My rogue recently "acquired" a ring of Telekinesis. Can the Telekinesis spell be used on yourself for the following?
saving yourself from a fall as long the fall distance allows you a standard action before you go SPLAT! (a modified feather fall spell)
levitate yourself to reach a vertical dest...
Idiom: a group of words established by usage as having a meaning not deducible from those of the individual words (e.g., rain cats and dogs, see the light ).
@goodguy5 I don't really know how to explain it further. I think an important distinction is that idioms are a part of the language being spoken, and hence commonly understood despite their literal and figurative meanings being mismatched, while a metaphor has no such constraint.
I can't think of any good examples of English metaphors, but Wikipedia bails me out: Shakespeare's famour "All the world's a stage" is a metaphor, yet isn't an idiom (or at least, probably wasn't at the time it was penned)
A metaphor is something I can establish on the spot: This room is a penguin. (I'd need to further explain what that means before it makes sense to you.) An idiom is already embedded in the language and I am not establishing it, I am just using what's been embedded already: This room is a goose. (This room is a silly oaf.)
In one I am saying the room is basically a penguin (the bird), in the other I am definitely not saying the room is in any way like an actual goose (the bird).
I've never heard the term before, I thought it literally meant a prayer that was stable (maybe like "Our Father" or something limilar that always uses the same words)
I wouldn't call Our Father an idiom, though, because its literal meaning is quite the same as its meaning as understood, even if it has a few kinks people keep debating
Well, I'm guessing (I could be wrong) much like 'No Feather', the English 'Break a Leg' is meant to be taken literally by the targets of the prayer, even though the human listening to it is meant to guess that it's a trick.
Well, you say 'Break a Leg' because you want the petty and jealous gods who hear it to think that the people are already in a squabble and so don't bother making things worse, right? Or are such sayings serving a totally different purpose in Saxon land?
I think typically Western people don't consider wishings of good luck or such to have intermediaries, but I'm not sure sure if there's a historical difference there
I mean, that is the function of our local 'No feather no fur to you', and I've been told that the English 'Break a Leg' is essentially the same thing but in different words.
@vicky_molokh The origin of the phrase is the Stage, where superstition would have it wishing some good luck would jinx the performance so you wish them basically the opposite
@vicky_molokh The origin of "break a leg" is, as far as I know, from a superstition that wishing good luck to an actor will jinx them and therefore it's better to wish them something bad instead --- ironically, of course --- but I've never heard this superstition involve spirits of any kind beyond the one who speaks the wish and the target
@vicky_molokh From some quick reading (I've never heard 'Neither feather nor fur' before today) they have the exact same function (and much of the same logic)
My parents told me it's because speaking'd scare the fish away, but for some reason, wishing someone "may your fishing lines be taut" is okay despite being lengthier :P
@Carcer well if i did say you can do it on opposite day, you wouldn't be able to do it on opposite day
@Carcer You can flag those for moderator attention and we'll remove them. Our current criteria for when to do that is when it's hurting the interests of the asker:
When HNQ Harms the Interests of the Asker
HNQ can give the asker extra visibility, but it can also result in answers that are missing some of the expectations specific to this sub-stack. It is a difficult question when the benefits exceed the drawbacks and vice versa. It's certainly not a welcom...
@vicky_molokh It probably varies in specific contexts, but (speaking from an English perspective) it is not my experience that there's a general superstition about wishing people good luck
@Carcer there is not, it might just be a weird thing to say sometimes, when there's nothing needing luck. If I'm having lunch with my estranged sister-slash-nemesis, wishing me "good luck" (that it goes well or something) might be funny and appropriate, but if I'm having lunch with my darling sister-slash-bff, there's nothing to wish me luck for and "good luck" would be weird.
I think maybe it feels a bit weird to wish someone luck in the absence of a specific reason - it's natural to wish someone good luck if they're about to go and do something difficult or uncertain, but not to just wish them luck in a non-specific sense
jinx
@vicky_molokh are you wishing these hapless westerners luck with specific things they are doing or just in a vague and general sense?
In Finnish, a person who has been especially lucky can be described as "Fortune's mole" (as in the mammal, not the skin thing). In Swedish, it's "Fortune's cheese" instead
And several times I saw people react along the lines of 'why would anyone wish me luck?' or the like. I don't think I've seen the same reaction from someone in the second world.
you're either wishing people luck at confusing times when they don't consider that they're doing anything they'd need to be wished luck for, or all your friends are very self-deprecating
Saying good luck can imply they need luck, which can work out to have a disrespectful subtext. "I'm going to have a meeting with the manager now about project progress." "Good luck!" - implies there's something they need luck with, which may in turn imply the project's doing badly or something. "I'm going to have a meeting with the manager now about our proposal." "Good luck!" - implies they need good luck with the proposal... when it's uncertain, that's totally appropriate.
@kviiri Someone said that the Hotness Bot was a fickle mistress. Someone else said something about it being an idiom. I asked if it should be a metaphor, instead. And I thought you said it was both.
"I'm gonna go play Mario now." "Good luck!" - Thank you, I need it, Mario is a merciless game. "I'm gonna go do some drawing now." "Good luck!" - Luck doesn't factor into drawing at all, so that'd be weird tos ay.
@vicky_molokh From my midwestern US perspecitve, we generally wish someone luck when they are about to perform a task that might need being lucky. I generally wouldn't wish someone luck just as a way general way to say "goodbye" for example.
@vicky_molokh On the other hand if, for example, the traffic or weather was unusually bad and we were both talking about it, I might wish someone good luck as a way of expressing commiseration with the situation and hoping they make it through it.
@vicky_molokh Sure, that's just a farewell. You're not actually wishing them that their bye is a good one; "good bye" is a contraction of "god be with you". It's "fare well", "see you later", etc.
The Great Vowel Shift was a series of changes in the pronunciation of the English language that took place primarily between 1350 and the 1600s and 1700s, beginning in southern England and today having influenced effectively all dialects of English. Through this vowel shift, all Middle English long vowels changed their pronunciation. Some consonant sounds changed as well, particularly those that became silent; the term Great Vowel Shift is sometimes used to include these consonant changes.English spelling began to become standardized in the 15th and 16th centuries, and the Great Vowel Shift is...
But the translation argument doesn't really hold because my language --- and no doubt many others --- have indeed appropriated English expressions and idioms word-for-word. Anglisms
@goodguy5 Similes are most certainly a thing both here and there. As are metaphors. But I'm not sure in what way they could be still a thing yet work differently.
Now, individual ones will of course not be translated 1:1, and usually not literally either.
One Finnish idiom is iisakinkirkko, literally "Isaac's church" but referring specifically to St. Isaac's Cathedral in St. Petersburg. Something is an Isaac's church if it takes seemingly forever to finish, but of course the connection is metaphorical
it's fascinating seeing some of the language questions that pop up in HNQ from ESL speakers trying to find english equivalents to idioms/expressions in their language
I don't assume to know how languages with other roots work. I cannot be certain that phrases in Chinese, or Cyrillic, work the same way that they do in English
I'm translating a Russian blog post into English and got stuck with the proverb, "Whatever a Russian does, they end up making the Kalashnikov gun." (Humorously meaning it's hard or even impossible to get past established patterns of doing things.)
Are there any similar proverbs in the English la...
@goodguy5 Cyrillics tend to have looser word order and a lot more flexion that carries some info that's not easily packed in English (or maybe I'm just bad at packing it).
But Isaac's Church is a building which has many current qualities. None of which are "takes a long time to build." That is a fact about a building but not a quality of the building. The idiom "st isaacs church" is nonsense to anyone outside
There's also an idiom derived from a simile, täynnä kuin Turusen pyssy, "full like Turunen's musket" which originates from a guy named Turunen having been raiding across the border and bringing loot even inside the barrel of his gun
@goodguy5 The cathedral DID take a long time to build tho :)
E.g. Ukrainian 'документи розповсюджуватимуться' means documents will be distrubted, packing all that into one verb, as contrasted to English verbs which don't have a future tense ending.
@goodguy5 A term used (previously) used by jounalists to describe drunk people (to get around libal laws). Not used anymore because the actual meaning is now widely known.
Yeah, I think we tend not to differentiate that into stages of drunkeness but suggest that people get drunk in different ways, or based on different kinds of alcohol
you'd categorise someone as a cheerful drunk or an angry drunk, for instance
@goodguy5 Interesting, here they're considered distinct parts/phases of inebriation. They're called, roughly translating, "upwards inebriation" and "downwards inebriation"
There are some creatures in the plot of ToA that my players will interact with.
The problem is that their stat block says they speak only their specific language, which my players don't speak.
Is it possible for them to speak Common? Would I break some hidden or future plot point if I allow t...
Which is funny to me, because I have never considered Finns as drinkers. If you asked me to make a list of 10 stereotypical drinking nations, Finns wouldn't make it.
the whole posh stiff upper lip received pronunciation english upper class stereotype is confusing because it has almost no relevance to reality anymore
the binge-drinking football hooligan is much closer to reality
@goodguy5 Ahh... Horned-helmet, beer-quaffing lunatics might be a slightly outdated depiction of norwegians (also historically inaccurate on the horn-thing, but that's a different matter)
the language thing is an important detail because it affects which of the characters can actually understand each other. There's a guy who only speaks Finnish and therefore has no idea what the rest of them are on about most of the time
Here are the rules about Jumping :
Your Strength determines how far you can jump.
Long Jump. When you make a long jump, you cover a number of feet up to your Strength score if you move at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump. When you make a standing long jump, you can leap ...
@Someone_Evil When I worked in NATO, I discovered that there were two groups of people who you don't try to keep up with when drinking. Norwegians and Russians. (We were doing some Partnership for Peace stuff with Russians in the 90's). Not sure how my Norwegian colleagues developed their amazingly powers of handling booze, but it was there.
There's this really old Finnish PSA (older than me --- they were already a bit out of fashion during my childhood) where there's a crudely stop-motion animated bottle of booze. "If you drink, stop in time," the narration says as the liquor drains from the bottle, revealing a blade, "so that you wouldn't regret," the narration continues and the liquor drains further revealing the rest of a knife
Based on what I hear that matches the stereotype quite well
when the bottle is completely empty the knife breaks the bottle from within. "Leave the violence in the bottle!" the narration concludes.
"Don't you put it in your mouth" (puppets singing a song about not drinking chemicals) "North American House Hippo" (A PSA about not believing everything you see on tv that failed spectacularly by convincing a whole generation in a fictional species)
I also recall one about a robot losing his arm in some machinery and basically saying "I can get a new one. You cant. Don't play with.. giant machinery"
@SirCinnamon What I find oddest about that is it being from 'The War Amputees of Canada', implying that you should play safe in war which isn't quite grounded as an idea
@SirCinnamon This was more for adults than for kids, but man, we have a legendarily spooky one for kids too. Basically our traditional PSA topics are thin ice, driving safely and moderation in alcohol --- so the kids usually got only the first kind since they don't drink or drive yet
I actually posted a short story about it in chat not too long ago, basically it was this PSA that would air with little/no warning at the end of an otherwise serene variety program for kids
So there's this children's program from something line the 1970's
(starting from there)
What's the correct English term for a TV program that's composed of short "host bits" between other programming? eg. in the case of that one, the host'd do crafts, sing, tell a story or something, and then introduce the upcoming children's program that was usually something with a 5-10min episode.
@Someone_Evil It's usually scheduled as one continuous show on TV schedules, and has its own intro and outro, but includes other, unrelated children's shows
Could we get some extra pairs of eyes on this question? The highest voted answer [Disclosure: mine] has a mixed vote score summing to 0, and there's two other answers with negative scores. Clearly, there's been some disagreement over how to resolve these rules.
TBH, I'm not even certain my answer is correct; only that it's less incorrect than the other two answers. =P
There's two answers I *nominally agree with*, am not sure which I think is more true:
* The druid, because they gain proficiency as a consequence of the *Wild Shape* feature, substitutes their normal Proficiency bonus to any skills the creature is proficient in, regardless of whether the creature has *Expertise* (or some equivalent feature) or not; UNLESS the creature has a higher overall bonus. * The Druid gets *Expertise* in any skills the beast has *Expertise* in, and adds double their proficiency bonus; UNLESS the creature has a higher overall bonus.
@Xirema That all looks very reasonable. Maybe once I get some food in me and my brain revives a bit I'll see about voting on one of them.
@Xirema fwiw, I do agree with @Someone_Evil in that using "Expertise" is probably not the best way to do things. It would likely not change my vote if I had one, but I think using different terminology would be good here.
obviously it's completely your call whether or not that matters to you
Yeah, I think I'll reword it; though I do maintain that some use of the word is appropriate given its presence in that blurb in the Monster Manual. Definitely gonna restructure though.
I mean yeah I made the same argument in support of the original question using it as well. But we ended up changing that wording because of confusion. I wouldn't want your answer being adversely affected by the same thing.
Is there seriously no section in the MM that explains that Creature bonus etc. need not follow the same rules as for players? I guess they are supposed to, but a couple of beasts have weird non-consistent attack bonuses
@Someone_Evil First thing I tried to search for. I know of very specific exceptions, where creatures have unexpectedly low/high attack bonuses, but there's no specific rule that says "a creature might have an extra +3 to their stealth checks, just because". It's pretty much always tied to their hypothetical Proficiency Bonus, with a table in the Monster Manual suggesting what a creature's proficiency bonus ought to be, given a specified Challenge Rating.
It's mostly a thing with CR0 creatures which noone is gonna look at too hard, but a bat has Str 2 and Dex 15, so its bite attack should have -2 or +4 to hit. It has +0. So does a bat use its Strength and has 'expertise' in biting then?
@Xirema Is there any cases (that haven't been errata'd away) of a arbitrary bonus that isn't the doubling of proficiency?
@Someone_Evil Not that I'm aware of. In fact—I can't remember which creature it was—there's at least one creature I've seen where an explicit +X bonus to their Attack/Damage rolls was specified as an explicit feature of the creature, something like "Enchanted Weapons" or some similar concept. Something that could be explicitly removed under certain combat circumstances.
I am suddenly very worried we're about to have the "Saber-Toothed Tiger Proficiency is not the same thing as Druid Proficiency" Semiotics argument, i.e. "there's a difference between Cleric!Cure Wounds and Druid!Cure Wounds and [Celestial] Warlock!Cure Wounds", like they're completely different spells.
(Beginner's Guide for why that's a bad argument: if there's a difference between cleric-cure-wounds and celestial-warlock-cure-wounds, then why can both characters pick up a Scroll of Cure Wounds and cast it?)
(4e was generally REALLY good about being clear about those sorts of things, but there was this one case where a particular Druid variant had access to a Cleric spell as a Cleric spell, making it eligible for anything that had Cleric spells as a pre-req without also requiring being a Cleric, and that was messy because everything written before the Druid variant had assumed "can cast this spell" implied "is a Cleric.")
@BESW FWIW, the only scenario I know of off-handedly where that kind of semiotics matters is that infuriating question from a while back about whether a multiclassed Bard/Celestial Warlock could take the Boon of Spell Mastery for the spell Cure Wounds if they learned Cure Wounds as a Bard but not as a Warlock.
And pretty much every answer [that got positive votes] hinged on the logic that a bard-cure-wounds spell was different to a celestial-warlock-cure-wounds spell, and therefore ineligible.
"How many times do you roll damage for Magic Missile?" was bumped to the top of the home page today, and a note underneath the question on the home page states that it was modified today by mattdm. But the change logs of the question and both answers do not indicate any edits today. So what was c...