100 gp needed for identify), those items cannot be satisfied via a component pouch or spellcasting focus but must specifically exist in the caster's inventory. This raises the question: Wh...

3
Q: Do you add your strength modifier once or twice to an unarmed strike?

jwodderPost-errata, page 195 of the PHB contains the text: On a hit, an unarmed strike deals bludgeoning damage equal to 1 + your Strength modifier. Moreover, page 196 says: When attacking with a weapon, you add your ability modifier — the same modifier used for the attack roll — to the damage...

 
2:13 AM
@BlackSpike I now need to make a rules light game called "bucket of frogs"
 
5e is super messy.
 
So too is a bucket of frogs. :-)
 
5e is definitely pretty messy
Not to say that it isn't also the case with say 3.5
 
Messy in different ways.
Early 3e was written without clarity in mind, but 5e is written to actively avoid clarity.
For instance: the primary action is an action.
It is also called an action.
Actions are a subset of actions.
 
I certainly would not dispute that
It confuses me more than 3.5 did
 
2:27 AM
hey there @Powerdork, how're things going?
 
I'm pretty bitter this evening.
 
2:39 AM
@Powerdork: Wanna end the world? I've got defcon.
 
2:52 AM
I seem to recall there being a userscript that makes chat nicer. Could someone point to it?
 
3:08 AM
 
 
2 hours later…
4:50 AM
@KorvinStarmast why are the frogs in a bucket, though?
 
 
1 hour later…
6:19 AM
Morning
 
6:38 AM
4
Q: Do things made of adamantine rust?

OharCould Rust monster or maybe Gray ooze make adamantine weapon rust? Or maybe adamantine doesn't rust at all?

 
7:33 AM
Hi
 
hello
 
night
 
8:14 AM
Evernoon
 
The other day I wanted to use a random loot table to determine what my players found on a hag they killed (dnd-5e), and one thing struck me as odd : the loot table for individual monsters only includes coin rewards, is that expected or was I looking at the wrong table?
 
5
Q: Would a flying character fall prone after dashing if they had lost a leg

Himitsu_no_YamiSuppose I'm playing a character that has a flying speed (such as a Varient (Winged) Tiefling or an Aarakocra) and get critically hit. The DM rolls on the Lingering Injuries table and after rolling a 3 tells me I lose a leg. The table says (emphasis mine) Lose a Foot or Leg. Your speed on foot...

 
@PierreCathé I think that's intentional - if an individual monster/NPC has a magic item on them, it's probably one they're using already. this is more to cover the situation of "if the party loots the body, how much money do they find"
 
That's... a really good point I hadn't considered, thanks
 
No problem!
 
8:26 AM
Not only for magic items, that's also a good way to give the party back some rations, torches and tools
kill a thief, get his picks, crowbar and rope
 
I liked the 4e "parcel" method of treasure picks.
 
How did that work ?
 
3
A: How do Treasure Parcels work?

doppelgreenerTreasure parcels are shared among the whole group, not one per character. The entire party has a level 2, 4 and 5 magic item to share between themselves. This means in a group of four level 1 characters, only three magic items have dropped, and one person may not have their own magic item yet. ...

Basically, the game tells you how much treasure a party of your size and level should get, including guidelines for how many magic items of what power level. It divides these things into "parcels" of items, coin, and other valuables, which the GM is free to include in the adventure as loot from corpses, quest rewards, treasure stockpiles, etc, as fits the story.
 
For background information: 4e's system of handing out magical treasure is more integrally tied to the game balance than 5e's. So where the table you're consulting in 5e is akin to a "helpful guideline"; the 4e equivalent is a much stronger recommendation
 
Thanks, that's interesting
 
8:33 AM
Notably, 4e doesn't really... care... about making sure that the stuff a monster is using in battle matches the stuff you pick up from its body, because in 4e the stuff you have doesn't define your capacity nearly so much as in 3.x or 5e: it's your character features that define your capacity, and items tend to just enhance that capacity.
 
9:06 AM
One of my biggest issues with 4e (specifically, as opposed to DnDisms in general) is the number game, although it does have some bright sides.
I think there's a certain beauty to just picking enemies of roughly the same level as the players, instead of doing CR math.
Of course 4e is much less allowing of wide level gaps than eg. 5e is, even between players and monsters. You can't just use underleveled monsters instead of minions, or overleveled as bosses. I guess a part of the beauty is in that it doesn't work out too well in 5e either, all too often, even if it doesn't really advertise the fact as much
 
@kviiri I mean, 5e advertises the exact opposite, and states it as a primary feature of the system.
 
@Miniman Yeah. It's a good change IMO, although not as comprehensively thought-out as I'd like
 
@kviiri I've run enough 5e to be thoroughly tired of "moar hps" being the only thing distinguishing the strongest enemies from the weakest ones.
 
9:23 AM
@Miniman Well ostensibly there's legendary actions, yet another attempt to make solo monsters feel good. :-)
Attemp.
There wos one.
 
@kviiri Legendary actions, lair actions, and legendary resistances are absolutely some of the best features of 5e.
 
@Miniman Maybe in the sense that the game'd be worse without them.
But honestly, I feel the foundations of the combat engine undermine such attempts to make "solo bosses" work well without radically changing some assumptions.
 
@kviiri Well, yeah. I wouldn't have complimented them otherwise :)
 
@Miniman Yeah well, I kinda see what you mean but that alone doesn't qualify for good in my books
They feel like band-aid, masking but not resolving a deeper game design problem
 
@kviiri True enough. But coming from 3.5e, they're bandaids I can compliment.
 
9:44 AM
@kviiri If I were to ever go back to 4e [throws salt over shoulder] I'd abandon the numbers game completely and revise the leveling system to be purely about increased options.
It would produce the same effect as my careful Effectivel-Level-One numbers-crunching back in the day, with 100% less crunching.
 
9:55 AM
@BESW what would you do in situations numbers currently handle?
 
10:06 AM
@doppelgreener Throw 'em out. You get your numbers at the start of the game and they don't change, you just get more things to do with them.
 
Hmm, that actually makes a lot of sense
 
Maybe increase the number of things you can swap out each level.
 
You might need to do some rebalacing on the fly, but I really like the idea of progression being more about powers than HP and to-hit
 
Honestly the number progression in 4e feels almost like a vestigial holdover, preserved only because of tradition. It's such an afterthought that they had to create some of the most desirable feats in the game just to patch it up midway through the edition.
 
@BESW Oooh. Okay, yeah, that makes sense.
I was thinking "don't use numbers on anything/anywhere" but then I was wondering how you'd handle combat. (If it's not being handled with numbers, why do 4e?)
 
10:21 AM
You get a much more visceral sense of progress by unlocking access to level-gated status effects and new planes of existence.
 
Yeah. :)
I'd be down with that.
 
It's still D&D with all the reasons I wouldn't play any edition of D&D, but within that box... I think 4e without numerical progression would be a significant improvement.
 
I agree, removing the numbers rat race would be nice and let you focus on just expanding into other fun cool things to do.
(hey, that sounds like the fate fantasy thing i was working on :P)
 
@BESW yeah
I fully approve of not changing the numbers
most of the really good level up powers give better effects
 
The whole reason they made the new set of +2-attack-and-also-a-feature feats is that the +2-attack-and-nothing-else feats were horribly boring but everybody needed to take them because of the numbers race so it was a 'feat tax' that just leveled out to "and you have one fewer feat slots."
 
10:29 AM
yeah :/
and they are really good feats
but
they are definitely pretty boring
especially compared to other feats you can grab
I mean that push fighter? the reason literally all his attacks could push was because I found feats for that
 
10:46 AM
Of course that'd need some rebalancing efforts but... this is 4e we're talking about
it'll need it anyway x)
 
pretty much all D&D does really
and actually this addresses what I consider the biggest balance issue in 4e
the numbers are very off, especially at high levels
 
Yeah, I was already re-writing all the monster numbers starting around level 12 and continuing to level 30.
 
yeah
 
11:11 AM
Does 13th Age have a noticeably different numbers game?
 
13th Age does the d20 System numbers game.
So, basically D&D 3.x.
 
11:40 AM
I have out-anydiced Ilmari Karonen and will probably be riding that high all day
lunchtime
 
12:08 PM
@Carcer :D
 
12:24 PM
@Carcer He's even better at the "Who am I?" game, that's the next level
 
12:47 PM
I think it was he who one time landed me with the card "the baby King Solomon decided a case over by threatening to split him with a sword"
 
heck
that's a bit specific
or uh
"obscure" is probably what I meant
 
1:30 PM
@Rubiksmoose So close to all the answers we need for the Lady/Man question.
but they...don't seem happy.
 
heh I was just about to ping you.
I honestly think we probably have enough to reopen now.
 
I'd like to wait until the last one is answered, but I think it's close enough.
But that last one is a big one.
But wonder if we're the 'chat board' that they reference unhappiness with.
 
@NautArch I would say yes, we are. They had popped into the chatroom under KRyan's answer I saw.
 
@Rubiksmoose ohnoes :(
 
Yeah :-/. I'm guessing they had a similar reaction to the perspective that people were sharing there that I did.
 
GcL
1:33 PM
@Carcer clever use of empty die. I couldn't sort out a way to answer that with anydice. Rerolling quickly exhausts the call stack.
 
@Rubiksmoose It's a really difficult situation. In some ways there's a no harm/no foul piece. But there's also the "we really don't want to perpetuate these attitudes in society" piece.
 
@NautArch I'm not certain what exact situation you are referring to here (the one in chat, the one in OP, or something else).
Either way, I do agree that it is a complex issue.
 
@Rubiksmoose little bit of chat and OP.
 
@NautArch Gotcha.
 
If the group is generally 'ok' with that type of talk/action and OP isn't, then it's highly unlikely they'll be able to make a change in the group dynamics.
But if others aren't okay and were hiding it like they were, then there is an opportunity.
I think I need to update my answer :)
 
1:38 PM
@NautArch I'm not sure I'd say it is highly unlikely in general honestly.
Ideally it shouldn't be.
But the world is far from ideal.
 
@Rubiksmoose Yeah, i'm not answering in an ideal world.I'm answering with respect to rthe real world.
And my own experience at a table I play at.
They talk a big game, but they all treat their wives/girlfriends/other women very well in reality. I don't love a lot of the in-game stuff, but I also see them outside the table not acting in those ways.
I've voted reopen, btw.
 
@NautArch Fair enough. I can tell you though a cons and other spaces (including any game I run, even if it is only for casual acquantences, "group dynamics" mean nothing. If someone is not having fun and there is any way to fix it, we try to do that.
But I seriously cannot imagine as a DM having a player coming up to me and expressing discomfort at a situation and me, as DM, telling them immediately that they should just find a new table.
 
@Rubiksmoose Well yeah, the latter is kinda bonkers. But if OP is odd-man out, then they're not going to change to make the new guy comfortable when they're all comfortable.
Heck, the guy that left our table was a long-standing member. Had other issues, too, though.
 
@NautArch Why not? I'm not sure that that is something that can be assumed to be true.
 
@Rubiksmoose My personal experience has shown that to be generally true.
 
1:46 PM
One of the reasons a good DM should help encourage that kind of attitude at the table.
 
Well, a DM generally is trying to get a table to have fun together. If everyone is and then one person joins relatively recently and says "this isn't fun!", I think the DM is more likely to say "well, we've been having fun. Why do we have to change for you?"
 
@NautArch I'm not arguing that that can't and doesn't happen (I mean, just look at the comments made in that chat). I guess the thing that feels wrong to me would be to tell someone that that outcome is certain. It seems way too depressingly pessimistic to me. And also, I've seen and played with a lot of groups where that would not happen.
Because a good DM has a very good reason to not do that because a good DM respects and values the emotional health and fun of every player.
 
@Rubiksmoose I'm not sure about that bolded bit. It seems like that's a pretty big change to the question from before (maybe?)
 
@Rubiksmoose It was exactly copied and pasted from OP's comment.
 
But as it reads, every answer just got invalidated.
 
1:55 PM
@NautArch Hmm
 
No one really answered that.
 
@GcL literally stumbled into it by accident trying to do it the naive way so
 
@NautArch True. I think that might have been the another reason the question was unclear. We probably should have pushed OP to help define what "Help on how to approach?" actually meant way sooner.
 
@Rubiksmoose Yeah :( not sure what to do here.
Seems like a mod problem :P
 
[looks around shiftily]
 
2:00 PM
But it also very much becomes an experience-required question. Either as a DM or a player in this situation.
 
I feel like OP may have changed their approach with the question in direct response to that chat.
Hm I'm not seeing a clear way forward at the moment, but I think I need to step back from it for a little bit. It might be something best served by having the community take a look with a Meta post.
 
2:21 PM
@Rubiksmoose Should we remove the clarified question from the comments you added?
 
2:38 PM
Hey everyone. I was wanting to get some kind of clarification on the events of the second sundering. was it ever put in an official book for 5e? If so, which book?
 
@NautArch I put in another edit based on the most recent comments. What do you think? It certainly puts another twist on things that answers should address, but I don't think it invalidates anything.
I'm also not sure it completely captures what OP is asking.
 
More specifically the events that caused 5e to start and 4e to end.
 
@Eternallord66 Deathwing burst out from the Deepholm, what else is there to know?
 
@Eternallord66 You mean the sales of 4e books dwindling to 0? ;)
 
forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Second_Sundering has a lot of references, though not to any actual 5e books (there were a lot of adventures for it as part of the D&D Next playtest at least)
 
2:43 PM
@Yuuki I have no idea what that is
@Rubiksmoose No, the in game reason
 
@Eternallord66 the SCAG has an overview of FR history in it which describes the second sundering, on page 37
 
@Carcer It seems like a lot of talk from a lot of different sources that don't seem to go together
@Carcer Thanks. I'll check it out
 
Realmsian events are always huge and complicated
the second sundering had a lot of consequences in lots of different places
the FR wiki is generally pretty good, anyway.
 
@Carcer Pg 37 is only describing Sune and Silvanus
 
@Eternallord66 I think Carcer meant 17
 
2:49 PM
did I?
I did
small text, eyes failed
 
Thank you
 
@Eternallord66 no worries I was just joking
 
@Rubiksmoose I think that's pretty good. Dale's misogyny piece doesn't seem quite as applicable, but he still goes into recommendations. But now he really is unsupported.
 
To be clear if you see a better way I'm all for it
 
No, I think this is good and I think my answer addresses it.
if you think it doesn't, i'd like to know so I can add to it.
 
3:04 PM
@NautArch I'll take a look when I have a minute, but from memory I think you are golden.
 
 
1 hour later…
4:27 PM
I guess I asked a pretty good question yesterday judging by view count lol
 
4:54 PM
@Himitsu_no_Yami Yup! It's a nice one :)
And it hit HNQ
 
So the FSO interacts with the CSO and thus the CSA according to NISPOM guidelines as laid out in SPP. Got it.
This may be harder than learning 4e.
 
7
Q: Can Bless or Bardic Inspiration help a creature from rolling a 1 on a death save?

CyanicFor instance, say the creature rolled a 1 on the d20, and would have gotten failed 2 death saves, but uses their pre-given bardic inspiration and actually rolls a total of 10+. Would the creature be saved from the consequences of rolling a 1 on the d20, since it says that when you roll a 10 or h...

 
@Himitsu_no_Yami Definitely seems like a situation where the table didn't account for it, so if a DM is using the optional rule, they'll need to adjust it for their players.
^not an answer.
feeling lazy - can pact of chain familiars attack? or are they limited like wizard familiars?
 
> Additionally, when you take the Attack action, you can forgo one of your own attacks to allow your familiar to use its reaction to make one attack of its own.
From the description for Pact of the Chain
 
5:03 PM
@Xirema Hmm, so can't cast a spell?
 
> Your familiar acts independently of you, but it always obeys your commands. In combat, it rolls its own initiative and acts on its own turn. A familiar can't attack, but it can take other actions as normal.
No reason I see that they couldn't cast a spell.
 
Cool, so totally different than the wizard's find familiar.
 
@NautArch Oh, sorry: that second quote comes from the spell.
Not from Pact of the Chain.
So Pact of the Chain is overriding the "can't attack" part of the spell, but both versions may cast spells.
 
@Xirema Well, the standard Find Familiars don't have spellcasting - just that you can deliver a touch spell through them. But I guess if you True Polymorphed it into something else, then it could.
 
(Although I don't think any of the default Familiar options have any spellcasting features....?)
 
5:10 PM
@Xirema Mhm. But most familiars don't really have the capacity to provide components, and have questionable capacity to attune to items that would let them cast without
 
So wait if I'm reading this right, you can forgo your attack to make your PotC familiar attack and still have your action free to do something else?
 
What if you gave the familiar a wand? Use Object is an action.
 
@MikeQ That would work (although it would be Use a Magic Item, not the Use an Object action)
 
@Himitsu_no_Yami No, you still used your action.
 
oh I'm blind I missed the "when you take the Attack action" bit
Shame you can't have multiple pacts at once tho. That would make interesting combinations with PotB
 
5:13 PM
Most of the PotC familiars have poisonous attacks, too, so there's good reason to consider giving them an opportunity to shine.
 
@MikeQ I think the best magic item to let your familiar use (if they can attune) is probably the tentacle rod
 
@DavidCoffron why do you think it can't attune?
18
Q: Can a familiar attune and wear or use a magic item?

NautArchIs it possible for a familiar to attune to and then wear or wield a magic item?

 
@DavidCoffron Why not small-sized +1 barding
 
@NautArch An animal might not be able to focus for 1 hour
 
@DavidCoffron And the best option is a wand of ceremony so that a magical toad can perform weddings
 
5:18 PM
Whoop. New Unearthed Arcana today.
 
Bard and Paladin!
Two of my favorite classes
 
> What's this over here? My goodness, it's another Unearthed Arcana! Today the bard and the paladin each gain a playtest option: the College of Eloquence and the Oath of Heroism. You can read them here: dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/bard-paladin #DnDJeremy Crawford
 
10
Q: Why are some of the Stunts in The Expanse RPG labelled 'Core'?

DrBobThe system for The Expanse is the AGE system, so I'm hoping someone with another game which uses AGE can answer this. Neither The Expanse core rules nor the Blue Rose RPG have any rules about it! In all the lists of stunts, the first few have the label (Core) written before their name. For insta...

 
@DavidCoffron Why wouldn't they? Just DM fiat?
 
@Xirema oh dang Infectious Inspiration is nice.
 
5:21 PM
@Rubiksmoose Indeed.
 
ha, doc is titled "eloquent heroics"
oh, for Eloquence bards and oath of heroism
womp womp
 
9
Q: Can an animal attune to a magic item?

Darth PseudonymWe have previously determined that an awakened creature or a familiar can attune to magic items, but one of those is a sapient creature, and the other "always obeys your commands". A paladin's steed (per the Find Steed spell) is also 'unusually intelligent' and falls within the score range for s...

 
Unsure about the power level of these options. But it's more balanced than the previous few UAs.
 
@Xirema Is it just me or is the rest of that Bard stuff... really underpowered?
 
@MikeQ That is fantastic
 
5:24 PM
And/or super situational
 
@Rubiksmoose I think Undeniable Logic might be good under the right circumstances, and Universal Speech/Soothing Words are about on par with what Bards usually get at level 3 for subclass options.
 
@Rubiksmoose The level 3 stuff could be useful for tons of non combat situations
 
I think situational is the most of it. Universal Speech is actually really strong from a mathematical perspective (replicating the effect of a level 3 spell), but since the spell itself is so situational, the feature is too
 
Notable outliers being the Valor/Swords bards, whose level 3 features are definitely more powerful than their peers.
 
@Rubiksmoose and same with the paladin. not loving these - but seems like they're making potential non-combat focused classes.
 
5:26 PM
@NautArch Hero paladin seems combat focused (as are most paladin subclasses)
 
Honestly Mighty Deed and Glorious Defense seem pretty good.
 
@DavidCoffron sure, but where does it say you need a certain stat to focus for an hour? that seems very dm-determined, but nothing in the rules that they can't.
@MikeQ ability check focused. Those generally aren't as combat necessary. especially with grappling being awful.
 
@NautArch Agreed. Deciding what capacity the animal has to focus is completely DM-dependent
 
"Everytime you get a crit, give an ally temp HP", and their Channel Divinity can also give them a Superior attack roll one minute per short rest.
 
@Rubiksmoose Idk. Undeniable Logic is pretty strong; if they fail the Intelligence check its on par with Heightened Spell Metamagic (albeit using your bonus action)
 
5:27 PM
yeah, the paladin does some have some options. not quite as bad as i thought, but i like the other subclasses better.
 
@NautArch Sure, but I thought most of the level 3 channel divinity options included 1 combat-ish option and 1 utility-ish option
 
@MikeQ hvae to re-check. Vengeance is definitely all combat.
@DavidCoffron But again, that's up to a DM to say something. NOthing in the rules suggests they can't.
 
> —Once on each of your turns when you make a weapon attack and miss, you can cause that attack to hit instead. —If you fail a saving throw, you can use your reaction to succeed instead. — Level 20 Capstone, ten minutes per long rest.
Uhhhhhhhhh.
 
@NautArch Agreed
 
That seems.... like CRAZY good????
 
5:29 PM
@DavidCoffron Hmm. It is better than my first impression. I thought the "before the end of your next turn" bit was a significant nerf, but I think it would be very powerful doing that then casting a spell immediately.
 
@Xirema Yeah that's like an epic boon for 10 mins
 
@Xirema The level 20 capstone is usually quite wacky
 
Does anyone have Baldur's Gate to confirm the language is correct in GaelL's question?
 
@NautArch My friend does; I'll ask him (make take some time to get back to me though)
 
I know, Paladins get some pretty sweet capstones, and TBH it's really disappointing the rest of the classes don't get stuff as cool as them.
 
5:30 PM
@Xirema Legendary!
 
@Xirema Dang. That is nice.
 
I loooved the Vengeance capstone.
 
I think this is a much stronger aspect:
> • If you fail a saving throw, you can use your
reaction to succeed instead.
Unlimited Legendary Resistance? (once per round albeit)
 
@DavidCoffron Legendary Resistance doesn't consume reactions
Although I'd probably overwrite it so that they get a reroll, not an automatic success
 
Can someone also take a look at that flaming gauntlet/baldur's gate question and let me know if my related are dupes. I can't duplicate now since I had previously voted to close as unclear.
But they seem like they are. THe question isn't exact, but it is effectively asking if an improvised weapon can have weapon things applied to it.
and we've definitely closed as duplicates other similar type questions. but not same answer doesn't mean same question still applies. so...
 
5:37 PM
@MikeQ True. Still very strong
@NautArch I don't think they are dupes. Weapon Bond and magic weapon are both applied to the weapon through a process (a ritual and Spellcasting respectively) whereas the gauntlets are an ongoing effect
 
@DavidCoffron okay, i think it's definitely same answer, though. It's can you do stuff to an imrpovised weapon that requires the target to be a weapon.
 
Yeah I think it is one of those cases where there are a bunch of not-quite identical questions circling around the same issue, but not quite close enough to dupe.
 
@NautArch Yeah, the object is not a "weapon" (game term) unless the GM agrees it can be treated as one, and therefore is only affected by the gauntlets in that case
 
@Rubiksmoose fair enough!
 
Druids and Clerics are pretty good.

And the Barbarian is nothing to laugh at.

But it is weird that they wrote the Paladin to have different capstones per oath
 
5:48 PM
weird, i never noticed that.
 
Even the oathbreaker has a dope level 20
Dread Lord
At 20th level, the paladin can, as an action, surround himself or herself with an aura of gloom that lasts for 1 minute. The aura reduces any bright light in a 30-foot radius around the paladin to dim light. Whenever an enemy that is frightened by the paladin starts its turn in the aura, it takes 4d10 psychic damage. Additionally, the paladin and creatures he or she chooses in the aura are draped in deeper shadow. Creatures that rely on sight have disadvantage on attack rolls against creatures draped in this shadow.
 
I mean the biggest benefit for Oathbreaker is always gonna be aura of hate though. It can put in work with a party who focuses on undead stuff
 
6:17 PM
Oh yeah, Twitter doesn't one-box anymore.
 
I'd really like to see more class archetypes that do stuff outside what the class already focuses on, to add versatility and encourage different playstyles. I mean, these new UA ideas are okay, but it doesn't expand much past the basic concept of the class.
 
@Xirema So what you're saying is that when I'm a 6th-level bard, I can DESTROY THEM WITH FACTS AND LOGIC?
 
I'm reluctant to call d6 "gaming dice"

y'know... rather than just "dice"
 
Alternately, could I steal literal dice with Infectious Inspiration?
It says that if I roll an inspiration die, I get to keep it.
 
"A truck full of cycling bicycle tires"
"A truck full of communications cellular phones"
"A truck full of food for eating"
 
6:20 PM
So I can just ask to borrow someone else's die to roll with and then, by RAW, it's mine now.
> Oath of Heroism spells
> 3rd - expeditious retreat
🤔
 
@Yuuki Bravely bold Sir Robin rode forth from Camelot...
 
@MikeQ dammit! you got there first.
 
I mean, fwiw, Expeditious retreat also lets you charge in
or pull people out
 
although i'd think most paladins worth their salt are looking for something besides Dash for their bonus action.
 
Oath of Heroism Paladin can get 4 attacks per round with Two-Weapon Fighting.
Unless you go the entire round without getting hit—but if you manage that, then you're probably already in good shape.
 
6:29 PM
@Xirema how? I'm not seeing that...
 
@NautArch Haste maybe?
 
@Xirema and two-weapon fighting uses their bonus action, no?
 
Oh, Glorious Defense.
 
@MikeQ lol
 
@Yuuki ^
 
6:30 PM
If the attack misses, you can use reaction to make one weapon attack.
Being an Eloquence Bard seems like a good way to start a dice collection if you're low on funds.
 
I might just do that to my friends just to see their reactions lol
 
They'll all be d6s but beggars can't be choosers.
Oh, it's a 6th-level feature so none of them will be d6s.
Since inspiration upgrades to d8 at 5th-level.
Never mind, your collection will be suspiciously missing d4s and d6s.
 
The 6th level feature doesn't use the word keep. It just says to roll it
However be careful at 14th level, you might end up giving your entire collection away
 
Whoops confused it with the 6th-level feature.
 
@Xirema ah, gotcha. At 15th level, but yeah. They'd get their 2 attacks, bonus action attack, reaction attack. I had a similar setup with sentinel/PAM.
 
6:36 PM
I have been DESTROYED by undeniable FACTS AND LOGIC.
 
I'm not 100% sure that you don't get a success on a death saving through if the paladin's aura grants +9
 
I have a setup to get 4 attacks at level 7 with a fighter/warlock mix
 
@goodguy5 I definitely am. A natural 1 is a natural 1.
 
but nat 1s don't do anything to ST
 
@goodguy5 they do for death saves
 
6:39 PM
Oh, I see that the Eloquence-specific Bardic Inspiration doesn't add dice to ability checks, attack rolls, or saving throws.
I think that's evidence that the dice-stealing is .
 
@Himitsu_no_Yami I'm actually curious how you did that; I'm assuming it involves use of Haste, but I'm not sure how else you'd do it.
 
If the roll is 10 or higher, you succeed. Otherwise, you fail.

When you make a death saving throw and roll a 1 on the d20, it counts as two failures.

Does "it counts" preclude the 10 or higher clause?
And the rule is clearly assuming that a 1 is under 10
 
@Xirema actually let me double count the number of attacks in one round cus it might be more
 
@V2Blast The question I first have to ask is whether or not the frogs want to get into, or out of, the bucket.
 
@goodguy5 The rule is if you roll a 1 on a d20. Not when your result is a 1.
Rolling a 1 precludes modifiers.
They don't matter, ify ou've rolled a 1, you've rolled a 1. Regardless of what any modifiers might do.
 
6:42 PM
Right, so I'm saying are we sure that a 1+9 isn't a success and two failures
I'm not supposing we remove the failures.
 
@goodguy5 Why would it be a success? You've rolled a 1, you've got two failures.
 
but you rolled 10 or higher, you get a success!
 
@goodguy5 but you didn't. You rolled a 1.
 
1+9 is 10 or higher
 
@NautArch I have seen that happen more than once.
 
6:43 PM
no modifier if you roll a 1.
 
Hrm.... note to self, houserule
if the situation ever comes up
 
@KorvinStarmast yeah, i think that's (for better or worse) more common than not.
@goodguy5 What about modifiers that get you to a 20 or move from a 20 on an attack. Is that both a crit and not a crit and you get to roll damage accordingly?
Or roll a 1 on an attack. Is it both a hit and not a hit?
 
@Xirema it's a hexblade and fighter, it's got room for improvement right now weapon-wise but I get 2 attacks with my pact weapon, bonus action attack with my off-hand weapon. action surge into two more attacks with the pact weapon for 5 attacks, plus an opportunity attack if the situation presents itself
 
I don't understand the first point.
 
@Eternallord66 That seems to be a World of Warcraft style answer to me. ;) (Yuuki often does funny comments)
 
6:46 PM
@goodguy5 My point is that when you have a roll that has a rule without modifiers, then you don't use the modifiers. If you're going to use the result and the modifiers in those cases for death saving throws, why don't you apply that to all other cases?
 
but I get what you're saying....

Even so, if a Paladin manages to get a +9 on the aura.....
The verbiage and rarity is a little different, and I concede that the rules are on your side.
 
At one point, I had a +15 to hit. (+9 STR, +3 Potion, +3 oil of sharpness).
 
@Xirema I can also link the character sheet if you like
 
@Himitsu_no_Yami Ah—so when I say 4 attacks per round, I generally intend that to mean "without blowing situational, one-turn effects" a'la Action Surge. So your build would still be classified as dealing 3 attacks per round by those standards. The reason I'm allowing the Heroism paladin to extend to 4 is because "getting hit, but then using your reaction to boost your AC and get a counter-attack" is more reliable than "consistently engineer a scenario where enemies trigger Attacks of Opportunity"
I'm not including things like Haste even though a level 15 Paladin probably could ensure they have it up very frequently at that level.
 
@Xirema yeah, that's fair but as a bonus, the theoretical max damage in a round (burst/nova damage) is kinda obscene too
 
6:51 PM
@Himitsu_no_Yami I bet!
 
@Xirema I was always way too worried about losing it to use it. Even with all my save bonuses. Only had it going a few times over the years.
 
@goodguy5 As I am about to start a Tunnels and Trolls game with some friends, d6 are in fact gaming dice. ;)
 
@Xirema the beauty comes in when you add things like hex and hexblade's curse. and adding ability modifiers to offhand attacks (two weapon fighting style) and a good old Eldritch Smite
 
00:00 - 19:0019:00 - 00:00

« first day (3275 days earlier)      last day (84 days later) »