TRPG General Chat

WrongOnTheInternet

20:00

Is this a RAW question or a gameplay question?

Xirema

The chain of logic from "I make an attack"→"I am no longer hidden" is a simple lookup of a single sentence in one rule buried somewhere in the PHB (I think in the Combat chapter?). The chain of logic from "I cast Fireball"→"I am no longer hidden" involves using multiple rules in conjunction with each other to imply the result.

Ah, found it.

> If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses. — Unseen Attackers and Targets, PHB, pg. 194

GcL

But chanting some arcane phrases and waving your hands about seems to fall under the "making noise" section of stealth

@Xirema That's from the combat section. The using abilities section talks about hiding and the things that might reveal a character.

WrongOnTheInternet

So 5E doesn't allow hidden sniper fire?

GcL

@Xirema Yeah. There is a step in there to recognize that chanting and waving your arms -> noise -> breaking hiding.

@WrongOnTheInternet Totally does if you're building for it. Rogue and monks can take an action and hide in the same round.

Xirema

@GcL Yes. They Imply (capital-case I) that you would lose stealth from casting a spell, but they don't expressly say "if you cast a spell, you become revealed". So a strictly RAW reading requires you to conjoin all the relevant rules, rather than being able to cite a single rule.

WrongOnTheInternet

20:04

@GcL Ah, the old hidden / attack / re-hide trick.

GcL

@Xirema What's the difference between "Imply" and "imply" ?

goodguy5

@GcL the number of imps involved

GcL

@goodguy5 Aren't both i an I just one imp ?

goodguy5

(and with that, I'm off for the weekend. Have fun ladies and gents... etc)

GcL

Ciao

Xirema

20:04

@GcL In the former case, it means that the implication is an intentional designer decision, in the latter, it means the implication is an accidental consequence of the rules.

GcL

@Xirema That's a new turn of definition for me. So Imply means intentional and imply is accidental?

Xirema

(I am not trying to dispute anyone's claims about what should happen, RAW or RAI. Just providing a dissection of how the rules were written)

GcL

That's in the rules?

I thought it was some obscure convention of legalese or philosophical debate.

Xirema

@GcL That's how I'm using it. I doubt there's anything like that written in the rules, anywhere.

GcL

Well, if we're redefining terms, I would like to redefine Rose as "anything that smells as sweet" so we can short circuit that common turn of phrase about naming. Because naming is hard. /S

Daniel Zastoupil

20:11

@kviiri The OP's concern has more to do with the narrative of the spell rather than the mechanics of it. Otherwise, there wouldn't be a question as to why Fireball isn't an "Attack". The game doesn't say it is, so why would the OP question it further?

Because it's his narrative/perspective that seems flawed.

WrongOnTheInternet

So a fireball appears from nowhere; then you start searching for a hidden wizard

Xirema

If it's not obvious, I'm a software engineer by profession. I've worked for 3 different companies in 6 years, and the problem I keep re-experiencing is the fact that different corporations have different meanings for different words. The word "Boot" means a large shoe to one company, the back of a truck for another company, and a type of BigInteger implementation for another company, and even though one of these sounds very wrong, it's also treated as normal and acceptable.

WrongOnTheInternet

Boot means BigInteger? What?

Xirema

@WrongOnTheInternet Yeah. Corporations suck.

WrongOnTheInternet

@Xirema I imagine that decision was before any code review process was implemented?

kviiri

20:14

@DanielZastoupil Trying to force a narrative explanation to what is an attack and what isn't seems ill-advised.

Daniel Zastoupil

@kviiri Why?

Xirema

C̷̢̪̳̟͓̤͍̰͊͌̚ą̶̛͕͙̺̙̱̣́̋̄̀̊̎̈́̂̽̈́͠p̵̛̛͍̱̫̺̭͍̳̩̥̀̅͒́̋̍́͛͒̒̓̕i̵̧̻̗͙̺͔̭̙̍̓̀̊ṭ̸̬̿̃̈́́̍̓̈̆͛́̏̒̂̔̅͝ͅa̸̼̼̠͋̑̋͋̈́̈́̓̑̀̍̈́͌͒͘̕̕ļ̵̢͙͉͔̲̞͔͈̼̞̳̔̇͜͜͜i̶̛̟͙̥̱̳̜͖̖̣̮̺̽̆͌̽̃͋̃̈́́̚͝ͅs̶̲̤̱̯̘̻͇̱̥̩͒͋̂̈́͆̔̕t̶̬̥͊̃̀͊̚s̴̡̨̞̰̠̩̹̹̰̯͕͈̬̔͋̀̾̎̈̔ ̷̬͂̈́a̸̢̭͕̹͎̲̝̣̝̲͕͇̙͌̑̾͜͠r̷̢͓͉͍̔̂̃̆̓̌̀̉̈͆͌̚͜e̸̻̤̲̥̍͊̈̓ ̸̨̣͖͈͆̌͠p̸̢̟͎̬̪̩͇̹͔̐̑̈́́͛͛á̸̧̰̝̮̮͍̻̭͖̦̟͒̓̋̎ͅͅr̶̡̬̻͔̊͋̅̃͂a̷̹̜̠̯̠̹̎̏ŝ̵̩͎͕͓͐͝ͅi̷͕̱̬͕͔̜̺̐̽ͅẗ̸̢̛͔̦̦̟̼̤̱̒̐̃̏̌̈͊͆͜͝e̵̛̪̊̀̽͐̈́̄͛̚͝͝͝ṡ̴̪̹̀̚͠,̸̨̫̺̜́ ̷͕̘͈̱̥̞̳͈͚̹̎̍͠ͅ

p̸̡̞͎̳̙̋̓̇͜͜ͅǫ̷̬̗̾͝w̶̡͓̺̘̞͔̲̜͓̼̔͐̎̈́̈̽̍͋̈́͗͘ẹ̵̐̈́͊͘r̵̢̡͖͈̗̦̫͉̦̺͈̋̄̌̒ ̴̦̝̰̻̝̰̋͆̔̍̊͋͂̉͌͋̈͘͘͠͝͠ţ̵̢̛͕̥̫̣͂͋̀͑̓̓͗̀͗̕ͅŏ̴̢̧̤̻̯͙̘̻̒́͐̄̍͒͊̅̀̓̂͜͠ ̴̫̭͎̗͐̉t̷͓̙̞̺̫͉͖͓͕̠̞̘̩͖̞̿͆̅̓̈́͐̀̇̈́̌͠͠…

GcL

@kviiri It comes up from time to time. The storm cleric subclass gets to do thunder damage to anyone within 5' that attacks them as a reacton.

WrongOnTheInternet

@Xirema Zalgo is Marxist?

GcL

Which is cool. But a wizard casting magic missile or lightning bolt point blank doesn't count.

Same thing with a bard casting vicious mockery, but witch bolt and chromatic orb are fair game.

kviiri

20:17

@DanielZastoupil Because the underlying explanation between the two is driven by some arcane game design, not simulation

GcL

Good point.

Daniel Zastoupil

@kviiri To me, it doesn't seem at all that complicated. Attacks care about your armor, Saving Throw effects don't. As to why they do-or-do-not care about your armor is easily justified from the effect itself.

GcL

I like that description. Attacks care about your AC.

Daniel Zastoupil

@kviiri But then you have to still justify why some abilities work and others don't. Why can't I can't I use Shield against Fireball?

"Well, that wizard was stupid. I've seen him block arrows all day, but he can't block a single Fireball spell that he saw coming".

kviiri

@DanielZastoupil That's the mechanics of it

GcL

20:19

Fireball doesn't care about your armor, and fireball isn't magic missile. I can totally narrate that one. The arcane resonance of shield was designed specifically to enhance the casters armor briefly and the particular resonance was selected to negate magic missile.

Daniel Zastoupil

Sure, but then how does Mage Armor play a part? Or a Barbarian's Unarmored Defense?

kviiri

But what I'm saying is, there's no strong narrative correlation between what an attack is in game terms and what would be considered an attack in narrative.

GcL

I think it would be neat to have a wizard that designs shield spells to negate other spells, but not magic missile. Might be a fun side quest leading up to a wizards duel.

WrongOnTheInternet

What I want to know is why doesn't Transmute Rock to Mud work on worked stone? What counts as worked stone, anyway?

GcL

@WrongOnTheInternet That's stone with a job. /S

WrongOnTheInternet

20:20

@GcL I'm now picturing a field of boulders wearing hard hats.

GcL

@WrongOnTheInternet I like this mental imagery.

Daniel Zastoupil

It's probably just a requirement there to make sure you don't melt people's houses.

Or powerdrill your way into a stone fortress.

WrongOnTheInternet

@DanielZastoupil So what is it useful for then? I'd probably use it as a sapping tool (melt the rock under a fortress)

GcL

Actually, it's union magic. The stonemasons and bricklayers unions invested a great deal of their dues with some of the elemental forces and got their works in under the fundamental elemental laws.

@WrongOnTheInternet Useful against non-tunneling things that don't float in mud. Ogres come to mind.

WrongOnTheInternet

@GcL Spell Research : Transmute Worked Stone to Mud

GcL

20:24

@WrongOnTheInternet You want to end up "swimming with the fishes" because I don't want to cross the stonemasons' union.

WrongOnTheInternet

@GcL The campaign is now about the party's conflict with the Stonemason Guild.

GcL

CR 8 Guy who finds things that fall of ~~trucks~~ wagons having a nice conversation

deadly encounter

Thomas Mundane

Worked stone...

GcL

That's some hard working stone.

Thomas Mundane

even comes with a magic item that can cast message at will. . .

WrongOnTheInternet

20:27

This is probably in a megadungeon somewhere.

Daniel Zastoupil

@WrongOnTheInternet It has a few mentioned uses. The mud itself can be up to 10 feet deep, and basically becomes quicksand to anyone who cannot pull themselves out or fly.

It also mentions you can cast it at the top of a cave, and cause a bunch of damage to anything that's under it as they're hit by a massive glob of heavy mud.

WrongOnTheInternet

@DanielZastoupil The cave-in part of it can be cool. As a battlefield debuff... I feel like that role is filled pretty well by a bunch of other lower level spells.

Daniel Zastoupil

Give that sucker to some Drow casters, and your players will probably want to stop going underground for a while.

GcL

@DanielZastoupil Has other profitable uses as well. Cast it near a hot springs to host a pop-up spa day. Impress your friends and local nobility.

Daniel Zastoupil

Not to mention that it modifies 2 10ft cubes per level. Assuming the minimum level, that's 10 cubes.

WrongOnTheInternet

20:30

@DanielZastoupil "Aren't you guys tired of mining out the cave-ins?"

Daniel Zastoupil

What's really dumb is that it still retains a mudlike form once it's dispelled. It...kinda just stays as "magical mud" until it's dispelled.

WrongOnTheInternet

@DanielZastoupil I like the use as a spell for creating farmland

Daniel Zastoupil

So you could use it to distract people who are using Detect Magic, as they keep scanning the friggin mud on the walls.

WrongOnTheInternet

Go out into a desert and fill it with mud. Who'll stop you?

Daniel Zastoupil

Or you can make a shape of something with mud, then Dispel it to transform it back to Stone.

Instant stone floor.

I don't want to think about what happens if you dispel it while someone's in it.

WrongOnTheInternet

20:33

Ok, 5th ed Rock to Mud is better than 3rd Rock to Mud

Daniel Zastoupil

I'm reading this off of the 3.5 SRD

WrongOnTheInternet

Ah. I've read through... six versions of this spell recently, and now I'm mixing them up.

Daniel Zastoupil

The version I'm reading says that it has a Permanent duration, but Dispel Magic can revert it back to stone. The fact that Dispel Magic can be used implies that the mud itself remains magical...indefinitely.

Unless...3.5 Dispel Magic can dispel things that are nonmagical.

WrongOnTheInternet

Many of the original versions (OD&D, B/X, AD&D) implied that the mud just kind of... dried out after awhile.

Daniel Zastoupil

Dunno. It's been a long while since I've done any 3.5 stuff.

WrongOnTheInternet

20:36

Seems like the later editions had the same spell, but it would have been used in wildly different ways.

Daniel Zastoupil

Oh, it does that, too. It can dry out based on weather conditions, but Dispel Magic can be used for as long as it remains as mud.

WrongOnTheInternet

So the mud is magic until it... dries out?

Daniel Zastoupil

That's the implication, yes.

WrongOnTheInternet

So that is just magic water. If I were an enterprising mage, I'd harvest that magic water for use in experiments.

Daniel Zastoupil

You don't play 3.5 if you want everything to make sense.

And when it dries out, it doesn't become Rock again, it becomes mundane dirt.

WrongOnTheInternet

20:38

This isn't quite peasant railgun levels of nonsense, though; this has an interesting implication that you could take to its logical extreme.

Daniel Zastoupil

Really, if they just didn't say that you could Dispel it, it would have solved any problems.

"It's a spell that converts mundane Rock to mundane Mud that becomes mundane Dirt". But NO. They had to add that one thing.

WrongOnTheInternet

What. That seems like an editing oversight!

It's magic water!

BESW

@Xirema The problem with this argument is that it equates applying the male gaze to women with... applying the male gaze to men. It matters who is doing the objectification. Which is not to say that applying the male gaze to men is good, but it's a very different kind of thing.

2

Xirema

@BESW Definitely. The argument is somewhat satirical, i.e. the point isn't "actually, we should be putting all men in chainmail bikinis!", it's more like "if you're uncomfortable putting men in chainmail bikini's, how do you think women feel about having that done to them?"

BESW

Power dynamics mean that swapping a specific instance of objectification between a marginalized group and an empowered group, isn't going to produce the same effect.

2

Xirema

20:53

(I often forget that the 'unstated' part of an argument is more obvious to me than it might be to other people, so it's good you're pointing that out)

BESW

@Xirema Sure. But an equally likely response that I've seen pretty often is that male characters show a lot of skin all the time and it's empowering and non-exploitative so why are women so upset when it's done to them instead of to Conan the Barbarian?

The links above deal with the answer to that pretty definitively, I think.

The takeaway, I guess, is that our rhetoricals often turn out to NOT be rhetorical.

Xirema

@BESW Ugh, yeah, I've had those conversations with people a lot. A whooooole lot of people who don't understand that "Barbarian" aesthetic is a lot more empowering than "chainmail bikini" (which has its own problematic stuff, but I don't want to start like 5 tangential conversations...).

I would argue a lot of that stuff comes down more to framing than the costume design, but it's both if we're being honest.

BESW

It's a whole package.

But, as at least one of those links mentions, actually being objectified by the female gaze doesn't look like being objectified by the male gaze. They're different things but our culture's visual language is only fluent in the male gaze.

WrongOnTheInternet

Oh no I'm in an infinite loop

Xirema

@BESW Dan Olsen touched on that subject when he was examining the Fifty Shades movies: between movies 1 and 2, they changed from a female director to a male director, and the way that Grey was being framed by the camera changed from a framing that sincerely tried to make Grey into eye-candy, into a framing that instead emphasized his physique in a more male-gazey manner.

Not sure if I want to link the videos, since they might constitute being more NSFW than what is supposed to be allowed in this chat, but "Dan Olsen Fifty Shades" in youtube should take you to the right place.

I hope.

BESW

21:06

Ah, yes, I've seen that. Good video.

Though if you really wanna get the "what it's like to be objectified by the male gaze" experience inversed, read some gay romance novels by straight women.

user15026

@BESW eeeeergh yep. (If you want rec's, I've got 'em, both good and very not.)

BESW

It's the closest we can get to the experience of seeing people we consider "like us" immersed a power domain where our value is rooted in benefit to those in charge.

But it's still not the same because we can step back into our own power domain at any time.

WrongOnTheInternet

Does Chuck Tingle count?

user15026

Chuck Tingle is his(?) own separate....thing.

WrongOnTheInternet

Ah, gotcha

user15026

21:15

Like yes they're sorta queer romances, kinda, but far from representative of the genre in any way.

WrongOnTheInternet

A real genre-defier, that one.

user15026

(they're mostly sex fluff bits, from the handful I've read.)

BESW

Chuck Tingle is like Bob Dylan. Everybody know he's amazingly good, everybody disagrees what's good about him, a lot of people wish he would stop, and it's difficult to even agree on what it is he's even doing in the first place.

trogdor

lol

user15026

@BESW Sounds....about right, actually.

WrongOnTheInternet

21:17

My friend introduced me, and then insisted on reading several passages of his books aloud

During dinner

MikeQ

Is the work not considered genre parody?

user15026

@MikeQ Kinda? Sorta? Depends who you ask.

user15026

gestures to @BESW's point above

trogdor

what people do or do not consider parody,..... can be pretty different

user15026

Like I can't see him getting nominated for a RITA or anything any time soon, but then again, who knows. :P

trogdor

21:19

he doesn't pay regional income tax?

:P

user15026

@trogdor This mostly reminds me I forget what RITA stands for. Romance...something something Awards, I think.

BESW

The "Romance Writers of America" awards.

trogdor

@Ash yeah I have no idea

@BESW ah ok

there we go

user15026

@BESW ah, yes, sorry, I was being hyperspecific in my quest for meaning, should have been more general.

BESW

I'm not sure what the RITA stands for specifically.

Sir Cinnamon

21:21

"It is named for the RWA's first president, Rita Clay Estrada."

THEN WHY IS IT ALL CAPS

user15026

Because....caps are....fun?

Sir Cinnamon

She was a loud talker

WrongOnTheInternet

While it can be considered parody, what do you call a work that is both parody that also seems to constitute a straight (ha!) example?

trogdor

@WrongOnTheInternet complicated

BESW

@WrongOnTheInternet A good parody.

trogdor

21:23

that works too

WrongOnTheInternet

Works for me!

nitsua60

I think the fourth bullet point is the way I'm going to go. Do you have WGtE? My thought is to write something like:
* Setting books: *Guildmaster's Guide to Ravnica* (includes playable races[link to playable races question] and a short adventure), *Wayfinder's Guide to Eberron* (includes ____)
But I don't know what WGtE contains....

trogdor

like Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon yesterday

MikeQ

Or an action movie parody that is also an action movie

WrongOnTheInternet

@MikeQ Stuff that scratches the genre itch while lampooning it

KorvinStarmast

21:26

@nitsua60 I do, as I have it, but what in detail do you need?

WrongOnTheInternet

Although that can just be a straight deconstruction

KorvinStarmast

@nitsua60 You want the playable races from Eberron? Is that what you need?

nitsua60

@KorvinStarmast Wondering in broad strokes what other than setting info it contains. Classes, races...?

KorvinStarmast

Gimme a sec, I'll take a peak.

nitsua60

Don't even need a list of them, just what broad categories it contains.

You know what--maybe I don't even need that. Just "does WGtE contain anything that you wouldn't necessarily think of?" Like I think it's worth pointing out that GGtR contains an adventure, since it sits outside of a bullet point labeled "adventure books."

KorvinStarmast

21:29

Changelings • Kalashtar • Shifters • Warforged ... and Dragonmarks

nitsua60

Also, which came first: GGtR or WGtE?

KorvinStarmast

IIRC WGTE

nitsua60

So just playable races?

KorvinStarmast

I am not sure about classes, gimme a sec.

Nope, looks like backgrounds and dragonmarks are bound together as packages.

Didn't see a chapter on new classes in the material from the WGTE

nitsua60

Cool--thanks.

KorvinStarmast

21:31

@nitsua60 Glad to help. Artificer is still UA, but I think it is born originally in Eberron.

But that was while I was out of the game, 3.5 era.

WrongOnTheInternet

Artificier in 5e?

Ah... they're still not selling that stuff in PDF.

KorvinStarmast

@WrongOnTheInternet UA: it is play test at the moment.

@WrongOnTheInternet Huh? I got WGtE in pdf.

WrongOnTheInternet

@KorvinStarmast What?! Are they selling the core rules in pdf form yet?

nitsua60

@WrongOnTheInternet No, just that one.

Because they explicitly say "this is still playtest, but we're going to milk it for cash anyway."

WrongOnTheInternet

@nitsua60 Ah. I was practically breaking out my wallet on the spot.

KorvinStarmast

21:34

@WrongOnTheInternet No, and WGtE isn't core rules. I was not understanding your comment.

IIRC, D&D Beyond via Twitch is the way to get electronic core rules ...

WrongOnTheInternet

@KorvinStarmast Does that require an internet connection?

KorvinStarmast

yes

WrongOnTheInternet

They abandoned their 4e tools while we were still paying for them, so I'm not inclined to give them any money if I can't have permanent ownership over it.

KorvinStarmast

So does RPG.SE

@WrongOnTheInternet I find your PoV wise.

WrongOnTheInternet

@KorvinStarmast Yeah. I hate subscription based models that are unwarranted.

nitsua60

21:39

Nov 16 '16 at 1:32, by nitsua60

OMG WotC finally realized that I would love to pay them for things I've (presumably, illegally) downloaded!

I was wrong. They still haven't figured that out, really.

WrongOnTheInternet

@nitsua60 I can't put a finger on why they keep zig-zagging between smart and stupid.

Like... I found out the AD&D books were PoD, and picked up all the core books like that. If they released 5E PDFs, it might actually see play at some of my tables.

MikeQ

@WrongOnTheInternet WOTC has a freely available Basic Rules pdf, which covers most of the core mechanics and a subset of the race/class/build options

WrongOnTheInternet

@MikeQ Yes, but not all of them; which means that when players at the table are making their characters, they have to take turns with the one or two PHBs at the table.

MikeQ

It would be nice if they released an analogous pdf for the DMG, specifically how to run a game, build a campaign, and account for player playstyles

WrongOnTheInternet

@MikeQ That would be nice, but I'm not sure how much it would help.

Hm..

nitsua60

21:58

@MikeQ It'd be nice if the DMG did that.

MikeQ

@nitsua60 It kinda does, to an extent. The early chapters have useful advice and mechanisms for structuring and organizing a campaign

Among new DMs, a common pitfall is assuming that knowing the PHB combat mechanics means knowing how to organize an adventure game for actual human players

i.e., failure to establish what kind of game they want theirs to be, and then finding difficulty running sessions and planning adventures

WrongOnTheInternet

@MikeQ YOU CAN NOT HAVE A MEANINGFUL CAMPAIGN IF STRICT TIME RECORDS ARE NOT KEPT

MikeQ

I don't understand the reference

WrongOnTheInternet

Advice given in the 1E DMG; it was when a sandbox game was the assumed default playstyle

It's advice that's really good for one style of play, and totally unnecessary for others.

A newbie DM might not even know what basic playstyle they want their game to be.

MikeQ

Ah ok. The 5e DMG is better about it. E.g. There are sections about common player playstyles, common DM styles, common campaign themes, etc. They're all acknowledged.

It can help a new DM avoid frustration caused by players who approach their campaign in ways they didn't expect

It can also help guide the DM into crafting an adventure structure that works well with the system mechanics, as opposed to using book style or videogame style narratives

WrongOnTheInternet

22:16

I didn't find it particularly helpful, but I'm probably not the target audience, either

MikeQ

The book could be better organized. I think these style and general-approach sections should be at the start of the book, rather than the dense sections about cosmology

KorvinStarmast

@MikeQ Amen, could be better organized. Yes. but I find a lot of what's in it to be useful.

MikeQ

@KorvinStarmast The DMG's advice is to 1. define the pantheons and cosmos, then 2. pick some major plot events, and then 3. figure out the campaign's style, tone, and pacing. But I think that should be reversed.

KorvinStarmast

@MikeQ yep, I think you have the right of it.

Hot RPG Questions

23:04

2

Q: Can you replace a racial trait cantrip when leveling up?

The Tiefling has the Infernal Legacy racial trait, which grants them the Thaumaturgy cantrip. In the PHB, it says (emphasis mine): [...] when you gain a level in this class, you can choose one of the warlock spells you know and replace it with another spell from the warlock spell list, ...

user15026

23:20

user15026

Is this correct? Because if so that's kinda awesome.

Shalvenay

@Ash Fact 2 is correct at least in 5e

trogdor

@Ash yeah that's more or less how it works in every edition of D&D I have played

the responses are just conjecture but Werebears are lawful good for some reason

user15026

23:38

I assumed everything after prokopetz was just people having fun with the concept, but I was curious if it was a viable concept

MikeQ

Ah yes, the Conjure Orphanage spell. Only available to LG were-bears.

BESW

I know a guy who played a werebear paladin.

Glazius

@BESW Scarred his holy symbol into his belly, turned undead with a werebear stare?

BESW

23:55

[takes notes]

user15026

@Glazius And I thought normal Care Bears were unnerving...

Transcript for