« first day (3338 days earlier)      last day (1668 days later) » 

7:02 PM
it looks like it only applies to those to spells. idk... need to think on it
Yeah, if it's just those spells, i don't see a real issue.
Well, being poisoned is a big deal, right?
And not being able to use your weapon is a big deal, as well.....
Now, what's the big deal : spell level ratio that's acceptable?
@goodguy5 A bit, but it's just for one round.
And a creature can always try and pick up their weapon again. And dropping the weapon may stop the damage from reoccurring.
@NautArch does it? I thought that it was for the duration.
Q: Can you use a weapon affected by Heat Metal each turn if you drop it in between?

Mister BThis is a theoretical situation, but I wanted public opinion on the ruling. Heat Metal states (ignoring the "At Higher Levels" part): Choose a manufactured metal object, such as a metal weapon or a suit of heavy or medium metal armor, that you can see within range. You cause the object to gl...

7:16 PM
So, theoretically, someone could drop the weapon on being Heat Metal'd, pick up the weapon on their turn, make some attacks, and then drop the weapon at the end of their turn and avoid taking damage?
Since the caster has to use their bonus action to trigger the "if someone is holding this, they take damage" check?
@Yuuki Correct.
seems that way RAW, Though if that were happening, you better believe that I'd just yeet that weapon away off their turn.
The second a smug player (or DM) tries to circumvent that part of the spell, I'm moving into melee and snagging their weapon and getting rid of it.
@goodguy5 Or just taking their weapon and bashing them with it (if, for example, it's a magic weapon)
7:21 PM
On the other hand, some people use Heat Metal way too much.
@Yuuki That's because its one of the best ways to circumvent high AC
Are golems "manufactured"? and ifso, can you cast heat metal on a golem? (assuming it's one of the metal golems)
@goodguy5 They are constructs, so.... ask your GM
Would Heat Metal damage a golem?
Is a creature in physical contact with itself?
Oh wait, it wouldn't work, I think. "Manufactured" isn't the operative word, "object" is.
@Yuuki some are outright inmune to the spell
7:26 PM
@Yuuki When my bard had it, we did not fight armor-clad monsters much. And as a DM, there aren't a lot of armor-clad monsters. Doing it on a weapon is still a good option, but when PCs carry back-up weapons, why wouldn't NPCs? But then that seems, cheap.
@goodguy5 They aren't objects. "Choose a manufactured metal object"
ah, right. thanks
@Yuuki Oh. Missed Yuuki's
(he said it first xD)
I still might allow it if a player asked.
My favorite use will always be my tiefling grappler that got heat metal cast on his gauntlets.
Sure you still take half damage, but then it becomes like a flaming sphere that doesn't need an attack roll
7:29 PM
@NautArch Then again, if my BBEG is wielding a +3 weapon, I'd definitely not have their backup be another one.
@DavidCoffron "Sure, grabbing your face with these things on might hurt but I have fire resistance and you don't."?
@Rubiksmoose Yeah, that's very reasonable :)
@Yuuki This hurts you more than it hurts me!
That'd be an interesting build. A grappler with fire resistance and just pump as much HP as you can.
@Yuuki bear totem dwarf?
@Yuuki Mine was a barbarian for that sweet advantage on grapples while raging
7:33 PM
Gauntlets of spell storing, go!
Can you move into a flaming sphere?
@goodguy5 Yes, but it only does damage if its slammed rammed
@DavidCoffron . Any creature that ends its turn within 5 feet of the sphere must make a Dexterity saving throw. The creature takes 2d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
@goodguy5 Right, but if you run through it it doesn't deal damage is what I meant
oh okay
7:37 PM
Might be worth noting the flaming sphere is somehow tethered to the ground, or something:
I'm imagining a bearbarian standing inside of the sphere grappling two people so that they're within distance
> jump it across pits up to 10 feet wide
@DavidCoffron It's a big marble.
@goodguy5 haha. What about a high level Forge cleric?
> **Saint of Forge and Fire**
> At 17th level, your blessed affinity with fire and metal becomes more powerful:

> - You gain immunity to fire damage.
> - While wearing heavy armor, you have resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage from nonmagical attacks.
7:40 PM
@goodguy5 The only other built in immunity is in UA if I recall correctly
Storm Sorcery: Wind Soul
At 18th level, you gain immunity to lightning and thunder damage.
Liches International meeting:

"You think your phylactery is safe? Mine is in the middle of an ocean of lava in the Plane of Fire"
"Won't you just constantly die if you reform there?"
"Nah. I swim."
@goodguy5 Ah. That one too
@G.Moylan It looks like they're still on stackexchange, but removed themselves from rpg.
@DavidCoffron of course there's also the issue of a lot of monsters having immunity/resistance as well.
@NautArch You can bypass resistance if the caster is an Elemental Adept
@DavidCoffron <enter kool-aid man oh yeah!>
7:48 PM
And for immunity.... Idk, Unearthed Arcana Lore Mastery?
(which is utterly broken in my playtesting by the way)
I feel like the more I play, the less I like using UA.
@NautArch It feels more and more like they're just saying things to rile up players.
@NautArch I agree with that sentiment. I imagine for me it is the greater familiarity with the level of polish on the classes. I can recognize a UA subclass just from that. (I feel the same way about most homebrew, but if a homebrew measures up to the same level of polish as official options, I usually allow it pending balance)
While I kinda get it, I also kinda don't know why you'd want to play dnd with a pacifist character.
I feel like there is a lot of substandard official material too... Way of the elements monk, or the whole ranger class :S
8:01 PM
@Helwar I really don't think the 'whole ranger class' is true. Definitely beastmaster, but Hunter is pretty fun.
But I do think for optimizers, choices are more limited.
Well, yeah. Apologies. But everyone I've known that wanted to play with it what they really wanted was the animal companion
And choices are def more limited with regard to combat-focused campaigns, too.
There are clearly classes/subclasses that are significantly better than others.
Like I like the idea of eldritch knight, but most of the time you're better ignoring the fact that you can cast spells
at least in combat
@Helwar Yeah, that was my issue with it. YOu can't go Sword and Board.
which is stupit.
Oh, neat I get Shield. Can't use with shield.
even if your DM closes an eye for you having a free hand to cast with, or you get warcaster
cantrip+attack is never better than attack+attack+attack
8:05 PM
@Helwar dang material components.
I complain a lot about EK, but that's because I really like the idea and find the execution a little bit meh
Totally fair! Felt the same way when i was deciding between battlemaster and EK.
We have a Champion, so that was off my list.
And the others were really underwhelming.
I also like the idea of the Brute UA, but it also didn't feel as good as battlemaster.
I only played champion. (I DM too much to have time to play my own characters :S )
I do want unarmed-strike based fighter, though.
is battlemaster good? Have not tested it but I always felt like he had too few superiority dice to make a difference?
8:11 PM
Our half-orc idiot (int 3), went champion.
@NautArch so monk? xD
@Helwar Story of me and DnD :-)
@Helwar Haven't yet played :) But at level 5, i've got 4 dice that refresh on a short rest.
That's not too bad.
Couldn't you pick up a Ruby of the War Mage without a lot of trouble from your DM?
@Helwar Heh, no. :P
8:11 PM
Gets rid of a lot of the issue for M components no?
@GuidingOlive Yeah, it would Still need to grab warcaster, but that's normal. Although it still feels cheap to require a build like that to need something like that.
Has any of you played the Fantasty Flight Games version of Star Wars RPG? Edge of the Galaxy and / or Force and Destiny? Care to explain a few things, or play a quick "star wars for dummies" game?
@Helwar I've listened to a lot of it and love many of the ideas in it.
Sadly I can't explain the mechanics.
@Helwar i may be able to do a quick game. But I'm not familiar with the fantasy flight stuff (just very familiar with star wars)
@Rubiksmoose That makes sense :) THanks anyway
8:18 PM
(I'm tentatively interested in playing a game of it though, for sure)
@NautArch well I phrased that wrong, i'm quite familiar with star wars too! I don't know a Venator by sight but I know it was a clone wars era republican ship!
@Helwar And let me rephrase as well: I'm very familiar with the star wars universe in the original movies :P.
I'm even less familiar with Star Wars lore than I am D&D lore and that is saying something.
so, well, I bought Edge of the Empire years ago, 'cause I liked the idea but never convinced anyone to play. The other day we tried the starting box, and got into things we didn't know how to resolve
But if y'all end up doing something Star Wars-y, especially for FFG stuff please ping me.
8:21 PM
Then maybe in the following days i'd do a quick game to learn the basics, if you are all interested
bad guys decide on a plot to summon worse guys.

Good guys go on a long walk to stop them.

Basically everything you need to know.
@Rubiksmoose I'm still working on (very slowly) doing the 5e star wars thing.
@goodguy5 Well sounds like I'm all caught up then!
@Rubiksmoose Tiamat, Orcus, Elemental Evil, The Ordaining. Lolth. Etcetc
My major gripe with it is movement. It's supposed to be for theatre of the mind. You either are engaged, close, far, very far, etc... But tracking THAT for every single person in the group is very tedious, especially when the group separates and one of them is far but the other is close and whatever...
8:23 PM
@Helwar that sounds a little.... far fetched.
in what sense?
@JohnP far fetched, or very far fetched? I need a map for this
@Helwar whooosh
@Helwar HOw is that different than theatre of the mind anywhere else?
/me skulks on the corner
8:26 PM
@NautArch I dunno. I just found it was complicated to actually track. My group we are prone to spend hours debating if the surface tension of a cup of water allows for one more drop or not in it. So maybe the "looseness" of the system is what threw me off
@Helwar I would be careful judging that before I've actually tried it. At a hunch I'd say it gives you the freedom to not track very carefully which makes TotM way easier
@goodguy5 what, did I ruffle your feathers with that?
@Helwar Mulan had a pseudodragon familiar ... Warlock? Lockadin?
@Helwar I think that's actually one of the trade-offs about ToTM. You've got to track that stuff in your head. YOu've got some more freedom within it, but you can't just look at physical pieces on a physical board.
@JohnP No, I just felt like your analogy was a little leaky.
8:27 PM
@Someone_Evil I'm not judging without having tried it. I tried it and that's where I thought it was not working for me :) But I want to try it MORE and get used to it before rejecting it :)
I wonder if there's a video of me doing the Ievan polkka somewhere
aka leekspin
@goodguy5 well, that was your first mistake. It was a pun, not an analogy.
@Helwar Oh, my bad. Misread some of the earlier stuff
@Someone_Evil momantai
@KorvinStarmast I'm still having trouble with the pacifist paladin concept. But it seems better to build a subclass around it than a spell.
8:31 PM
@NautArch We had a pacifist ranger in our first 4e campaign. Although highly technically pacifist.
And more like "I'm sad to kill!" than actually refusing to do it.
emo ranger
@NautArch exactly that
I mean, that works better than true pacifist.
Pacifism is tricky in a game that is largely about killing (or at least fighting) things
You might be playing the wrong system if that's your design choice.
8:33 PM
@NautArch Aasimar in pathfinder had the Tranquil Guardian archetype.
Let's play hungry hungry hippos, except i'm going to play my hippo as a non ball-eater.
@Someone_Evil Aye, and the irony was great as his character was specifically a Ranger, which is a Striker class --- and he rolled killer stats (how could this pun NOT be intended) too.
I've played a "pacifist" paladin before. Playing one now. The spin is that he was shunned from the city watch for not killing a goblin than later killed someone important in the city. He feels like he's less for not wanting to kill, but can't really bring himself to do it, so i always do non-lethal damage, but I'm not judging others on their killing
@Helwar I guess not fighting is different than not killing. I always looked at pacifism as not fighting.
but yes in our defense: we hadn't really played DnD before, nor other TTRPGs, and like many beginner groups we had great and conflicting expectations :)
8:34 PM
And works for a melee-based character as the only ones with the option for non-lethal.
@NautArch true, that's more complicated. Isn't there a monk UA that does that?
@NautArch For some reason I read that "amelee" many times and thought this was about that movie
@Helwar way of tranquility?
@kviiri I did too! just fixed it.
8:36 PM
@kviiri Maybe? I don't remember the name, it might be that
but now i want to play an amelie paladin
my first character was Eric the Cleric
I still love the simple beauty of the SUBTLE rhyme
@kviiri Chaotic Lawful?
@NautArch Nay, Good. I wanted to be a jovial benefactor!
A man of leadership and charity
8:49 PM
@JohnP box arrived today =)
Probably won't have time to dig in until tomorrow =(
@nitsua60 Not until today? I thought it was supposed to arrive last Friday?
@NautArch Since you're working within a combat system, a "pacifist" archetype would still need some means of participating and contributing during combat situations
@MikeQ Yeah, that's why I think you'd need to build a custom class for it.
What if I refuse
Even a control-focused wizard needs a go-to action cantrip.
@MikeQ I'll just sit here and look cross at you.
8:56 PM
It would also depend on the definition of pacifism. Narratively, a character could ultimately want peace, but is willing to fight for it. You could also include bards, illusionists, and other characters who use support/control abilities to help their combatant allies.
Ultimately you run into the issue that in D&D, combats will happen. It doesn't make sense for a character to specialize in not participating.
Definitely - although you still need to come up with a class and maybe even custom spells/items that they can use.
@Gwideon Besides the character options in WGTE (plus all 3 Artificer subclasses), Eberron: Rising from the Last War includes a Khorvaire Gazetteer chapter, a chapter on Sharn, one on building Eberron adventures (with a short sample adventure from level 1-2), a list of treasures/magic items, and a number of new monster statblocks.
@goodguy5 There's no real need to put them in separate comments - that's just usually a side effect of multiple people commenting with different links, or one person making one comment and then finding another related question past the point at which they can edit their original comment
@MikeQ *Vanellope von Schweetz
Well excuuuuse me, Disney princess
@NautArch what that person doesn't seem to realize is that the Sanctuary spell does what they want to do, and they just need to modifiy it to "at higher levels one more zone around one more creature ' or something like that.
@KorvinStarmast Ooh, that's an interesting thought. I was also thinking about Calm Emotions.
But sanctuary still allows targeting of a new creature. Their preference seems no hostility/attacks.
Sort of like a modified Tasha's Hideous Laughter
9:07 PM
@NautArch it is a great idea generation question, but it needs work to be stackable.
@NautArch If I built it as a subclass, it would need some way to keep the usefulness of its other features. For example, a pacifist paladin shouldn't lose its divine smite, but rather gain some "pacifist" alternative for using it.
@MikeQ Yeah, I'm not sure what I'd replace it with. But that was my first thought, too. Divine Smite is a HUGE part of being a paladin, and not using it would remove a big piece of what the class is.
Divine stun...
We need to know what they mean by pacificst.
but you could run out of rope with all of the monsters you'd be tying up ...
9:09 PM
Striking someone ain't exactly peaceful.
and stunning is crazy powerful.
For six seconds.
@Helwar Legend of the Five Rings does something similar with "range bands"
@NautArch Divine Smite Smile.
@NautArch Yep. Without criteria this whole exercise is futile. Can they attack? Can they grapple? Can they deal damage? Can they target creatures with spells? Are there certain creatures they can kill, such as undead?
@KorvinStarmast Sort of like the monk's stunning strike. Just not sure how upcasting would work with that.
@MikeQ maybe they just wanna...sing!
9:10 PM
<music starts playing>
@NautArch multiple monsters
Q: How can a rakshasa deal with sleeping when relying on the "Disguise Self" spell?

OharRakshasas are good infiltrators because of their at will disguise self. But they should sleep sometimes. The problem is that this spell lasts for only one hour. How can a rakshasa hide their true form from possible observers when they are sleeping?

@KorvinStarmast sort of like the sweeping attack?
That's still pretty crazy powerful compared to the damage of a divine smite. But losing out on the crit could be worth it.
@JohnP Well, we're rural enough that things usually arrive a day behind what might be expected. Then it would have gotten to the post office on the designated day, but taken a day for the mail staff to get it to campus... then maybe another day for them to log it and the automated notice to come to me that I had a package and for me to pick it up....
Needless to say, AmazonFresh isn't a thing around here =)
9:12 PM
Divine Smile. Your immunity to disease has resulted in pristine, gleaming white teeth. As an action, you can choose to spend a spell slot to deal 1d8 nonlethal radiant damage per spell level. Alternatively, gain a bonus equal to your paladin level to Charisma-based checks.
Wait, who gets damaged by the teeth?
and did those teeth in ancient time
@MikeQ They're blinded by its radiance.
But who is "they" in this instance? There's no target specified.
@kviiri golf clap that got a grin out of me
9:21 PM
@MikeQ gesticulates wildly
@MikeQ Everyone within line of sight?
@NautArch Hmm... I did have that homebrew monk subclass who could compel enemies into awkward handshakes and hugs. Would that count?
@MikeQ definitely!
Way of the Bro?
More like a diplomat or businessperson. In place of an unarmed attack, they could force a creature to make a Wis save, or that creature would have to shake their hand / accept the hug / etc, effectively becoming charmed & grappled. I can dig around for the link later.
9:47 PM
ooh, charmed and grappled. That fixes the I'll just smack this guy around with impunity problem.
i like exciting d4!
@NautArch No, d4! = d24
9:55 PM
Should I roll back my edit on this question?
10:14 PM
@V2Blast we currently have two hot network questions. Is that OK? I thought there had been a change and we only have one at a time?
NVM, back to one.
10:30 PM
@KorvinStarmast Did we lower our max? I think we're still at the default of 5.
Q: Updating the Hot Network Questions List - now with a bit more network and a little less "hotness"!

CatijaSome of you may have noticed that we've been making some changes to the Hot Network Questions on the back end over the last week or so. I'm here announcing our first round of changes to how the HNQ works and give you some ideas of why we're starting here and where we're planning to go in the futu...

I really think there should be a this site's current HNQ questions to help keep an eye on it, maybe in the (10k) mod tools. But I guess it isn't that big a deal
@kviiri Passive checks are not the same as taking 10. You are not even allowed to declare that you are making a passive check for one thing. You definitely couldn't declare you are "making a passive check to hide".
@jgn Technically, players don't declare checks at all. They just describe what they do and the DM decides what checks (if any) are required to do it.
@jgn There's the Clockwork Amulet from XGtE, but I think that's the only case
At any rate, the Passive Check rules do involve the DM ruling that because the character is taking their time or whatever, they can just use 10 + Ability + Proficiency (if applicable) which is basically the same as "taking ten" in other editions.
10:42 PM
@Yuuki is that what gilderoy Lockhart had?
@nitsua60 gotcha.
10:53 PM
@kviiri I don't use passive checks for 'taking ten' . I find, over time, that I most often use them for "and you notice something" prompts that usually helps keep the pace of play moving ...
@jgn I played a (5e) character once with a passive stealth in the low 30s. While I never declared that I was "making a passive check to hide," there was a default assumption that I was hidden. To our amusement, as during some RP scenes the GM would have characters going "wait, who said that?" the first time my character spoke up.
@Rubiksmoose Oh, that's my memory being buggy. I thought at one point that we were trying to get RPGSE to only have one at a time but I guess that idea/suggestion didn't make it into an implementation.
@KorvinStarmast It might have! Definitely don't trust my memory.
@KorvinStarmast There was some talk of that, but (IIRC) around that time they gave us the ability to selectively kick questions from HNQ: that seems (from our end) to have largely solved the ~problem~ of wacky questions hitting HNQ and crowding out other notables.
@nitsua60 I once rolled a bard that was both invisible and could perform inaudibly (and flying, so no footprints). Some of the party thought they were haunted by a friendly spirit.
10:56 PM
@BESW Weren't they? (Just one with levels?)
Not technically, in the sense that pixies aren't affected by turn undead.
I also had a quarterling whose hide check achieved something similar, in addition to being able to control ambient light levels and teleport short distances through shadows.
@BESW Oh wow also very strong ghost vibes
But being a quarterling, he had to two-hand a dagger that only dealt one damage. He relied on sneak attack dice and poison for battle effectiveness.
[teleport into an enemy's shadow]
[stab upwards at their calf]
[teleport away before they fall on you from the paralysis poison]
11:02 PM
@nitsua60 While funny, I don't think that is the ways the rules work. A character with high athletics isn't sprinting around everywhere, a character with high acrobatics doesn't tumble and jump around instead of walking, a character with high sleight of hand doesn't constantly pickpocket subconsciously, etc.
@Xirema Yup, so I don't see when if ever you can declare that you are going to make a passive check instead of a roll. Only when the DM decides, which for practically everything except perception/investigation/athletics/history/arcana is basically never.

« first day (3338 days earlier)      last day (1668 days later) »