« first day (3944 days earlier)      last day (1318 days later) » 

01:06
@KorvinStarmast Arcadum does Living World streams where a lot of his players are other streamers. So he's done a lot of work on perfecting the craft for his players AND an audience.
Michelle Nguyen Bradley is asking on twitter for people to share their AAPI TTRPG shows.
> Hoang: When readers trust that everything is going to be O.K. in the end, they open their hearts to experience a wider range of emotion, because they’re not protecting themselves from pain. This is something special to the genre.
-- "How to Write a Romance Novel in 2021" article by Annabel Gutterman for Time. https://time.com/6078820/how-to-write-romance-novel/
Sharing here because, hello safety and consent tools/techniques.
01:24
2
Q: Is animate objects overpowered?

user3698988I am a new DM, just having run a game around 10 to 15 times. I have an experienced player, and he plays as wizard. He is casting animated object so that he can attack my mage or weakling. He moves 20 feet, and he cast animated object on 10 coins. And the coins can then move a further 30 feet. He ...

 
4 hours later…
05:10
@BESW Wow, thanks for sharing this!
I wish I’d seen this sooner cause I was explaining textile repair to my d&d group (looooonnng story) and it would’ve been a good example!
(I’ve been spending all my spare time working on two secret projects and packing for a road trip so I haven’t had my phone on much lately)
 
4 hours later…
09:39
R. Talsorian Games wrote a twitter thread on "how a TTRPG company tackles the process of creating a TTRPG book"
10:19
5
Q: Where in D&D published material did the nomenclature "ability check" first appear?

Amethyst WizardLooking through the Redbox and the Bluebox I noticed that there are abilities and there are checks. But there is no cohesive concept of an "ability check". Then I looked in Gygax' AD&D Dungeon Masters Guide and did not find the term "ability check" there either. I did however find the term "Abili...

 
1 hour later…
11:20
Pretty sure this is a dupe. Can someone check behind me there?
 
2 hours later…
12:58
I'm less sure than you
The dupe target doesn't mention the actually problematic part of the spell's text at all, so it's up to the answers to actually notice something that the OP didn't see and didn't even ask about and then to state that it is or isn't confusing and to then figure out which it meant.
From the target: “However, if the creature decides to do something else instead, can it?”
The dupe target even states "The creature can choose to take an action to make a saving throw against this effect.", I could see the new one remaining open despite asking approximately the same thing if not just because the dupe target asks it in a way that requires odd amounts of extra work. Though, we've certainly had plenty questions where the OP has a misconception of some kind, hmmm
This seems to be exactly the question I closed.
Yeah, this line is shows it's the same "However, if the creature decides to do something else instead, can it"
That is the new question.
I suppose so, I definitely think the new one points out the actually confusing text and asks about it explicitly
13:09
Yeah, that's another question. What do we do when a new duplicate is written better :)
Someone has their DMG handy? I need the page number of the collapsing ceiling trap... 3d10 damage, right?
eh, 4d10
5e? If so p. 122, 4d10 damage
@NautArch Though I don't think it's ambiguous but I also natively speak English, agree that's in an unusual wording given the "makes" construction alongside it using an action. (The construction is otherwise quite common)
@Medix2 I mean, also think the spell is pretty clear.
Most of the other similar spells/effects include either a "can" or a "must" don't they?
13:15
Usually, but I found about 10 that don't
Example, blinding smite: "A creature blinded by this spell makes another Constitution saving throw at the end of each of its turns. "
Well, waddya know
@Medix2 But that's not an action to end though, that's just free
@Someone_Evil Thanks! Just needed to make an obligatory Kyle Hill: you can't wade through lava... you start to become a Leidenfrost-effect lava skimmer and don't sink into that stuff if thrown on top of it. But the damage values in the book can be... interpreted to make sense. it's just as deadly, just the wording on the page 249 is wrong.
dominate X: "Each time the target takes damage, it makes a new Wisdom saving throw" etc. Etc.
@Someone_Evil Which is why I said the action wording is unique
But there may be a spell that says "uses its action BLANK" which isn't particularly different from "as an action, BLANKS"
@Medix2 I was thinking more like using an action to escape a grapple, and is it fear that forces a Dash action
Welp, can't find anything that says "uses its action" in that way. Just stuff like "must take the Attack action and use its movement"
13:29
I mean,it is pretty obvious that it's saying you must, even if it doesn't have that word.
But maybe it isn't, andthat's the whole issue :)
Yeah, I think it's clear, but I'd have to explain how English works to prove it
@NautArch I think the existing disagree with you there, don't they?
Witch bolt: "you can use your action to deal 1d12 lightning damage to the target automatically. The spell ends if you use your action to do anything else"
Web: "A creature restrained by the webs can use its action to make a Strength check against your spell save DC. If it succeeds, it is no longer restrained."
Fear: "While frightened by this spell, a creature must take the Dash action and move away from you by the safest available route on each of its turns, unless there is nowhere to move."
@MikeQ That at least isn't something I was looking for
There are all the summoning spells though: "If you don’t issue any, it takes the Dodge action and uses its move to avoid danger. "
13:38
@Someone_Evil Hence maybe it isn't :) I just never noticed an issue with the spell.
I think maybe one way to look at Otto's is that it is written without agency. It just describes what a creature will do, in the way (newer?) companions have described activity if you're unconscious
I presume adventures might feature a lot of the same wording for how certain NPC will act in certain situations
@NautArch Yeah, I think it's a fairly easy DM call to make, for as rare as individual 6th level spells come up (which hasn't been often at least in my games)
13:53
@BardicWizard I was surprised to see you around Puzzling! It felt like catching a teacher in the grocery store :)
@bobble I distinctly remember the day I learned teachers do not live at school. Funnily enough, I later went to a boarding school where they did
 
3 hours later…
16:30
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword with email in answer, email in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer (164): How do Resurrection spells work with someone who has died of old age? by Emily Arizona on rpg.SE (@Rubiksmoose @ThomasMarkov)
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword with email in answer, email in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer, blacklisted user (235): How can I bring an evil NPC back to life after the PCs think they've killed him? by Emily Arizona on rpg.SE (@Rubiksmoose @ThomasMarkov)
 
2 hours later…
18:24
I don't think I've ever wanted to undelete a comment before just now XD
5
Q: Are rolls to 'Players can tell if X is real with a skill check' passive?

NibblyPigHag for example can use mimicry A creature that hears the sounds can tell they are imitations with a successful DC 14 wisdom (Insight) check Are incidents like this saying, if a player hears they make an automatic wisdom/insight check, or are they saying if a player wants to listen closer to th...

 
1 hour later…
19:44
10
Q: Is there an issue with simplifying wealth rewards like this?

BlueMoon93I've been playing for some years now, and with nearly all of my groups, keeping track of resources is always a hassle. To make things efficient, we basically eliminated all the multiple wealth levels and condensed into gold and gems. A character gets 50cp, 11sp, 2g, a bracelet worth 25g, and a 5...

 
2 hours later…
22:09
I loved the idea, I just think it was executed really badly

« first day (3944 days earlier)      last day (1318 days later) »