Is the DM Always Right?

I recently got into a disagreement with my DM for a DND 5E game regarding a use of Prestidigitation.

The argument was that since it could create a Non-Magical Trinket, and Music Boxes are specifically listed in the Trinket section of the book, I should be able to make one, even if it is only temporary.

Her argument was that a music box did not fall under her definition of a trinket.

I’ve asked about the D&D 5e rules for that situation already, but now I’m asking whether the DM has the authority to change that rule in our game if she wants.

How does Automatic Seeding work – Always On Availability Group

I found only these two statements from BOL regarding this Initial Data Synchronization method:

Link 1

Automatic seeding uses the log stream transport to stream the backup using VDI to the secondary replica for each database of the availability group using the configured endpoints.

Link 2

During automatic seeding, SQL Server performs a backup over the network for initialization.

Looking into SQL Server Error logs of both primary and secondary replicas, these two logs caught my attention:

On primary replica

enter image description here

On secondary replica

enter image description here

My question is related to the working nature of automatic seeding, namely where does taken backup is stored before restoring on the secondary replica?

Eldritch Smite: Can you decide whether the enemy goes prone or do they always go prone?

Once per turn when you hit a creature with your pact weapon, you can expend a warlock spell slot to deal an extra 1d8 force damage to the target, plus another 1d8 per level of the spell slot, and you can knock the target prone if it is Huge or smaller.

Since it says "can knock the target prone." I assumed it was optional, (though you wouldn’t have much reason not to if in melee, within 5 ft.)

Why do agents always employ the same algorithm when playing a congestion game?

I’ve been conducting research into congestion games and have come across many papers that study the effects on the outcome of a game played by agents employing a particular algorithm e.g. seeing how quickly Nash equilibrium is approached when using a modified version of fictitious play.

Is there any particular reason as to why there hasn’t been any research conducted that looks into agents using different algorithms playing a single congestion game? For example, agents who uses fictitious play playing alongside agents who use a q-learning algorithm.

My players have a habit of always torturing enemies they capture for information, how can I make our adventure less macabre?

So I’m running the lost mines of Phandelver as a new DM and we’re about 5 sessions in. I’ve noticed a pattern that seems to repeat itself: the players defeat and capture an evil NPC character that knows some information, that character is tied up and intimidated/tortured, then that character inevitably spills the information it knows.

This cycle is getting a bit repetitive and depressing. How can I, as a DM, encourage my players to try more diverse ways of obtaining information from uncooperative NPCs without withholding story-critical information?

Does a character hit with Drow Poison always have to attempt the 2nd Fortitude Save?

The description of Drow in the SRD states:

An opponent hit by a drow’s poisoned weapon must succeed on a DC 13 Fortitude save or fall unconscious. After 1 minute, the subject must succeed on another DC 13 Fortitude save or remain unconscious for 2d4 hours.

Does the character have to make the second saving throw if they succeeded in the first save? The inclusion of the word “remains” suggests that the character was already unconscious, which suggests that this second saving throw is only required if the first one was failed.

However the rules for poisons suggest that the second saving throw is “usually” required even if the first succeeded. But it talks about additional “damage” which unconsciousness isn’t, exactly:

When a character takes damage from an attack with a poisoned weapon, touches an item smeared with contact poison, consumes poisoned food or drink, or is otherwise poisoned, he must make a Fortitude saving throw. If he fails, he takes the poison’s initial damage (usually ability damage). Even if he succeeds, he typically faces more damage 1 minute later, which he can also avoid with a successful Fortitude saving throw


If a character succeeds in their initial saving throw against Drow poison, are they still required to make another save a minute later?

Magic Missile or other ‘Always Accurate’ attack spells as an anti-aircraft weapon

I’m working on a story that has a mix of futuristic tech and D&D style magic, so I was wondering about this interaction.

(Note: I’m "houseruling" that Magic Missile can be used to attack objects)

Even a really pokey airplane flying at 136 miles per hour crosses Magic Missile’s 120-foot range in under a second, as the craft is flying at just under 200 feet per second. That’s peanuts compared to something flying supersonic or hypersonic speeds.

Something going Mach 2 crosses 2,251 feet in one second, and something flying at Mach 16.7 covers 18,793 feet in that same second.

So, would it turn a normally ‘always accurate’ attack into a ‘roll to hit’ attack, or would it even be possible to hit such fast-moving targets with a spell like Magic Missile directly, or would you have to use spells that simulate flak instead?

SQL Server always running

I have a personal computer where I have different instances of SQL server running (developer edition) with both integration services and analysis services (one in tabular and one in multidimensional). I use it for practice and to improve my skills. The start mode in Configuration Manager is "Automatic". So I have two instances each with both SSIS and SSAS. When I am not using SQL Server and e.g. will these services use a lot of resources on my computer by simply running in the background?