OOTS #1240 - The Discussion Thread

[ff7hero]

IIRC (my days of 3.5 optimization are long behind me), any shrunken cone worn as a hat will work to block the effect of AMF. I think lead is traditionally used so that once the Shrink Item is suppressed you're also protected from other spells that are blocked by lead.

[danielxcutter]

IIRC (my days of 3.5 optimization are long behind me), any shrunken cone worn as a hat will work to block the effect of AMF. I think lead is traditionally used so that once the Shrink Item is suppressed you're also protected from other spells that are blocked by lead.

It's also probably stronger than something like paper or fabric, which might buy you the time to 'port out before they break your hat.

[toodeep]

I doubt an umbrella blocks anti magic.

But I’m not sure if there’s an official table of materials and effects describing what stops what. I think you just have to guess.

Like:

Stone blocks fire
Lead blocks detection
Umbrella blocks anti magic
Etc…

With beholders and the magic literally coming from their eyes, anything physical blocking line of site blocks line of effect has always been my understanding. The lead hat idea wouldn't work because it is worn and thus part of you - when you get hit everything part of "you" for saving throw purposes (i.e. everything worn and carried) gets shut down too, so its not like any magic items you have on your back keep working when you get hit from the front. But if the party huddled up to give Belkar enough cover he might be able to get his bag open, but with the Beholder above them aiming approximately straight down, that is hard to do.

[Last_Riot]

With beholders and the magic literally coming from their eyes, anything physical blocking line of site blocks line of effect has always been my understanding. The lead hat idea wouldn't work because it is worn and thus part of you - when you get hit everything part of "you" for saving throw purposes (i.e. everything worn and carried) gets shut down too, so its not like any magic items you have on your back keep working when you get hit from the front. But if the party huddled up to give Belkar enough cover he might be able to get his bag open, but with the Beholder above them aiming approximately straight down, that is hard to do.

What if the umbrella is reflective and made of lead?

[Dion]

What if the umbrella is reflective and made of lead?

What if it’s a tiny little umbrella with enlarge object cast on it, and it gets tiny in an anti magic field?

[Last_Riot]

Does Daylight create UV radiation? If so, why does it waste energy generating non-visible parts of the spectrum?

Well, if it didn't do the whole spectrum, then it'd just be Light, right?

I'll admit to fishing around for the boring answer (if I was more creative, there'd be a fun answer). But I would say being fussy about he laws of thermodynamics is more important in this case than 99% of magical non-sense. This is applying an infinite force to a PC's body in a game that generally contrives to make PCs durable and give a chance to avoid serious damage.

Tesla talked about tapping into cosmic energies, which sounded (and still kinda does) like magic.

We are just now starting to see wireless chargers. But we've been harnessing these cosmic energies for a while, now: solar pannels, radios, wifi, satellite phones, all examples of old tech "creating" something "out of thin air".

Now think about what happens when you mix corn starch and water. Without pressure, the right solution will be pretty fluid. Apply a bit of pressure, such as clenching it in your hand or stepping on it, and suddenly it becomes (mostly) solid.

Magic is really not much of a stretch from real-world physics. The right motions with the right catalysts drawing upon existing intangible forces to produce fantastical effects is pretty close to some recent and upcoming tech.

In other words... does magic break conservation of energy? Well, only if you want it to, rules can plausibly be made so that magic doesn't actually break conservation of energy. There are so many weird physics rules we still barely understand, and presumably much we still don't understand, saying a fantasy setting has a ton of energy magicians can tap into with the proper know-how without actually breaking conservation of energy is quite acceptable in my book.

[Quizatzhaderac]

In other words... does magic break conservation of energy? Well, only if you want it to....

My point was that we don't want conservation of energy broken here, specifically because it has an impact on the narrative we don't like (no save dismemberment form a novel, on the spot rules interpretation).

What if it’s a tiny little umbrella with enlarge object cast on it, and it gets tiny in an anti magic field?

Well, I suppose the depends if the antimagic field undoes purify water. Will the water turn back into a cocktail?

[Riftwolf]

Well, if it didn't do the whole spectrum, then it'd just be Light, right?

'Light as Bright as Sunlight But Functionally Different in Its Electromagnetic Wave Array' took up too much space in the spellbook.

Tesla talked about tapping into cosmic energies, which sounded (and still kinda does) like magic.

Tesla= Original Captain Marvel?

[Last_Riot]

'Light as Bright as Sunlight But Functionally Different in Its Electromagnetic Wave Array' took up too much space in the spellbook. ?

Or, you know... "Light, Greater". :P Or "Light, Brighter"

I mean, they didn't name it "Darkness of the New Moon Night with Heavy Couldcover" They just called it "Deeper Darkness".

[skim172]

Does Daylight create UV radiation? If so, why does it waste energy generating non-visible parts of the spectrum?

Wow. Way to be humanocentric there. What about other fantasy species that can perceive UV wavelengths? Why should the Daylight spell not accommodate their senses? Maybe they're only capable of perceiving UV wavelengths.

I mean, take Sunny the (Legally Distinct from) Beholder, for example - this individual has nine eyes of different sizes, each capable of individual movement and direction, which can also biologically alter themselves to become organs that emit rays of magical power. It would be extremely improbable that such a creature would have evolved similar visual perception and processing capabilities as a human being. It is entirely possible that this species can't perceive "visible light" as we so species-centrically label the EM spectrum between 310-1100 nanometers.

And look at our friends, the dwarves. Dwarves evolved to live underground - evolutionarily, it would be odd for them to develop eyes at all like a human being's. Most likely, Dwarves' eyes are mainly vestigial and their primary sensory perception is via their whiskers, like moles. This explains why they have such lush beards. Their eyes are probably just basic sensors and all their brain's visual cortex has been entirely rewired to perceive the world entirely with their beards, in such rich detail that it is indistinct from human visual perception.

(In fact, their beard-senses are so good that no one has yet realized it. The dwarves believe that the word "vision" is simply the surface-dwellers' word for beard-sense, and have yet to realize that the humans use their EM radiation-detecting orbs for anything significant.)

[Fyraltari]

Wow. Way to be humanocentric there. What about other fantasy species that can perceive UV wavelengths? Why should the Daylight spell not accommodate their senses? Maybe they're only capable of perceiving UV wavelengths.

I mean, take Sunny the (Legally Distinct from) Beholder, for example - this individual has nine eyes of different sizes, each capable of individual movement and direction, which can also biologically alter themselves to become organs that emit rays of magical power. It would be extremely improbable that such a creature would have evolved similar visual perception and processing capabilities as a human being. It is entirely possible that this species can't perceive "visible light" as we so species-centrically label the EM spectrum between 310-1100 nanometers.

And look at our friends, the dwarves. Dwarves evolved to live underground - evolutionarily, it would be odd for them to develop eyes at all like a human being's. Most likely, Dwarves' eyes are mainly vestigial and their primary sensory perception is via their whiskers, like moles. This explains why they have such lush beards. Their eyes are probably just basic sensors and all their brain's visual cortex has been entirely rewired to perceive the world entirely with their beards, in such rich detail that it is indistinct from human visual perception.

(In fact, their beard-senses are so good that no one has yet realized it. The dwarves believe that the word "vision" is simply the surface-dwellers' word for beard-sense, and have yet to realize that the humans use their EM radiation-detecting orbs for anything significant.)

I love all of this.

Also, dwarves must consider beardless warriors extremely impressive, what woth them overcoming their disability like that.

[danielxcutter]

Wow. Way to be humanocentric there. What about other fantasy species that can perceive UV wavelengths? Why should the Daylight spell not accommodate their senses? Maybe they're only capable of perceiving UV wavelengths.

I mean, take Sunny the (Legally Distinct from) Beholder, for example - this individual has nine eyes of different sizes, each capable of individual movement and direction, which can also biologically alter themselves to become organs that emit rays of magical power. It would be extremely improbable that such a creature would have evolved similar visual perception and processing capabilities as a human being. It is entirely possible that this species can't perceive "visible light" as we so species-centrically label the EM spectrum between 310-1100 nanometers.

And look at our friends, the dwarves. Dwarves evolved to live underground - evolutionarily, it would be odd for them to develop eyes at all like a human being's. Most likely, Dwarves' eyes are mainly vestigial and their primary sensory perception is via their whiskers, like moles. This explains why they have such lush beards. Their eyes are probably just basic sensors and all their brain's visual cortex has been entirely rewired to perceive the world entirely with their beards, in such rich detail that it is indistinct from human visual perception.

(In fact, their beard-senses are so good that no one has yet realized it. The dwarves believe that the word "vision" is simply the surface-dwellers' word for beard-sense, and have yet to realize that the humans use their EM radiation-detecting orbs for anything significant.)

First of all, Artemis Fowl dwarves really are a bit like that, at least the beard part. Second, beholders actually have darkvision, being aberrations.

[skim172]

I love all of this.

Also, dwarves must consider beardless warriors extremely impressive, what woth them overcoming their disability like that.

Beardless dwarves intentionally shave their beards, relying only on their follicles, as a show of their strength and fighting ability. Like how ancient Celts stripped naked and painted themselves before battle to prove their courage (according to dubious internet sources that are probably untrue).

[Fyraltari]

Beardless dwarves intentionally shave their beards, relying only on their follicles, as a show of their strength and fighting ability. Like how ancient Celts stripped naked and painted themselves before battle to prove their courage (according to dubious internet sources that are probably untrue).

I meant warriors of other races.

[skim172]

I meant warriors of other races.

Oh, they are viewed with the highest of esteem.

It is why the dwarves have not yet conquered the world. Consider that the dwarves are a species that prides itself on its fighting ability, with a culture that emphasizes a powerful martial ethic, has a militaristic social structure, and access to advanced metallurgy and technology. Yet the dwarves haven't erupted out of the underground and made savage war upon the surface. The only explanation is that the dwarves are overawed by the surface-dwellers' ability to function without facial hair.

It would be like us encountering an alien species that casually perforated their eyeballs with a spike every morning - incredibly disturbing and intimidating. And the aliens are twice our size.

The dwarves believe every surface-dweller is a giant who is a great warrior who ritually mutilates themselves to prove their warrior might. It is this myth - and this myth alone - that preserves peace between dwarf and surfacekind.


They fear our females most of all - innately born with no beard-sense, these horrific monsters must have been bred - or genetically engineered? - to be the perfect killing machine.

[KorvinStarmast]

The only explanation is that the dwarves are overawed by the surface-dwellers' ability to function without facial hair.

No, not the only explanation.
The rest of the attempted joke didn't land either.

[Dion]

I mean, take Sunny the (Legally Distinct from) Beholder, for example - this individual has nine eyes of different sizes, each capable of individual movement and direction, which can also biologically alter themselves to become organs that emit rays of magical power. It would be extremely improbable that such a creature would have evolved similar visual perception and processing capabilities as a human being. It is entirely possible that this species can't perceive "visible light" as we so species-centrically label the EM spectrum between 310-1100 nanometers.

Obligatory Oatmeal link: https://theoatmeal.com/comics/mantis_shrimp

My head cannon: Beholders are the Mantis Shrimp of D&D

[skim172]

No, not the only explanation.
The rest of the attempted joke didn't land either.

Curses! Back to the drawing board.

[Dion]

Curses! Back to the drawing board.

I laughed.

[Aaron L]

Way to go, Elan.

To all the people who like to claim that Bards are weak (and I still see that ludicrous claim from certain people on the Internet) I am currently playing a Half-Elven Bard of the College of Swords (a Blade) in my weekly 5th Edition D&D game (he is 16th level currently) and he is by far the most all-around effective member of the party. He can fight nearly as well as the warriors (dual cut-and-thrust swords [mechanically rapiers] with the Elven Accuracy Feat so that when he has Advantage it becomes Triple Advantage, and between all of the Feats I gave him dedicated to raising his AC and his Defensive Flourish ability his AC regularly hits 30+), he is our sole arcane spellcaster and heavy artillery, every bit as effective as a Sorcerer (Magical Secrets have given him all the Fireballs and Chain Lightning that he needs) and is also a very effective backup healer (he was originally also the party's sole healer, until our party gained two Clerics!)

He has repeatedly turned seemingly deadly, overwhelming battles into cake-walks by doing things such as using Stealth to sneak up on large groups of the enemy and cast Hypnotic Pattern from concealment, sneaking into an enemy army encampment and using upcast Mass Suggestion to sow chaos among the enemy ranks by "suggesting" to large groups of enemy soldiers that they are being manipulated and abused by their commanders and they should mutiny, and using upcast Charm Monster to take control of multiple enemy monsters and having them attack their masters (and with his little Doss Lute all those saving throws are at Disadvantage.)

(And when he reaches 17th level and gets his first 9th level spell he will be learning Foresight, which means that for 8 hours every day he will have Triple Advantage on every attack roll with his swords, and with his Peircer Feat every Critical Hit will do an extra die of damage... )

It has gotten to the point of becoming a running joke among the other players that Bards are vastly overpowered and need to be drastically nerfed. I suppose if you played a Bard as an unsubtle battering ram, just running up and attacking everything, they would be just plain awful, but if you play a Bard correctly and with style they are absolutely deadly.

[Last_Riot]

Way to go, Elan.

To all the people who like to claim that Bards are weak (and I still see that ludicrous claim from certain people on the Internet) I am currently playing a Half-Elven Bard of the College of Swords (a Blade) in my weekly 5th Edition D&D game (he is 16th level currently) and he is by far the most all-around effective member of the party. He can fight nearly as well as the warriors (dual cut-and-thrust swords [mechanically rapiers] with the Elven Accuracy Feat so that when he has Advantage it becomes Triple Advantage, and between all of the Feats I gave him dedicated to raising his AC and his Defensive Flourish ability his AC regularly hits 30+), he is our sole arcane spellcaster and heavy artillery, every bit as effective as a Sorcerer (Magical Secrets have given him all the Fireballs and Chain Lightning that he needs) and is also a very effective backup healer (he was originally also the party's sole healer, until our party gained two Clerics!)

He has repeatedly turned seemingly deadly, overwhelming battles into cake-walks by doing things such as using Stealth to sneak up on large groups of the enemy and cast Hypnotic Pattern from concealment, sneaking into an enemy army encampment and using upcast Mass Suggestion to sow chaos among the enemy ranks by "suggesting" to large groups of enemy soldiers that they are being manipulated and abused by their commanders and they should mutiny, and using upcast Charm Monster to take control of multiple enemy monsters and having them attack their masters (and with his little Doss Lute all those saving throws are at Disadvantage.)

(And when he reaches 17th level and gets his first 9th level spell he will be learning Foresight, which means that for 8 hours every day he will have Triple Advantage on every attack roll with his swords, and with his Peircer Feat every Critical Hit will do an extra die of damage... )

It has gotten to the point of becoming a running joke among the other players that Bards are vastly overpowered and need to be drastically nerfed. I suppose if you played a Bard as an unsubtle battering ram, just running up and attacking everything, they would be just plain awful, but if you play a Bard correctly and with style they are absolutely deadly.

I have no idea how they are in 5E. I think most people comment their 3.5E iteration as being weak.

[danielxcutter]

Bards in 3.5e are actually halfway decent; bardic music is a surprisingly good buff even in Core and supplements help with that too. Not to mention they can break the game wide open with social skills and Use Magic Device.

[KorvinStarmast]

Curses! Back to the drawing board.

They can't all be gems. (Been there, done that)

I have no idea how they are in 5E. I think most people comment their 3.5E iteration as being weak.

My 5e (College of Lore) bard is a hoot to play, but I built here as a support, not as a DPR machine. My martial party members keep thanking me.
Plus, I get to play concerts for the queen. *Cha ching!*

[Riftwolf]

A genuine question: is infra-red vision or UV vision closer to Darkvision as described in the SRD? My inclination is it sounds like infra-red on a limited wavelength, but I'm unsure how UV works in low light settings. I do seem to remember hearing UV is what makes looking up at an eclipse dangerous, but that seems unrelated.

[Yirggzmb]

A genuine question: is infra-red vision or UV vision closer to Darkvision as described in the SRD? My inclination is it sounds like infra-red on a limited wavelength, but I'm unsure how UV works in low light settings. I do seem to remember hearing UV is what makes looking up at an eclipse dangerous, but that seems unrelated.

In my experience, looking at an eclipse is dangerous because you're still looking at the *sun*, except now something weird is happening and you want to look at it. So yeah, uv most likely. But no more dangerous than usual except for the new incentive to do it. Once the sun is 100% covered, you actually can look at it safely.

My sister and I drove to get into the path of totality for the 2017(?) eclipse. Weirdest thing I've ever seen in my entire life. 100% recommend btw. But yeah, the exact instant the moon had moved enough to let that very first ray of sunlight through again, I could feel the heat on my hair again even though the world was still dark looking. And also hear my sister go "ow" because she hadn't looked away yet. Even a single ray of sunlight packs a punch.

[Riftwolf]

In my experience, looking at an eclipse is dangerous because you're still looking at the *sun*, except now something weird is happening and you want to look at it. So yeah, uv most likely. But no more dangerous than usual except for the new incentive to do it. Once the sun is 100% covered, you actually can look at it safely.

My sister and I drove to get into the path of totality for the 2017(?) eclipse. Weirdest thing I've ever seen in my entire life. 100% recommend btw. But yeah, the exact instant the moon had moved enough to let that very first ray of sunlight through again, I could feel the heat on my hair again even though the world was still dark looking. And also hear my sister go "ow" because she hadn't looked away yet. Even a single ray of sunlight packs a punch.

It was something about how your pupils dilate in the low light even though UV (undetectable by the eye) is still being emitted by the sun's corona.
It was in a thread where someone made the analogy that the sun gets an attack boost when at low health. Then someone made the better analogy of an eclipse being the sun equipping the moon for a bonus to sneak attack.

[MoiMagnus]

I have no idea how they are in 5E. I think most people comment their 3.5E iteration as being weak.

In 5e, they got promoted to full spellcaster (which already make them strong, though not as OP as it would be in 3.5E). Additionally, 5e cut most of the small bonuses to checks, so Bardic inspirations are some of the few ways to actually get bonuses to checks, making Bards almost universally loved as teammate.

[danielxcutter]

In 5e, they got promoted to full spellcaster (which already make them strong, though not as OP as it would be in 3.5E). Additionally, 5e cut most of the small bonuses to checks, so Bardic inspirations are some of the few ways to actually get bonuses to checks, making Bards almost universally loved as teammate.

Yeah, apparently you aren't much better at skills when you level up. High level characters still have a big chance of blowing their checks against basic DCs unless you're a rogue or bard.

[Ionathus]

Yeah, apparently you aren't much better at skills when you level up. High level characters still have a big chance of blowing their checks against basic DCs unless you're a rogue or bard.

RAW, yes, though I'd argue a lot of 5e DMs overlook the RAI of "only call for a check if there's a meaningful chance of failure." I've had my level 10 druid fail to recognize plants & animals in the biome she grew up in, and have seen the extremely athletic fighter with the highest modifier fail a baseline Athletics check. Things that really shouldn't be up to luck: when you're an expert in your field, there are certain small things you should just be able to do. It's the same reason crit fumbles bother me: a 20th level fighter should not have a 5% chance of stabbing themselves with their own sword every time they attack.

Passive skills (10 + mod) are a band-aid on this, but don't completely fix the problem. Bards and Rogues having Reliable Talent shine as a result, because they're able to always be baseline competent in their area of expertise. For the most part I like the flattened numbers of 5e, but the 3.5e potential to have, like, +15 to a check is definitely appealing.

[danielxcutter]

RAW, yes, though I'd argue a lot of 5e DMs overlook the RAI of "only call for a check if there's a meaningful chance of failure." I've had my level 10 druid fail to recognize plants & animals in the biome she grew up in, and have seen the extremely athletic fighter with the highest modifier fail a baseline Athletics check. Things that really shouldn't be up to luck: when you're an expert in your field, there are certain small things you should just be able to do. It's the same reason crit fumbles bother me: a 20th level fighter should not have a 5% chance of stabbing themselves with their own sword every time they attack.

Passive skills (10 + mod) are a band-aid on this, but don't completely fix the problem. Bards and Rogues having Reliable Talent shine as a result, because they're able to always be baseline competent in their area of expertise. For the most part I like the flattened numbers of 5e, but the 3.5e potential to have, like, +15 to a check is definitely appealing.

Yeah, that's probably part of the reason I hear that 20 levels in 5e are just the first seven levels of 3.5e diluted.

Also I thought fumbles weren't RAW.