@eimyr Yeah, it certainly is; it just comes with the same "fine print" as any and all art forms come with - some of it will be bad, some of it will be great, some you will like, some you will hate, some you will find intriguing but not really like or dislike, et cetera. No tricks in the statement, just standard sneaky-disclaimers that come with artworks in general

@Delioth I'm very happy that we agree.

At least to me if something "can be" art then it simply "is" art.

@eimyr I think I might hold a small distinction in my mind between the form and the implementation (maybe due to my profession's distinction between interface/implementation); a medium holds the ability to be art, while the implementation (a "piece") may or may not "be" art. Graphics "can be" art, thus a painting "is" art but a (truly random and unintended) scribble "is not" art. Maybe it's a pointless distinction, maybe it's not.

@Delioth As I understand it, the definition of art is "Manipulating a medium to create an effect". So anything intentional is art, even if it's not very good. A random scribble isn't art, because it has no intentional meaning to it.

@GreySage Is a sunset art?

@godskook It wouldn't look like it by this definition (or most definitions I've found), since there is no manipulation. A person didn't go out and make that sunset, it just "exists" (natural beauty != art, but is still pretty)

@godskook Discounting the possibility of a creator god for the sake of this conversation, no it is not

A picture of a sunset is art though, or a painting, etc.

@NautArch I added your comments, or rather the detail they helped point out, as a side note in my answer on rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/104249/…

@GreySage Yeah, I'll not get into that particular "gotcha" for this discussion.

@GreySage although follow-up: Is a minecraft sunset art?

@godskook Someone created it (the programmer of the game), so yes

@GreySage What about all those "spontaneous art" exhibits where the artist doesn't intend a meaning but rather the meaning is what the viewer ascribes to it?

@T.J.L. saw that, and @Adam 's answer. Have a couple upvotes, gents.

@NautArch Won't do me any good at this point. I'm capped for the day. :)

@Yuuki The artist is still creating an effect

@T.J.L. then you GET NOTHING!

@NautArch It is my lot in life...

Nice answer on the monk palm one.

"Burn all the Ki you want, it won't help!"

@T.J.L. It was hard for me to not put "but why" in. Trying to Be Nice :)

woof

@godskook system?

@NautArch 3.5 as a base.

I think anything else can be left unexplained if you assume all 3 builds are legal as-is, but my E6+gestalt_progression ruleset is being used.

@BanjoFox No barking indoors. :P

@godskook I got complaints for mooing too :P

@BanjoFox If I wouldn't let the actual doggo bark in the house, I'm not letting someone merely pretending to be a doggo do it. As far as mooing goes, I don't let cows into the house at all, so.....moo(t) point.

@godskook What's a doggo? (:D)

@NautArch and @T.J.L. are you still here ?

dives for cover

@godskook gotta ask. Where is Doggo from? Is it a reddit thing? Is it a country thing?

points at @T.J.L. "He's over there!"

@NautArch It comes from that fresh hellhole known as "the internet".

@T.J.L. I feel like i've never heard it before starting to read reddit this year

Ok. Wouldn't want to flood the comment section of @NautArch answer, but I want to discuss something with you about the rules of spell overlapping.

sips covfefe

@NautArch That's because it's a fairly recent thing, as meme-sourced perversions of the English language go.

@T.J.L. shakes head

@BanjoFox Do you know where that's been?

@GaelL -- At this juncture it would be best to simply ask.

@T.J.L. -- Freshly made from the kpod

@T.J.L. first rule of covfefe is do not drink the covfefe

So, let's begin by an example situation (covered by the rule). Let's say you are A sorcerer, and you do something with the Extended Metamagic (so, 2 minutes instead of 1, for example). Then, next turn, you do the same spell, without the Extended metamagic (so, 1 minute).

@GaelL ok - based on what i've written about the rules, what do you think should happen there?

@GaelL Assuming they're persistent effects, you just wasted a spell slot.

@NautArch Woops... Should I have waited? :)

@T.J.L. teach a man to fish...

But here's the deal : I'm really confused about said rules (and what you said about them). It's the "while their durations overlap" that confuses the crap out of me.

@NautArch Confucius say... build man a fire, man be warm for night. Light man on fire, man be warm rest of life.

@GaelL @T.J.L. is correct in that you'd basically have just wasted a spell slot. The longer duration (2 minutes) remains as it is the more powerful (in this case because it's a longer duration) spell

@GaelL What's the point of confusion?

@GaelL Both durations are "counting down" at any given second. If they were 5 minutes and 10 minutes durations, after 2 minutes you would have 3 minutes left on one duration and 7 on the other. However, you can only gain the benefits from one at a time, where you would use the higher bonus

@NautArch I disagree with the idea that "duration" is a relevant measure of power. Irrelevant in this case as described in chat, but just in case it DOES become relevant.

@GaelL Let's say 2 clerics cast Spirit Guardians, one at a higher spell level, which causes increased damage. The weaker one is cast 5 minutes after the stronger one. If the areas of the spell overlap, then any creature in the area will take only the damage from the upcast spell, since it deals more damage. After 5 minutes, the stronger spell ends, and the creature starts taking damage from the weaker one now.

@godskook Hmm - so how would you adjudicate which spell gets priority?

@NautArch If the spells are COMPLETELY equal, other than duration? It doesn't matter?

@NautArch Whichever gives a higher numerical bonus? (if they give the same bonus it is irrelevant)

@GaelL Empowered is probably a bad example, because it's damage-related, and damage is generally instantaneous. Can you try with specific examples?

Ahhh, right off the bat, I don't know my metamagics by heart.

@godskook But duration does matter if all things are equal, no? If two effects are reducing your hit points by 2 each round, then the longer effect is the more powerful effect.

@NautArch Which I suppose, is the same thing as saying "duration is the final tiebreaker after all other tiebreakers".

@GaelL Then don't worry about Metamagic. See @Adam's example.

@godskook In this particular case - but I think each one is judged on what makes something powerful. maybe.

@NautArch I would say the duration is not part of the effect - the effect in your example is "lose 2 HP per round".

So, @T.J.L.... The weaker-but-longer version of the same spell is just... waiting, not wiped out, yes ?

@GaelL Correct.

@NautArch Unless duration affects potency else-wise, you can resolve either effect randomly, then decrease both durations appropriately, and every randomized version ends up with the same result.

@T.J.L. Okay. So, basically, the weaker-but-longer effect will resume once the stronger-but-shorter effect stops, correct ?

@GaelL If by "resume", you mean "finish counting out its remaining duration", yes, I believe that's what he means.

@GaelL There's nothing to "resume", per se. It never stopped. It just wasn't relevant.

@GaelL (( I think I have a decent analogy if you need a visualization on this ))

I mean, resume its effect (becoming relevant again).

@Delioth Please share

In the background, the weaker-but-longer effects still loses time, but as soon as the stronger-but-shorter effect is dead, it can resume applying its own effect, correct ?

@T.J.L. Hmm, so is my answer incorrect? That the effects are 'hidden' beneath each other but in the case of quivering palm the earlier ones end before the later ones so you never see them or give them a chance to 'end'?

Well, that's what I'm asking here. That's my confusion.

@NautArch No, you're correct. That power has a specific case that causes the other ones to go away.

Why would they go away ?

@GaelL Why? Who knows. But you quoted the rules passage that says they do.

Which passage?

:D

@GaelL So, imagine a spell effect as a colored timer; it counts down time. Our timers are set in increments of 5 minutes and click loudly each second (/round/minute). But we can only listen to one kind of clicking at a time from a given color (each color has an associated pitch, say).

We set one blue timer for double-length time. We can listen to it as we wish. But if we then set a louder blue timer for one 5-minute increment, we only hear the newer timer- we can't hear the old one, but it still counts down.

Each color of timer here represents a spell's effect (like Mage armor), while each timer is a casting of that spell

@Delioth Having not read the rest of this conversation, I am having fun trying to imagine what you are talking about from this analogy alone

Indeed. And when the louder timer dies out... you resume hearing the longer timer.

Yep; and bigger effects (like from a higher spell level or Empower or something) make the timer louder

@GreySage We're talking about stacking Quivering Palms.

(and stacking similar spell effects in 5e at a deeper level)

OK @Delioth. So now, to use your analogy, let's speak of Quivering Palms as single-working alarm bells. You put 3 of these alarms close to someone's bed. You then remotely choose to activate one of these alarms, which does a terrible noise before self destructing. The sleeping guy may or may not die from the heart attack it will take from the noise.

But..... the other alarms are still ready to be activated later on.

So....following this logic...Earlier, I quoted "while their durations overlap". We know Quiv Palm can stay dormant for at least 17 days. This makes me believe that if I set up several Quiv Palms on a target, then day 1 I can activate one of them, then if the target isn't dead, day 2 I can activate another one, and so on. So I do not believe that the other Quivering Palms are outright wasted when the first one is activated.

(ah, just to add flavor to the alarm bells situation, we know that these alarms automatically break without any noise after 17 days because they are of crap quality)

For what purpose does one want to apply multiple quivering palms to the same target, as opposed to killing them on the spot?

@GaelL I think that's where it falls apart - you aren't necessarily able to stop "one". You can stop "the vibrations", which implies you must end all of the vibrations as one action. When you take that action, the target makes one save & dies/takes damage.

Unless the vibrations have different frequencies, for flavor purposes.

"I stop the 15 HZ one, but not the 10 HZ one"

Well... the RAW says nothing about that. You only appear to have one detonator, not a single one for each set.

Do you believe this is worth a Sage Advice question ?

@GaelL I'm having a hard time not agreeing with you, to be honest (and wanting to change my answer)- based on our current discussions and the issue that Ki and it's effects are NOT considered magical which remove stacking magical effets bit.

@godskook For the purpose that if the target succeeds the first Quiv Palm save (and doesn't die from the 10d10 necrotic), you want to try again with your other Quiv Palms.

@NautArch The problem here is that there are arguments for, and against, your position (which makes it valid and invalid at the same time). Kind of a Schrodinger's opinion.

@GaelL you're not addressing the clause "as opposed to killing them on the spot", which changes the entirety of my question.

@GaelL damnit, i'm very close to submitting a 2nd answer that is at odds with my first :/

@GaelL I understand completely why you'd want to apply multiples IF you somehow couldn't kill the target, but I don't get why you can't just kill the target.

@godskook I want to understand you, but I am confused. What do you refer to when saying "killing them on the spot" ? The Quivering Palm can fail to deliver.

@GaelL Quivering palm requires a melee attack, right?

Yes. A successful melee attack.

I don't think so. You "use your action to end them." (them being the vibrations). It doesn't say anything about stopping one frequency of vibrations, or stopping a subset of vibrations, just that you stop the vibrations. "The Vibrations" must encompass all of the vibrations, since otherwise it is reasonable to say you set up the vibrations with one hit and then activate them several times "because I set up multiple vibrations and ended part of them"

@GaelL Ok, so if you're at that range, just kill them with normal attacks?

I mean, you have time to apply multiple Quivering Palms, so you have the time.

@godskook Sometimes you don't want to be in the area when you kill them, or your enemy runs away

Having the time to make 3 unarmed attacks does not necessarily mean you have the time to beat someone all the way dead

@Delioth You make a very interesting point about the vibrations thing.

I would argue that a single Quivering Palm application only sets up a single frequency of vibrations.

(after all, it's one hit).

@GaelL That's in homebrew territory

Indeed. Sorry for the idea. I want to stay in RAW/RAI.

The ability says nothing about frequency, anything that does is extracting more from the rules than is written :P

But... Do you believe this question is complex enough to deserve being asked to Sage Advice ?

@Delioth Plus, each quivering palm is either going to instakill the target, or cause 10d10 damage, which is more than the monk could reasonably expect to do with all of its available attacks on its turn

@Delioth that's a great way of looking at it.

@Delioth Would you allow @NautArch to add your Vibrations point in his answer ? I think it's a very good addition.

@GaelL you can always try :) But be warned Crawford did discuss magic of Ki and that some DMs may choose to rule it as magical effect - which would then bring in the stacking of magical effects issue. Ultimately - I'd discuss with your DM and come to an agreement.

@GaelL @NautArch of course, I don't intend on holding copyright over them :P

@NautArch But remember, the magical stacking itself is not an issue (as the "durations overlap", which works fine here).

@GaelL true

@NautArch would you allow me to change the title of my question to include the "waste or no waste" part ?

@GaelL It's your question :)

(I was once scolded for changing the purpose of a question by modifying its title, so it's better to verify)

@GaelL -- I don't understand why.... that would seem to fall into the "clarification" heading.

Very good. Edit in progress. I thank you, @NautArch, for your dedication in this issue.

Edit done.

@NautArch You may want to edit the starting "Yes" of your answer.

@GaelL already done :)

very good ! Let's now wait for additional answers.

On that note, I wish you a happy day.

@GaelL I would recommend you remove your last comment and submit it as a possible answer. It doesn't belong in comments.

...I feel kinda bad answering my own question.

It feels... narcissic, no ?

@GaelL Do not! There's even an option to do so when you submit a question. I've done it once (i think)

@GaelL Nope. It's encouraged.

Alright, will do.

@GaelL It's perfectly valid practice on the site though. Sometimes you find the answer to your own problem (through research or discussion), and just because you asked doesn't mean your findings are obsolete or not worth sharing.

Could I pre-verify with you that the wording of my answer is professional enough ? I am kind of a goof, sometimes.

@GaelL There is no shame in using the edit feature on the main site liberally until you are happy with the result.

@GaelL I don't think we can stop you from posting it, but you or community members can propose edits until it's satisfactory. It's a pretty nice feature that we try to make full use of.

@GaelL I regularly post something, then go back and make tweaks - like adding headings, links, page references, and so forth. There's no need to call out edits either. Make like the question (or answer) always existed in its current form.

Thanks for the tip !

@GaelL you can always get the Peer Pressure badge for removing an answer after -3 or something like that.

here goes one downvote. ouch...

@NautArch lol

@GaelL going to try and clean up the answer a bit - feel free to roll it back

@NautArch Theres's a badge for that?...

I once got a Tumbleweed badge on Stack Overflow for posting a question that got no answers for 100 days... I didn't know if I should have felt happy or sad about it, heehee.

What I'm hearing is... "Hey Banjo, go write a crappy answer to something so that you can continue your everlasting quest for badges :D"

@GaelL I think have that one over on the Mac SE, but it's only a week.

So, bottom line - I shouldn't feel too bad about myself if I get tons of downvotes for being a stupid weasel ?

@T.J.L. yup, i got it when i realized i just had a bad answer.

@GaelL there are no stupid weasels, just stupid...something?

seawells?

@NautArch DOWNVOTE

@GaelL I'd also consider an answer based not on the vibrations, but simply on dismissal of individual effects that might be better received.

done

I think I'm a bit too nice in life - I upvote your answer while not upvoting mine (and keeping it in the negative), hee-hee.

@GaelL etter, but right now it's an opinion-answer. You can support it by citing the multiple effects and the interpretation that the effects aren't dismissed, but remain. LIke two spiritual guardians only hurt once, but if oneg oes away, the other will hurt.

@GaelL can't upvote your own answers/questions :)

Hmmm, yes, I'll use up the Spirit Guardian example above.

@GaelL the danger of that is it's a magical effect citation, but it can go under the same game effects citation from the DMG. The goal here is to propose an answer, and then find support either in the rules or in your own gameplay that supports it.

I tend to prefer rules support, but I'm learning to be more open :)

Quick question : if two Monks apply a Quivering Palm to the same target, and the first one ends his vibrations... It doesn't end the second monk's vibrations, I would believe ?

@GaelL I'd have to imagine you're correct. There appears to be something fundamentally different between "my" quivering palm stuff and "yours" (mostly since the thing says nothing about one Monk's Quivering Palm interacting with any other monk's)

Huh?

Pleas explain

To be clear, he means between Quivering Palm used by "Monk A" and "Monk B".

Aye; Nothing says that Monk A using Quivering Palm overrides Monk B's Quivering Palm on the same Red Dragon

or that B using his action to kill/maim Red Dragon by ending his Quivering Palm stops A's from being able to do the same

@T.J.L. This is where I think @GaelL may have the correct answer. If there isn't a difference in functional Quivering Palms (The effect is the effect. Whether it is the same originator or not)

@NautArch Perhaps... but my interpretation of the "only one creature" bit would favor your answer. I believe the intention was that you can only have the effect floating, untriggered once total. The DMG errata goes along with that being the intention, too.

@T.J.L. yes - I'd agree with that. The intent is likely to only have one. I mean, it is a 17th level ability, but when the results are either Unconscious or 10d10 necrotic, then you're looking at either an unconscious, dead, or severely hurt enemy.

There's an errata on the Quiv Palm ?

@GaelL I believe T.J.L. is talking about the "overlapping game effects" that @NautArch cited in their answer

@Delioth Yes.

Hmmmm. Very insightful discussion. I added the bit on several monks QPing the same target, it may make my answer slightly more convincing.

Heh. I like the term QPing. Has a nice ring to it.

@GaelL Again, I'd strongly suggest adding rules citations to help support your opinion and logic on the answer.

Not sure which part of the rules I should cite.

Later, folks!

@GaelL Whichever ones you can find which support your interpretation (whether they exist or not is an entirely different discussion; but if you find them and they support you, cite them)

...darn, another downvote. Well, time to terminate myself.

@GaelL This is not Paranoia!

@godskook That sounds like treason.

@Delioth @GaelL Consider (the coconut...sorry, damn kids and their Moana) what basis you are using for your opinion. If you're saying that multiple effects are ongoing, then use the rules discussing that to help explain why your intepretation makes sense.

But you already cited it in your answer, which is on the same page. Wouldn't it be unnecessary repetition ?

@GaelL I QPed last weekend. And yes, it had a nice ring to it. =D

@GaelL Answers should stand on their own. You don't know @NautArch's life, they might decide to delete it (for any reason or no reason) at any point. At that point, part of your answer is as good as a dead link.

Good point

@NautArch I never did get an evaluation about those mooks.....

@Delioth Please continue referring to me in plural :)

@godskook hahaha. Meant ot respond saying I have zero knowledge of 3.5 :D

@NautArch In soviet 3.5, there's zero knowledge of YOU

@nitsua60 @GaelL I just want to make sure that both of you are using "ring" as a vibration pun. It's been a long day.

Holy cow !

@NautArch I'm just conscious of pronouns since I read the discussion on it on meta earlier. I decided arbitrarily choosing pronouns probably isn't a good choice for chat (and also that neutral-singular-they has more historical precedent than default-he)

@Delioth We know, and we appreciate it. Okay, I'll stop. You can refer to me as a he, though.

We are many. We are strong

good nighttime

And we don't stop QPing

nice edit @GaelL have an upvote.

Which one ?

@GaelL QPing and QQing are one letter apart. Are they similar concepts?

Maybe. But first, we must talk about QPUs.

Oh my goodness... My answer has now positive upvotes ! I can't believe it !

I won't have to cry in a corner tonight, very good !

@GaelL Quantum Processing Units?

Quick question: Would 4d6d1, reroll 1s have the same probability curve as 4d5d1+4?

@Papayaman1000 What is 4d5d1?

(4d6 drop the lowest 1 dice, reroll any dice that evaluate as 1 for the first equation)

(4d5 drop the lowest 1 dice, add 4 to the final sum for the second)

It seems like it would have the same effect (limit dice to outputting numbers 2 through 6, effectively), but I'm not the greatest with probability, so...

@Papayaman1000 does this help answer your question at all? anydice.com/program/c665

@Adam Not quite. I need to reroll any dice that evaluate to 1 in the first equation. Otherwise perfect, though!

wait

I found an article on exactly this

What about this? anydice.com/program/c666

And what do you know, aside from slightly shifted values, the probabilities are the same

@Adam if you look at the graph view it doesn't look the same.

@A.McCurran Perfect!

Exactly my fear. The d5 method boosts the probability some.

Wait...

*palm*

@nwp Looks pretty similar to me. It's just a horizontal translation

I shoulda said +3. When I do that, it lines up perfectly.

anydice.com/program/c667

Well then. Looks like the 4d5 method is a perfectly acceptable substitute.

And you wasted c666 for that? The beast will not be pleased.

Kehehe.

It's exactly what I asked for, but not what I wanted.

[Proceeds to self-crucify in front of the tech department]

You didn't want it to be perfect?

No, it was perfect. It was my own request that was wrong.

[Which is where the whole phrase is born.]

@Delioth the fact that it's not my "RPG IS ART" statement got starred but your reserved response says a lot about community's both realistic and a bit nihilistic attitude towards promoting RPGs as a higher form of entertainment.

apparently dnd-spells.com screwed up their certificate and firefox says

> This site uses HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) to specify that Firefox may only connect to it securely. As a result, it is not possible to add an exception for this certificate.

Man, you know you've been on this site too long when you're shocked to see a picture of Blue Diamond in a SU community because you thought it was Dooplergreener

@nwp guess they haven't fixed it

@NautArch Well, dodgy illegal sites aren't generally too concerned about this sort of thing.

And we aren't exactly shocked when it happens either.