Passive check and Gelatinous Cube Transparent traits

Since Gelatinous Cube have the transparent trait, do you need to do an action perception check to spot it or you could use your passive perception?

Transparent trait: Even when the cube is in plain sight, it takes a successful DC 15 Wisdom (Perception) check to spot a cube that has neither moved nor attacked. A creature that tries to enter the cube’s space while unaware of the cube is surprised by the cube.

Why is targeting an adjacent attacker with a 5 foot cube area attack considered a ranged attack?

An opponent has moved adjacent up into a character’s face and swung at them. On their turn, in retaliation, the character would like to attack back with their favoured cube area attack, made at the size of a 5 foot sized cube to be ergonomic. Oddly the rules as written (see below) seems to qualify this attack as a ranged attack even though the target is adjacent and every other area attack also containing the attacker would not. Is this an oversight, an intentional design decision, or is there anything I’m overlooking that makes this ruling invalid?

The rules leading me to this conclusion appears here:

Ranged Attacks in Melee

Any time you make a ranged attack and there is an enemy within melee reach of you, you have disadvantage 1 on your attack roll. Area attacks are considered ranged attacks if the area does not include at least one space adjacent to the attacker.

The 5 foot cube placed on the attacker’s square does not include at least one space adjacent to the attacker but it does include attacker’s square itself which intuitively feels like it shouldn’t be a ranged attack as well as other area attacks. RAW however, this means it’s a ranged attack and imposes disadvantage 1. To me a more intuitive ruling and writing of it would be:

Ranged Attacks in Melee

Any time you make a ranged attack and there is an enemy within melee reach of you, you have disadvantage 1 on your attack roll. Area attacks are considered ranged attacks if the area does not include the attacker or at least one space adjacent to the attacker. (changes italicized)

Are there existing rules or other evidence the designer’s intention was for this scenario to be a ranged attack? If so, why only 5 foot cubes and not every other area effect (they have to include a square adjacent to the opponent as well)? Is there perhaps another mechanical reason I can’t find that this attack should be considered ranged? Is the attack simply supposed to impose disadvantage 1 and being considered ranged is simply a byproduct?

In the case that it shouldn’t be considered ranged (or only considered ranged for the purpose of disadvantage 1), I would like to revise this confusing wording. I have found the Open Legends repository and my intention is to submit a pull request if I understand the rules correctly and this ruling is against the RAI. However, I’m asking my question here first to gain assurance, as I know that I am very new to the system and may be overlooking something.

Cube of force intersecting with objects

The cube of force states that

A barrier of Invisible force springs into existence, forming a cube 15 feet on a side

And the 5th level of this is

Nothing can pass through the barrier. Walls, floors, and ceilings can pass through at your discretion

How would this work if there was a large living creature currently occupying the space that the wall acts? Would it cut the creature in 2, freeze it in space as it can’t move in any direction, or force it to be on one side of the wall?

So, for instance if there was a 26 foot tall storm giant, and I stood next to it and activated this 5th level what would happen to the giant?

Show, if possible, small isolated “islands” in the unit cube using RegionPlot3D

I have a certain three-dimensional constraint

-(1/3) < t3 < 1/3 && -(1/3) < t2 < 1/3 && 9 t1^2 < (1 - 3 t3)^2 && 9 t1^2 < (1 + 3 t3)^2 && t1^2 t2^2 t3^2 > 1/23328  . 

If I perform an integration over the unit cube $ [-1,1]^3$ , I obtain (using the GenericCylindricalDecomposition and FullSimplify command) the result

(1/(54 Sqrt[2]))(8 Sqrt[2 - Sqrt[2]] - ArcTanh[Sqrt[1 - 1/Sqrt[2]]] (8 + Log[128]) + Log[2 - Sqrt[4 - 2 Sqrt[2]]]^2 - Log[2 + Sqrt[4 - 2 Sqrt[2]]]^2 - 4 PolyLog[2, 1/4 (2 - Sqrt[4 - 2 Sqrt[2]])] + 4 PolyLog[2, 1/4 (2 + Sqrt[4 - 2 Sqrt[2]])] 

which evaluates to approximately 0.00221357, while, of course, the unit cube has a much larger volume, that is, $ 2^3=8$ .

I believe–on the basis of prior (“bound-entanglement” probability) considerations, that the regions in which the constraint is satisfied are disjointed and form an “archipelago” of islands.

However, my limited attempts (using various ranges of coordinates for the variables $ t1, t2, t3$ ) to show these presumed regions using RegionPlot3D just return vacuous plots.

How gelatinous cube reproduce?

Last time when our party encountered gelatinous cube, this question occured to us, and we instinctively agreed that they reproduce like amoeba – by mitosis or cell division.

However, I’m curious: Is there a canonical DnD reference to how gelatinous cube reproduce?

I’m very interested if there is a reference in the early DnD edition, and especially more interested if there are different methods proposed between editions, if any. Answers from pathfinder is also welcome, since they stem from DnD, too.

When to roll a spot check for a gelatinous cube in poor light?

I’m new to DMing, and trying to figure out what’s fair vs. fun on when the player characters have a chance to spot a gelatinous cube. So if they are in a dimly lit dungeon, when do you have the PCs roll the unmodified DC 15 spot check?

The 3.5e Monster Manual says:

Transparent (Ex): Gelatinous cubes are hard to see, even under ideal conditions, and it takes a DC 15 Spot check to notice one. Creatures who fail to notice a cube and walk into it are automatically engulfed.

The 5e Monster Manual says:

Transparent. Even when the cube is in plain sight, it takes a successful DC 15 Wisdom (Perception) check to spot a cube that has neither moved nor attacked. A creature that tries to enter the cube’s space while unaware of the cube is surprised by the cube.

In our dungeon, I had the gel.cube hiding around a corner and the PCs had to make a spot check when they rounded the corner. The guy in front made the spot and stopped everybody from just blindly walking into it and being auto-engulfed (the 3.5e rules).

To simplify the question though, let’s say the PCs are walking down a 130 foot dark passageway with the gel.cube at the far end. Does the Dwarf get a spot check at 120 feet (120′ max darkvision), then later a spot check for the elf when dim torchlight reaches it, then at 20-30 feet when the human/halfing is within decent torch range? Or is it so hard to spot at that distance (increasing difficulty by +4 or +8 or more on the DC due to distance and a nearly invisible unmoving gelatinous cube), that they’d have to wait till they are much closer? Or do you allow multiple spot checks per character as they get closer? My thought is wait till much closer, but what is fair and fun?

This thread below talks about it vs. darkvision in 5e terms. I’m playing 3.5e, so I might go with a +4 on the DC if they try to spot it at medium range on their vision.

Is it harder to see a Gelatinous Cube with darkvision?

This thread makes it clear that it isn’t truly invisible: When do you see a gelatinous cube?

I feel a second question coming up about how many spot checks can you make as you approach something hard to see from far away, but that’s bending the rules on asking questions so I’ll leave this post with this link which might answer that question for me as I go read it:

How to use spot checks in a wilderness encounter?

Does an Ooze (Gelatinous Cube) float?

If I have a situation where an ooze, such as a Gelatinous Cube, is near a source of water, like a small pond or underground stream, is there source material somewhere that says whether the ooze floats or sinks? Is there any mention of their density — so whether they could travel over the body of water, possibly try to resist being carried away by it, or if they sink to the bottom?

Having trouble with getting a image to a fit on a face of a cube

I have little problem from a unity project that I’m working on. I’m making a 3d art gallery which will be further developed to VR application. In the 3d scene I created paint canvas as a game object (cube) but having trouble, getting the images fit through out the whole canvas. When i try to apply image as applying a material it is treated as a texture and only small proposition of image is visible in the canvas

And also i am planing to make a UI so that customer can upload pics and application automatically get the images and render the gallery. So I’m kind of stuck in the image to object part.