Would “upcasting” extra Free Access slots into the next tier thereof be balanced?

I’m currently playing a spellcaster who’s making a lot of short dips into the lower paths, to the point that I believe I may have learned all the Free Access spells that I am actually interested in for the lowest level (for there are cheaper and better variants in the paths I have taken), if not all the spells that I could learn, from the level 1-10 Free Access spell list in the core book. (Aside from Sheeles in general and the rule on spending DP to get magical learning, this campaign has not yet touched on the Arcana Exxet, so please do not answer with subpaths; I don’t want to reverse-engineer the subpath spells to work like core spells do and otherwise refuse to use them out of principle.) Leaving aside the thought of simply inventing spells to fill in the gaps, I had a thought of combining two slots of a lower level to make a slot of a higher level.

Would it be potentially unbalancing to convert two 1-10 slots into a 1-20 slot and so on? (two 1-20 to a 1-30, etc. etc.)

Is this homebrew feat, Beast of Burden, balanced?

I’m working on a homebrew feat for a player with a specific agrarian background. I developed the following feat based on Squat Nibleness racial feat from XGTE. Is this feat balanced?

Beast of Burden

Prerequisite: Hooves

You’ve spent so many years caring for large livestock that you have become something of a beast of burden yourself. You gain the following benefits:

  • Increase your Strength score by 1, to a maximum of 20.

  • Increase your walking speed by 5 feet.

  • You gain proficiency in the Animal Handling skill.

  • You gain advantage on ability checks and saving throws that you make against attacks, spells and effects that would knock you prone, or move you away from your current space.

.

All to All Broadcast on a Balanced Binary tree

Can somebody please suggest some procedure for All-to-All broadcast on a balanced binary tree?

Assume that only the leaves of the tree contain nodes, and that an exchange of two m-word messages between any two nodes connected by bidirectional channels takes time ts + twmk if the communication channel (or a part of it) is shared by k simultaneous messages.

Should I use Scatter technique on it i.e All -to-Personalized Communication?

Somebody please guide me.

Zulfi.

Is one of these Homebrew classes balanced [on hold]

Okay these classes are based on one of my favorite animes fairy tail. I wanted to play as a dragon slayer for my first time playing D&D coming up this weekend.I’m still new to this so I’m wondering if some of these are balanced. I heard you shouldn’t go on dandwiki for Homebrew stuff because alot of the classes are op or something. So I looked up I need a Homebrew Dragonslayer class because that’s one of the magics used in the anime but this is all I could find so I was wondering if people who are experienced in this kind of stuff could help me out in like saying which one is balanced or one could be tweaked to be more balanced.

https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Dragon_Slayer_(5e_Class)

https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Dragon_Slayer,_Monk_Variant_(5e_Class)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I8klYQ2dhX3CrwLp2TnfeGv2OuH7SO-K/view

http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/rJNIwtwz

The balanced $k-$ partitioning problem : how to design testbeds to compare different metaheuristics methods

I implemented different search metaheuristics methods (local search, Tabu search, and simulated annealing) on the problem of partitioning a non-oriented weighted graph’ vertices into k parts of nearly equal size. I want to compare the methods. In the following article the author claim that :

  • We can compare the deviation of the solution given by each method from the optimal solution but it’s difficult to determine the optimal solution for large instances. One idea is to use geometrically constructed solutions for which optimal or near-optimal solutions are easy to determine despite the size of the instance. How to apply this idea on the k− balanced partitioning problem ?

  • Classifying the problem instances being tested is critical to the proper analysis of heuristics. Differentiating factors between problem instances should be noted prior to any experimentation, and heuristic performance on each type of problem instance should be discussed. What are some of the important factors to classify the instances ?

Any help will be appreciated!

Circle of the Flame Druid (V 1.6): Is this one more balanced?

As a follow up to the original balance question, and after some input from GiTP homebrew forum members and the goodly folks here at RPG.SE, the Circle of the Flame Druid as currently envisioned is, I think, closer to balanced.

Or is it? Is there a glaring balance hole in this version?

Circle of Flame (V 1.6)

Fire burns the forest, and out of the ash rises new growth. Just like the fire that burns the weak and dead trees, Druids of the Circle of Flame reap the weakness from those who have lost their way, leaving the next generation a fertile soil to grow upon. Wind spreads forest fires, cleansing a greater area. Lightning starts forest fires when it strikes a dead tree; fiery death brings a new beginning. Even evil, consumed by flame, can provide fertile ground for Nature reborn. Circle of Flame druids believe that everything will burn one day, to be re-born for a new beginning.

Circle of Flame spells (always prepared)

  • at level 3 Flaming Sphere, Gust of Wind
  • at level 5 Plant Growth, Lightning Bolt
  • at level 7 Guardian of Nature, Wall of Fire {Grasping Vine for PHB Only Games}
  • at level 9 Control Winds, Immolation {Flame Strike for PHB Only games}

Only You
When you choose the Circle of Flame at level 2, you gain the fire bolt cantrip.

Heart of the Flame
At 2nd level, you gain the ability to awaken the primal spirits of flame. As an action, you can expend a use of your Wild Shape feature to awaken your inner flame, rather than transforming into a beast form. While this feature is active, you gain the following benefits:

  • A flaming aura surrounds you. Your armor class increases by one third of your Druid level (minimum of 1). Druid level linkage to forestall MC shennanigans
  • You can use your reaction to heal yourself, or an allied creature within 10′ of you, for 1d4 hit points when either of you takes damage. This healing increases to 1d6 at 5th level, 1d8 at 11th level, and 1d10 at 15th level.

    Both of these effects last for 1 minute or until you are reduced to 0 hit points.

    unlike the beast shape that lasts for hours and hours, this is a one combat benefit expenditure of a class feature.

Heat of Battle
Starting at level 6, the druid gets an Extra Attack when taking the Attack action. Add Fire damage equal to your Wisdom modifier to your melee attacks

Flaming Soul
At level 10 you gain resistance to fire damage. While concentrating on a spell that does fire damage, add your wisdom modifier to the damage

From the Ashes
Starting level 14, as a reaction, you can absorb fire or lightning damage dealt to yourself or a single friendly creature within 30′ of you. The friendly creature, or you instead heals for the amount of damage taken. You must take a short or long rest before using this feature again.

=================

Why the revision? My original idea on using the Wisdom mod for AC was too front loaded and bounded accuracy issues arose with the seeds of Multi Classing Exploits.

Having this AC increase be tied to druid level (like Moon Druid CR for Wild Shape) will be offset by the higher CR opponents, who have less trouble hitting as the game goes on.

We have spent over a year in a Tier 3 campaign. AC 18 – 19 does not appear to be much protection against monsters with a decent strength/dex to hit mod, and prof bonus, and multi-attack. (Lots of them have that). If you’ve ever been in melee with stone giants or frost giants, I think you’ll see what I mean.

Fire resistant and fire immune creatures, of which there are plenty, won’t see this druid as a threat.

Testbeds to compare search metaheuristics applied to the $k$-way balanced graph partitioning problem

I am working on the problem of partitioning a non-oriented weighted graph’ vertices into $ k$ parts of nearly equal weight (we allow a small relaxation of the balance). What I am doing is implementing different search metaheuristics methods (local search, Tabu search, and simulated annealing). The aim is to compare those methods. In the following article the author claim that :

  1. “It is advantageous to test on the problem instances already tested by previous papers.” Where can I find some data with results? I’ve read many articles but the problem is to find the instances used in those papers.

  2. “It is generally more reasonable to create a testbed based on existing well-known problem instances than it is to create one from scratch.” what does he mean by that and how to do it?

  3. “Even when using advanced techniques, it is typically difficult to determine optimal solutions for large problem instances. A way to minimize the difficulty in this step is to use geometrically constructed solutions for which optimal or near-optimal solutions are apparent. the designer can use the specially designed problem instances and provide a good estimate of the error of each metaheuristic tested.” Any ideas of doing this on the $ k-$ balanced partitioning problem ? Maybe a lattice graph ?

  4. “Classifying the problem instances being tested is critical to the proper analysis of heuristics. Differentiating factors between problem instances should be noted prior to any experimentation, and heuristic performance on each type of problem instance should be discussed.” I am thinking about homogeneous and non homogeneous graphs based on the standard deviation of the different degrees; where a degree of a vertex is defined by the sum of weights going from/into that vertex and the average degree is defined by the sum of total weights divided by $ N-1$ where $ N$ is the number of vertices). Is it a good idea? Are there other important factors? How to generate them?

Any help will be appreciated!

Is this Spell Mimic feat balanced?

While working on a character concept around using an opponent’s strength against them, I thought of an ability that would make this cool for magic users. Initially, I thought it would be a bard subclass feature, but I don’t think I want to make a whole subclass for it. Instead, I made it a feat:

Spell Mimic

Prerequisite: At least one spell slot

You are practiced at imitating the movements and words of other. Refining your skills you gain the following benefits:

  • When a creature that you can see casts a spell of 1st level or higher, you can use your reaction to carefully study their movements and wording. For the next minute, you know the spell and can cast it using your spell slots.
  • On your turn, you can cast the spell as normal. Casting the spells in this way still requires all components of the spell unless you have a way to avoid them.
  • Your spellcasting ability for this spell is the same as the original caster’s. You use your own corresponding ability score to calculate your spellcasting ability modifier.

Once you use this ability, you cannot use it again until you complete a short or long rest.

This feat is basically a watered-down version of the arcane tricksters 17th level Spell Thief ability. It is slightly more available and more interesting though.

Is this feat balanced against other available feats?


Potential problems I’ve identified:

  • Warlocks and clerics teaming up to use the warlock’s higher-level slots for healing magic immediately before a short rest.
  • Warlocks upcasting other classes’ spells. Basically warlocks in general are a concern.
  • It makes half-casters even weaker as they have fewer slots to spend on mimic spells.

Is this Silencer homebrew ranger archetype balanced against the other ranger archetypes?

I’m planning a new campaign setting which treats most magic use as a significant cultural taboo, unless used by trained and certified practitioners. Use of magic by untrained individuals is seen as very dangerous and unstable.

As a result, there are a number of professions specialized at hunting down and capturing (or killing) rogue magic users. This seems particularly suited for a ranger archetype.

That being said, I’m pretty inexperienced at homebrew classes. I tried to stay fairly close to the progression of the base Hunter archetype, but I’m having a hard time evaluating how strong some of the Hunter abilities are, since some are “always on” or situational abilities compared to limited use abilities in my homebrew.

Here’s my archetype:

Silencer

Stabilizing Words – At 3rd level, you can use your reaction to attempt to disrupt a spell. You may target a creature casting a spell within 30 feet of you. The target creature makes any applicable attack rolls for that spell with disadvantage. Any saves made to avoid the effects of that spell are made with advantage.

After using this ability, you must complete a short or long rest before using it again. You gain one extra use of this ability before requiring a short or long rest at levels 6, 9, and 12.

Disrupting Words – At 7th level, you may use your bonus action to attempt to strip a target of spell effects after making a successful melee attack on the target. This acts as a dispel magic on the target.

Pronouncement of Redirection – At 11th level, you can use your reaction to change one target of a single spell you see being cast within 60 feet of you. The new target must be within 30 feet of you. You can only use this ability once per long rest. The spell you target must have a range of 5 feet or greater (includes touch spells altered by Distant Spell metamagic).

Grounded Reality – At 17th level, you have advantage on all saves you make against hostile spells or magic effects.

Is this Silencer homebrew ranger archetype balanced against the other published ranger archetypes?

Hackerrank All Women’s Codesprint 2019: Visually Balanced Sections

Link: https://www.hackerrank.com/contests/hackerrank-all-womens-codesprint-2019/challenges/visually-balanced-sections/problem

Problem Description

A rack has $ n$ horizontal compartments. The leftmost compartment is the $ 1^{st}$ compartment and the rightmost compartment is the $ n^{th}$ compartment. Each of the compartments of a rack has a colorful item. A section of a rack consists of one or more consecutive compartments.
enter image description here

A section ($ i^{th}$ compartment to $ j^{th}$ compartment where, $ i \le j$ ) of a rack is visually balanced if the items within the section can be re-arranged in such a way that the color sequence of the items from the $ i^{th}$ compartment to the $ j^{th}$ compartment is same as the color sequence of the items from the $ j^{th}$ compartment to the $ i^{th}$ compartment.

Few examples of visually balanced sections are:
enter image description here
enter image description here
enter image description here

Note that, in the third example, the items in this section can be re-arranged in such a way that the color sequence of the items from the $ 1^{st}$ compartment of this section to the compartment of this section will be same as the color sequence of the items from the compartment of this section to the $ 1^{st}$ compartment of this section.

Given the colors of each of the $ n$ items of a rack, your task is to determine the number of visually balanced sections of a rack.

Function Description

Complete the visuallyBalancedSections function in the editor below. It should return an integer denoting the number of visually balanced sections of a rack..

visuallyBalancedSections has the following parameter(s):

colors: an integer array representing the colors of item in each compartment

Input Format

  • The first line contains a single integer $ t$ denoting the number of scenarios.
  • The first line of each scenario contains a single integer $ n$ denoting the number of compartments of a rack.
  • Each of the next line $ i$ of the $ n$ subsequent lines (where $ 1 \le i \le n$ ) of a scenario contains an integer $ color$ denoting the color of the item in the $ i^{th}$ compartment.

Constraints

  • $ 1 \le t \le 100$
  • $ 1 \le n \le 1000$
  • $ 1 \le color \le 50$

Output Format

  • For each scenario, print an integer denoting the number of visually balanced sections of a rack.

Sample Input 0

1 4 1 2 1 2 

Sample Output 0

7 

Explanation 0

There is only one scenario where the rack has four compartments.

  • The $ 1^{st}$ compartment has an item of $ = 1$ .
  • The $ 2^{nd}$ compartment has an item of $ = 2$ .
  • The $ 3^{rd}$ compartment has an item of $ = 1$ .
  • The $ 4^{th}$ compartment has an item of $ = 2$ .

The visually balanced sections are:

  1. {$ \{1\}$ } – compartment 1
  2. {$ \{2\}$ } – compartment 2
  3. {$ \{1\}$ } – compartment 3
  4. {$ \{2\}$ } – compartment 4
  5. {$ \{1, 2, 1\}$ } – compartments 1, 2 and 3
  6. {$ \{2, 1, 2\}$ } – compartments 2, 3 and 4
  7. {$ \{1, 2, 1, 2\}$ } – compartments 1, 2, 3 and 4

This current solution times out. I have an idea for a faster solution with memoisation, but I’m still working on it so I decided to submit this for review in the interim.

Current Solution

from collections import defaultdict as dd from copy import copy  def is_palindrome(counter):     return len(list(filter(lambda x: x%2, counter.values()))) == (1 if sum(counter.values()) % 2 else 0)  def visuallyBalancedSections(colours):     counter = dd(lambda: 0)     total = 0     for i, val in enumerate(colours):         counter[val] += 1         temp_counter = copy(counter)         for j in range(i+1):             total += int(is_palindrome(temp_counter))             temp_counter[colours[j]] -= 1     return total