« first day (4383 days earlier)      last day (567 days later) » 

1:34 AM
@Ben that sounds like a trap
 
 
2 hours later…
3:43 AM
6
Q: Holy Water Elemental?

ZinomaI'm playing an 11th-level Cleric and I just picked up the Bowl of Commanding Water Elementals in my game after a crazy encounter. During our downtime, I was thinking of using the ceremony spell to try and make my Water Elemental friend into a "Holy Water Elemental". Is this possible? I think it's...

 
 
4 hours later…
7:36 AM
3
Q: Would a charmed creature be considered Surprised when attacked?

GreenHatOne of my players, an assassin rogue recently took the Fey Touched feat and used it to learn Charm Person. In our last combat, they used it to successfully charm an enemy in the middle of the fight, asked the rest of the party not to attack them, tranquilly walked up to them, and then attacked. S...

 
 
2 hours later…
9:23 AM
My character got to introduce themselves to another dwarf in last night's game, so I made use of this intro I had been planning for a while (but only wrote a few hours before the game)
> I am Hrafnhildur Arnursdottir, hin breiða, heir to Hlífðarsmiðja, hin snuðalaus, hin grasnær, hin wormtunga, hin barnsgríma. Sú úbæriligi borðs brjótrinn! Binder of books magical or otherwise, slayer of dragons, breaker of fabrics, hin mjaðarístra and munvíðar mús, hin draumfjöðurabera!
I had a lot of fun with that 😃
 
 
2 hours later…
11:29 AM
1
Q: In Unearthed Arcana: Expert Classes, changes were made to the Great Weapon Master feat. How does this affect the damage output of Great Weapon Users?

XiremaOn September 29th, 2022, Playtest material for OneD&D was released for the Expert Class Groups, and included in this unearthed arcana were some planned feats for the new version of Dungeons and Dragons, including revised versions of feats that exist in 5th Edition D&D. Notably, the Great Weapon M...

 
12:13 PM
0
Q: How should we handle changes to One D&D playtest rules that affect questions about previous playtest materials?

Thomas MarkovAt the time of posting, Wizards of the Coast has just released the second One D&D Playtest Unearthed Arcana. It is not surprising that many rules appearing in the first article, Character Origins, have been changed or removed in the second article, Expert Classes. For example, the rules for criti...

 
12:35 PM
2
Q: How should we handle changes to One D&D playtest rules that affect questions about previous playtest materials?

Thomas MarkovAt the time of posting, Wizards of the Coast has just released the second One D&D Playtest Unearthed Arcana. It is not surprising that many rules appearing in the first article, Character Origins, have been changed or removed in the second article, Expert Classes. For example, the rules for criti...

 
1:19 PM
@ThomasMarkov could you add an intro to that answer you made? I initially read them as options not sections
 
@AncientSwordRage hahaha yea
 
2:08 PM
good stuff
 
 
1 hour later…
3:24 PM
RIP my path to the steward badge just got a lot longer: Glorfindel just reached 2000 rep, so he no longer has to suggest edits for approval.
 
4:05 PM
@ThomasMarkov time to go on a downvoting spree... :p
 
 
1 hour later…
5:33 PM
That Question + Answer I posted is why we need more people who can do math. It turns out the numbers I posted were bogus due to a pretty severe calculation error in my code.
 
5:52 PM
@Xirema That is always a HUGE problem of mine with the heavy math answers. THey get upvoted a ton, but I'm betting very few of us can actually check the work. I am not one of us that can.
 
^ If anyone's wondering, that's where the mistake was.
Yes, I do feel like an idiot, thanks for asking. 😣
 
@Xirema I might be able to take a stab at it tomorrow.
 
I actually have [what I'm reasonably certain are] correct numbers now, but the real numbers completely changed my conclusion
In that the newer version of the feat actually seems like it might be better than the older one at most levels of play
So the old answer is going to stay deleted, and I'll post a new one later
 
@Xirema eyebrow raise
 
3
Q: How to effectively deal with advanced "remote control" tactics in dungeons?

Groody the HobgoblinD&D 5e comes with a number of spells and abilities that allow characters to scout ahead without any risk for life and limb. For example: As a wizard or warlock, you can have a familiar, and with invisibility even an invisible one. Some of these familiars even may be able to open doors and have a...

 
5:59 PM
@Xirema Even when you account for the original being able to apply to every attack?
 
@ThomasMarkov Yeah. The new version is better for attacking creatures with an AC of 14 or higher at level 4, AC15 up until level 11, and AC18 from level 11 until... the rest of the game.
Though magic weapons might change things a bit
 
Pretty sure I can work this out in excel.
 
I always expected higher AC would be better for the new feat, but the mistake in calculations made it seem like the new feat would only be good at ACs 18+, which isn't good at lower levels, and by the time AC18 becomes semi-common in combat, the threshold has gone up to AC20.
But again: 'twas a mistake in the code.
@ThomasMarkov A good hack for figuring out the bonus action attack is to take the chance of getting at least one critical hit during the round 1 - (0.95 ^ [NUM_OF_ATTACKS]) and multiply it by whatever you figure out is the average damage of a single attack, then add that to the total.
 
6:15 PM
Here's some really rough napkin math:
Actually I can smooth it out a little real quick, one sec
So this assumes a 2d6 damage die, a sensible progression of ability score, and extra attack at 5th
Green means old feat is better, red means new feat is better
And this does not accoutn for the potential of the bonus action attack.
I made a table for expected damage per turn with each feat, then subtracted the tables.
 
@ThomasMarkov I think the Bonus Action attack probably skews things a little bit in the favor of the old feat, but it's not a huge difference, and I'd be surprised if the colors changed from taking it into account in your model.
 
I can export this to a google sheet and share it with you if you like
 
@ThomasMarkov What prompts the change at level 8? In my model, both characters reach 20 strength by level 6, so level 8 shouldn't change the math.
 
@Xirema I had 20 str happening at 8
 
Ah, okay.
I had

Old: 17 Strength + GWM at level 1, ASI at 4, ASI at 6
New: 17 Strength at level 1, GWM (+1 Str) at 4, ASI at 6.
 
6:24 PM
ASI at 6?
Isnt it 8 for most classes?
 
Fighters get an ASI at 6 and 14, in addition to the other ones.
 
(And there isn't new UA contradicting that, yet)
 
I was looking at the barb table.
 
They did keep the Rogue's level 10 ASI in the UA, though, so I wouldn't be surprised if they keep 6 & 14 for fighters as well
Actually, since Fighting Styles are now Feats, they have double incentive to give Fighters the same extra feats (ASIs) they gave them in 5e, since now it means more opportunities for Fighters to pick up extra fighting styles.
Among.... whatever else they decide to publish
 
 
2 hours later…
8:35 PM
2
Q: Does Instruction ability give characters a chance to improve their abilities without spending experience?

Maiko ChikyuI recently found out about the Instruction Ability that reads as: This talent represents a character’s knack for imparting information. Possessed by teachers, sect leaders or others in educative positions, this skill allows a character to teach other characters the Skills and Knowledges they pos...

 
9:00 PM
@ThomasMarkov Alright, I've posted a new answer
Would definitely like it if someone could double-check it, since while I'm fairly confident all the numbers are correct this time (last time it was basically a typo), it's still possible I'm doing something systemically wrong that I've not checked before.
 
9:11 PM
@Xirema I've not checked numbers but the logic is sound at a glance
 
Well, the numbers are what I really need checked. 😛
It's easy to look at two numbers, say "one is bigger than the other", and make a conclusion about that
But if the math is wrong, then the conclusions are wrong.
TBH at this point I'm hoping my numbers are wrong: because I'll find that out when someone checks my math and figures out that I'm wrong, and then I can be confident and say "yes, finally: someone did the math"
 
 
1 hour later…
10:35 PM
@Xirema I can't say I have 100% confidence in my results, but my values for L1 with OldGWM doesn't quite agree with yours (mine are slightly higher)
 
@Someone_Evil What are you seeing?
 
9.793 8.673 7.553 6.433 5.313 4.193 1.953
for the normal roll
 
@Someone_Evil For which Armor Class values?
 
That's across the same as yours
 
@Someone_Evil So, to be clear, that's AC 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 20?
 
10:40 PM
Aye
 
Because that's what I used in the most recent post.
Alright. And you're saying that's for Old GWM (so the player is always taking the -5/+10)?
 
I'm also assuming a strength score of 17 (+3), and they're using the Great Weapon Fighting Style (reroll any 1s or 2s that occur in the initial damage roll)
 
Yup, to clarify: L1 without GWM agrees to a tee
Ah, just found my error. Now that I'm not overcritting on the BA attack I my numbers agree with yours
 
Well, okay, lol
TBH, there is a possibility that both of the oldGWM and newGWM numbers are slightly undercounting.
I haven't looked at the internals of my code in a while, but it may be failing to get a proper estimate for "the odds that at least one attack is a crit", and is instead using "the odds that the first hit is a crit"
Since oldGWM should have higher numbers per individual hit at most stages of play, that might skew the results slightly.
I wouldn't expect it to be a big impact, but some of these thresholds do come down to single percentage points.
 
10:58 PM
Speaking of which, I again get higher values at L5 OldGWM
Similar small discrepancy with NewGWM
 

« first day (4383 days earlier)      last day (567 days later) »