How to counter high-level players using scry and teleport / How to maintain intrigue?

So, my Eberron campaign has gotten to the point where the players are level 18, and they are resolving many of their issues by scrying on their enemies, and simply teleporting to them in moments of weakness.

Example; They wanted to defeat a pirate fleet. simply found out who the captain was, waited till they scryed on him sleeping, then teleported in and killed him.

So, first of all – I want to know what actual counters are in place for this? How does a society work where people can just teleport in and kill people at will? Obviously scrying and teleporting have some counter-measures, but what are they and how effective are they?

How can there be intrigue in a world with magical surveillance? Wouldn’t everyone be walking around warded to scrying, etc?

I am looking for some ideas in how to deal with this situation so that the players can keep scrying and teleporting (I don’t want to remove those abilities) but that there will be some counter by the “bad guys” so that it’s not too easy for them.

I don’t like hand-waiving my DM-powers to say that certain critical parts of the plot are hidden from scrying, I want there to be a reason, some actual counter.

How can I maintain some mystery and intrigue when the characters can scry and teleport?

Counter to Focus Fire

My Problem is split in two parts, Realism and Counterplay.
I am DM and every fight my Party take one target and focus this enemy down, in best case they get the target down and there is no way to heal or recover the target between the turns. I understand its a pretty simple but effective way to win your fights, and deal with heals.

My Problem with Realism:
In reality you cant just ignore 3 other enemies to kill one of the four, because your “open” backs would result in 3 death allies.

My Problem with Counterplay:
The Party has a lot of sustain and small selfheals, so everybody can survive pretty good on its own. Its a invitation to do the same, because they could not do anything to rescue a focus fired ally. But this would pretty sure, kill one of the party.

How can i deal with this problem, mostly annoying is – that they know(more or less) i would kill somebody if i do the same and abuse the situation (not intentionally)

Thanks a lot for ideas.

Can Freedom of Movement counter Aberrant Ground?

The Freedom of Movement spell states this in it’s description:

For the Duration, the target’s Movement is unaffected by difficult terrain, and Spells and other magical Effects can neither reduce the target’s speed nor cause the target to be Paralyzed or Restrained.

A Gibbering Mouther has an ability called Abberant Ground which states this:

The ground in a 10-foot radius around the mouther is doughlike difficult terrain. Each creature that starts its turn in that area must succeed on a DC 10 Strength saving throw or have its speed reduced to 0 until the start of its next turn.

That ability doesn’t appear to be magical. Does that mean that Freedom of Movement won’t stop a creature from being reduced to 0 speed if they fail their strength saving throw?

Could following be a counter example to Church-Rosser (Confluence) theorem?

According to the “Type Theory and Formal Proof” book, Church-Rosser theorem (confluence) is as follow:

Suppose that for a given term $ M$ , we have $ M \twoheadrightarrow_\beta N_1$ and $ M\twoheadrightarrow_\beta N_2$ . Then there is a $ \lambda-term$ $ N_3$ such that $ N_1\twoheadrightarrow_\beta N_3$ and $ N_2\twoheadrightarrow_\beta N_3$ .

But if we take $ (\lambda u.v)((\lambda x.xx)(\lambda x.xx))$ expression as $ M$ , then it will reduce to $ v$ if we start with the left sub term and reduces to $ (\lambda u.v)((\lambda x.xx)(\lambda x.xx))$ if we start with the right sub term. And they would never reduce to equal terms if we keep reducing the sound one using the right sub term since it would keep converting to itself for ever.

Isn’t the above example a refutation of the CR theorem, or I have missed a point somewhere?!

Counter example to Zooko’s triangle? [on hold]

So Zokoo’s triangle is a conjecture that is often explained by this trilemma:





pick two

But what if we hash the public key of an user and turn it into a meaningful identifier?

For example, we can use the hash as an input to get an unique profile picture with Gravatar (the default profile picture generator of Stack Exchange). We can also pass the hash as a seed to a neural network that generates profile pictures with people, animals, landscapes, etc.

But that’s not good, we can’t fetch an user identified by their profile picture, so we have to create meaningful character strings. I call it the “exquisite corpse” method: Let’s say the hash contains 6 alphanumerical characters, we can divide it into 3 parts of 2 characters each. The first part identifies an adverb in a dictionary of 3844 words ((26*2+10)²), the second part identifies an adjective is a dictionary of 3844 words and the third part a noun in a dictionary of 3844 words. This way, we obtain usernames like Extremely Metaphorical Chicken.

Maybe you would say that relying on a common arbitrary dictionary of words makes it not distributed, but in this case the arbitrary choice of the hash function would also make it not distributed. The ‘distributed’ criterion means that every peer on the network can do name resolve by themselves, not that we can’t rely on a common standard. Every peer can download the dictionary and/or the Gravatar generator (although I concede installing a whole neural network would be too much).

Is it a proper counter-example to Zooko’s triangle or I am mistaken? If so, should we change “human-meaningful” to “human-choosable”?

Thank you for your help.

PerfLib 2.0 counter removal failed with exit code 2

When I’m installing SQL server 2017 express edition, I’m facing this error:

PerfLib 2.0 counter removal failed with exit code 2. Command line: C:\Windows\system32\unlodctr.exe /m:hkengperfctr.xml from directory C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server0\Shared.

And it shows that I have 3 features are failed:enter image description here

this is my summary:

enter image description here

enter image description here

enter image description here

enter image description here

enter image description here

enter image description here

Anyone can give me some ideas to fix this?